Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

by ian Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:49 pm

Admin wrote:6th June: 53,707,940 Total Units Killed
13th June: 91,438,544 Total Units Killed

(forgot I actually had a row with a sum of all unit classes killed)
On a lighter note, I think I have the strike mission war exp mapped out for the 4 alliances that disbanded (BD,TIE,WR and FIRE, right?), I still need to write a script for sabs and assassinations. When I'm done with it all, i'll run it all at once.

Cool, sounds good regarding the script for the 4 alliances Very Happy

As for the total units killed lmao - 37,730,604 difference so far Very Happy

.

Definately a bloodthirsty war.... and thats not factoring in kuwal costs for training supers, weapons etc... Twisted Evil

by ian Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:51 pm

Ishurue wrote:
ian wrote:Hmmm.... does anyone in The Coalition of Chaos know who's been massed so far, and what sort of losses for eithier side have been sufferred in this war so far? lol

I ll be honest... i haven't got a clue when it comes to losses, or a full idea of just who's been killed (as well as our "strime team" attacks individual TIE members are also launching their own attacks against targets of opportunities) lol. Was wondering if you guys know?

you see here the other wars in Aderan were a little country this ones more rock n roll

TIE massed
Castravete
Candyman86
Best
Lord Ishurue ( assassins )
Black Lotus ( strike and defense )
Freethinker94
Redblulu
Gortok ( strike and defense )
mikeshinota ( strike and defense )
quite a few sabs and assaults on random members

TOC massed
Seaborgium ( defense )
Dune ( Defense )
Souldog
Skyfighter ( Defense )
Curumo ( defense )
loregram ( defense . small member under 400k army )
Bloodhound ( Defense small member under 700k army )
Mobocracy
D-raven
viper
Hai_Shulud
Dursum/Zanti
Retro22 ( Defense )
Cursed (defense )
inox
alexei

I may have missed a few players from both sides .

Both TIE and TOC had fail assassination and sab tempts on each other .

Cursed lost over 630k spies and assassins on his failed attempts on Vaako .
Seaborgim lost 62.5k Assassins on his attempt on me .
I think ian and SA47 lost a total of 600k spies from attemting to hit kenzu .

TOC lost an estimate of 300k spies & assassins on failed attempts .

TIE killed ~ 5mil of TOC's miners
TOC killed ~ 2 mil of TIE's income units

( If some things are inaccurate send me a pm on the forum and ill correct it . or quote here )

( if this post gets edited a bunch of times its to update info )

- lots and lots and lots of killing by both sides lol.

I ll take your word for it that the above is correct Smile

by Kenzu Sun Jun 13, 2010 6:30 pm

TIE lost much more in failed assassinations and sabs.

Except me I received reports from another 3 WR members where a sab or assassination against them failed because of WR members going to critical during sabbing/assassinating.

EDIT:

TOC also massed the following TIE members
Vladimir Karovski
Survivor
gear (sabbing)

Raiding TIE:
230.000 UU raided from Survivor and roughly 50.000 from Vladimir Karovski.

by Vesper Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:50 am

Yes so I will be doing 1 more attack to kill off my strike. I am already tired of this war and dont got the real time for it. Staying up to launch strikes every night is a bit excessive and with where I work growing in business because of summer I cant keep doing all these attacks.

I would hit vacation but then I would need to wait even longer to get the silver loyalty award. Still waiting for it Mad

. So I will refrain from attacks on TOC starting 00;00 gametime tonight. If I am hit by TOC after 00:00 I will come back and continue launching an attack session each night as I have been doing. Basically I am giving TOC the chance to fight 1 less player player. If they agree I wont hit them and they dont hit me (sounds reasonable doesnt it?). If I get hit by anyone in TOC I will return to the war as normal. I wont supply TIE with any funding either, for that you have my word, I may have done many things on this game but when I said I will do something I have done it, good or bad.

Sorry Ian, I dont need a lecture about this decision. I have my reasons from withdrawing from the war.Hopefully TOC lets me out and doesnt force me to keep hitting them.

Terms I hope TOC can agree to:
Starting 00:00 gametime june 14th
- I will not do any attacks against any TOC members for the duration of war.
- If necessary, at any random point in time TOC questions if I am still sabbing and assassinating players in their alliances I will join a TOC member as their officer and they will be able to look through my logs to clarify I am not partaking in the war.
- I will not fund TIE in anyway (No way to prove this other then me screen shooting my trade brokers which I will also do if requested)
- TOC will not do any attacks against me
- If for any reason TOC attacks me all bets are off and I will rejoin the war on the side of TIE launching daily attacks against TOC members.

I will go onto protection and allow TOC to respond, you have 2 days, or I can continue business as usual taking out 1 account per day.

I currently have rank 1 war exp, afaik, Total Military Experience 547,069,259, Another way for FIRE to see if I am doing any attacks would be for me to join them as an officer and they can just see if my war exp has moved at all. I only farm inactives so I doubt that can make it move much at all.

I am hoping that not everyone forgets that in the 2nd TIE vs WR war I went around and offered individual members a chance to leave the war.

I got some real problems going on right now that I would rather not share and I hope that people can understand that and accept my proposal.

by seaborgium Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:55 am

I think Ish numbers look about right.

I will point out that TIE so far has only gone after anyone that has strike or a fair amount to lose. Also we have refrained from directly targeting anyone under 2m army size.

by Kenzu Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:08 am

seaborgium wrote:I think Ish numbers look about right.

I will point out that TIE so far has only gone after anyone that has strike or a fair amount to lose. Also we have refrained from directly targeting anyone under 2m army size.

Should I add that if TIE would go after people below 1 million armysize, they would have no ST to go after the big guys and most likely also no resources to fight everyone.

Besides, it's not true that you attack only people who have a big strike. You attack anyone who has a strike of 1 billion and if I am not wrong also people with less than a billion strike, which means your potential target can be almost anyone in TOC.

I wonder what means "fair ammount of loose". You talk about how you are only attacking certain targets, and being so nice that you dont attack small accounts, but actually what I see is that you attack any account that is worthy being massed and the only reason you dont mass small accounts is that it would cost you too much AT and ST to do that and your other resources would be wasted too. If a 1 million account had 900.000 miners, I'm sure you would go for it!

@Vesper
Interesting post, but I wonder when people will read your post, assuming you want not to be attacked from 00:00 gametime onwards which is in a couple hours if they will see your post in time. Well, not sure about this whole thing. I wonder how TOC leaders will react when they see this.

by Magnus Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:11 am

[quote="Kenzu"]

seaborgium wrote:I think Ish numbers look about right.

@Vesper
Interesting post, but I wonder when people will read your post, assuming you want not to be attacked from 00:00 gametime onwards which is in a couple hours if they will see your post in time. Well, not sure about this whole thing. I wonder how TOC leaders will react when they see this.

Sheesch give the guy a break Kenzu. He out of respect asked for everyone to stop hitting him. He even said he had personal things to go on and all you can respond is that how others will respond. I really applaud your response. jeeez mate really

by seaborgium Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:14 am

only gone after anyone that has strike or a fair amount to lose.

I think I posted what you just said...

We don't go after the little ones bc
1. no strike also not that big of an issue.
2. not enough to lose to waste.
3. If you hit small enough people they may quit and that isn't something we want.

Where did I post big strikes?

by Vesper Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:33 am

Kenzu wrote:
@Vesper
Interesting post, but I wonder when people will read your post, assuming you want not to be attacked from 00:00 gametime onwards which is in a couple hours if they will see your post in time. Well, not sure about this whole thing. I wonder how TOC leaders will react when they see this.

Me wrote:I will go onto protection and allow TOC to respond, you have 2 days, or I can continue business as usual taking out 1 account per day.

by Vesper Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:45 am

There I did attack player just to lower my strike. I am done hitting TOC now.

by ian Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:19 pm

I ve been talking to a couple of people in TOC and there seems to be *some* desire for peace - so i ll propose the below just for everyone's consideration as to how to bring this war to an end (since large chunks of TOC no longer have any decent strikes and its costing everyone lots to fight this war)

1.) Peace-treaty. All parties agree that their members will not conduct *any* of the following mission types against any other player's who are part of alliances who ve signed this treaty:

- Assault
- Destruction
- Invasion Missions
- Hunt Assassins
- Sabotages
- Assassination Missions.

Withdrawal from the peace treaty at any time requires a 96hour notification - sent to ALL other alliance leaders of alliances who are signatories to the treaty AND posted in a public topic on the Aderan War's forum.

The peace-treaty's length will be unlimited - meaning it will end only at such a point as one of the parties withdraws from it.

2.) In the event of allegations of a violation of the above peace treaty - the alliance in question making the allegations will need to provide proof that the allegations happened (i.e. via making the victim of a hostile act a officer of a representative of the accussed alliance to double check the "alleged" acts happened).

If this is satisfied ALL alliances agree to the exchange of an ambassador as required per incident into temporarily joining the other alliances rank's to check their logs. This will ensure violations of the above peace treaty can be proved or disproved without doubt (avoiding groundless accusations being made like in the past - which played a large part in igniting this war...).

Of course - if the accussed alliance in question admits to the alleged offences there will be no need to send an ambassador. The identity of the offender however must be revealed by the accussed alliance.

3.) In the event of a *proven* violation of the above peace treaty - ALL person's responsible for the violation will be given the opportunity to provide 100% compensation for the violation, and they shall have 96hours from the time of the violation being proven (i.e. when a ambassador checks the logs and confirms the actions in question) to do so. Other's may provide compensation on their behalf.

If compensation is provided, then no further action shall be taken. A failure to provide compensation within 92hours after the violation being proven will allow the victim or representatives of the victim (i.e. alliance mates) to retaliate with any of the acts ordinarily prohibited under point 1, against the individual responsible for the offence.

4.) All alliances agree to respect one another's farming policies and to deal with breaches via the below:

Each breach will "count" for 30 days. After 30 days from when the breach occurred, that breach will no longer "count" towards the below.

1st breach of alliance policy = education & warning PM sent to the player committing the breach, which educates the person on the farm policy and warns to wait for the target to have more kuwal out the next time.The player's leader is also contacted.

Any further breaches after a first breach will be dealt with as follows: Another warning is issued, as well as another message to the alliance leader of the player in question - and compensation required. Compensation includes the full amount of kuwal stolen , Weapon cost , retraining cost, and the UU being sent direct to the victim of the breach + 1%.

Players will be given 92hours to provide compensation from the time of being contacted by a representative from the alliance in question. Failure to provide compensation within that time will result in the alliance in question being able to take military action against the offender if it so chooses.

5.) All alliances who are part of this treaty will be prohibited from going hidden - this should help avoid past confusions which helped in large part to ignite the current war...

6.) ALL alliances agree to share with one another information concerning relations they have with any other alliances via the below relationship chart:

- Friendly
- Neutral
- Hostile
- Mutual Defence Pact (where they go to the aid of one another in the event of one of them being attacked)
- Full-alliance (where they go to the aid of one another regardless)
- Other (the alliance will need to specify).

This will ensure ALL alliances keep a responsible and civil level of communication between one another & keep one another informed of their various agreements etc... If alliances are open & honest with one another it will make war far less likely in the future (i.e. a large consideration to take into account for the ignition of this war was the back-door agreements taken between different parties and then the attempts to hide/ decieve other parties).

All information shared between the alliances under point 6 will be treated as private & confidential and will not be shared with other's not part of this treaty.

7.) All alliances and players in those alliances when discussing stuff with others (i.e. whether individual players or new alliances) agree to do their best to avoid creating a sense of hostility or tension between members of this treaty. Such examples of creating tension can be slandering, "flaming" or showing outright hatred and hostility towards alliances belonging to this treaty.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the event an alliance should feel a violation of the above peace treaty has occurred, they should make these feeling's known to ALL other parties. If they then choose to withdraw from the peace treaty - they must do so as listed under point 1 (a 96 hour notification given).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now... views & thoughts would be welcome. TIE is happy to continue the war if everyone wants to - but we are also happy to consider peace as well. The above treaty would hopefully keep thing's simple and help solve the issues we ve all had with one another which have led to this war occurring.

Views/ Thoughts?

by ian Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:07 pm

Figured i d update this - having had a quick look through *some* (not all lol) people's logs i can confirm the below people have come under sort sort of extensive attack by The Imperium - ranging from a decent amount of assassination missions to full-massings:

Castravete
Candyman86
Best
Lord Ishurue
Black Lotus
Freethinker94
Redblulu
R1maru
Gortok
mikeshinota
Reets
Black_Lotus
Syndicate
WhatsASniper
Jookaremo

I ll keep updating this as and when i can find the relevant details - there are almost certainly more to add to the list lol.

by Phyurie Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:57 pm

ian wrote:1.) Peace-treaty...Withdrawal from the peace treaty at any time requires a 96hour notification - sent to ALL other alliance leaders of alliances who are signatories to the treaty AND posted in a public topic on the Aderan War's forum.

The peace-treaty's length will be unlimited - meaning it will end only at such a point as one of the parties withdraws from it.

Yep, I trust that one from the guy who broke a NAP before time expired to start this war. lol!

by seaborgium Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:01 pm

I would like everyone to notice that TIE made first hits.
We also made the first public and private peace offering.
We have left it to the others to respond and work on the deal, we posted what we currently think is a good peace, but as with any document it needs to be tweaked and worked on so that all parties agree.

by Kingofshinobis1 Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:04 pm

ian wrote:I ve been talking to a couple of people in TOC and there seems to be *some* desire for peace - so i ll propose the below just for everyone's consideration as to how to bring this war to an end (since large chunks of TOC no longer have any decent strikes and its costing everyone lots to fight this war)

1.) Peace-treaty. All parties agree that their members will not conduct *any* of the following mission types against any other player's who are part of alliances who ve signed this treaty:

- Assault
- Destruction
- Invasion Missions
- Hunt Assassins
- Sabotages
- Assassination Missions.

Withdrawal from the peace treaty at any time requires a 96hour notification - sent to ALL other alliance leaders of alliances who are signatories to the treaty AND posted in a public topic on the Aderan War's forum.

The peace-treaty's length will be unlimited - meaning it will end only at such a point as one of the parties withdraws from it.

2.) In the event of allegations of a violation of the above peace treaty - the alliance in question making the allegations will need to provide proof that the allegations happened (i.e. via making the victim of a hostile act a officer of a representative of the accussed alliance to double check the "alleged" acts happened).

If this is satisfied ALL alliances agree to the exchange of an ambassador as required per incident into temporarily joining the other alliances rank's to check their logs. This will ensure violations of the above peace treaty can be proved or disproved without doubt (avoiding groundless accusations being made like in the past - which played a large part in igniting this war...).

Of course - if the accussed alliance in question admits to the alleged offences there will be no need to send an ambassador. The identity of the offender however must be revealed by the accussed alliance.

3.) In the event of a *proven* violation of the above peace treaty - ALL person's responsible for the violation will be given the opportunity to provide 100% compensation for the violation, and they shall have 96hours from the time of the violation being proven (i.e. when a ambassador checks the logs and confirms the actions in question) to do so. Other's may provide compensation on their behalf.

If compensation is provided, then no further action shall be taken. A failure to provide compensation within 92hours after the violation being proven will allow the victim or representatives of the victim (i.e. alliance mates) to retaliate with any of the acts ordinarily prohibited under point 1, against the individual responsible for the offence.

4.) All alliances agree to respect one another's farming policies and to deal with breaches via the below:

Each breach will "count" for 30 days. After 30 days from when the breach occurred, that breach will no longer "count" towards the below.

1st breach of alliance policy = education & warning PM sent to the player committing the breach, which educates the person on the farm policy and warns to wait for the target to have more kuwal out the next time.The player's leader is also contacted.

Any further breaches after a first breach will be dealt with as follows: Another warning is issued, as well as another message to the alliance leader of the player in question - and compensation required. Compensation includes the full amount of kuwal stolen , Weapon cost , retraining cost, and the UU being sent direct to the victim of the breach + 1%.

Players will be given 92hours to provide compensation from the time of being contacted by a representative from the alliance in question. Failure to provide compensation within that time will result in the alliance in question being able to take military action against the offender if it so chooses.

5.) All alliances who are part of this treaty will be prohibited from going hidden - this should help avoid past confusions which helped in large part to ignite the current war...

6.) ALL alliances agree to share with one another information concerning relations they have with any other alliances via the below relationship chart:

- Friendly
- Neutral
- Hostile
- Mutual Defence Pact (where they go to the aid of one another in the event of one of them being attacked)
- Full-alliance (where they go to the aid of one another regardless)
- Other (the alliance will need to specify).

This will ensure ALL alliances keep a responsible and civil level of communication between one another & keep one another informed of their various agreements etc... If alliances are open & honest with one another it will make war far less likely in the future (i.e. a large consideration to take into account for the ignition of this war was the back-door agreements taken between different parties and then the attempts to hide/ decieve other parties).

All information shared between the alliances under point 6 will be treated as private & confidential and will not be shared with other's not part of this treaty.

7.) All alliances and players in those alliances when discussing stuff with others (i.e. whether individual players or new alliances) agree to do their best to avoid creating a sense of hostility or tension between members of this treaty. Such examples of creating tension can be slandering, "flaming" or showing outright hatred and hostility towards alliances belonging to this treaty.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the event an alliance should feel a violation of the above peace treaty has occurred, they should make these feeling's known to ALL other parties. If they then choose to withdraw from the peace treaty - they must do so as listed under point 1 (a 96 hour notification given).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now... views & thoughts would be welcome. TIE is happy to continue the war if everyone wants to - but we are also happy to consider peace as well. The above treaty would hopefully keep thing's simple and help solve the issues we ve all had with one another which have led to this war occurring.

Views/ Thoughts?

I for one, still want to have a little more "fun" with this war. I doubt this will work but you never know. I have my suspicions as to why you offer this now but we will see Very Happy

.

by Magnus Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:06 pm

I think you might be wrong lol

by Nigatsu_Aka Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:08 pm

As an outsider, my opinion is that that document that ian proposed lets plenty of open doors for subjective interpretations...

Good luck to everyone involved.

by Kingofshinobis1 Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:25 pm

Magnus wrote:I think you might be wrong lol

Wrong or right, good luck with this treaty Wink

by ian Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:27 pm

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:As an outsider, my opinion is that that document that ian proposed lets plenty of open doors for subjective interpretations...

Good luck to everyone involved.

3 thing's above all other's caused this war:

1.) Contacting of other alliances by FIRE/ WR to align against TIE - resulted in TIE intepretation of hostile intent aimed against us (who wouldn't think that when there's secret backroom agreements about countring-TIE?)

2.) Threats of war and accusations against TIE by FIRE/ WR for unknown sabb/ assassinations which we were not responsible for - resulted in TIE going hidden/ trying to confuse the enemy believing an attack to be imminent.

3.) TIE's going hidden resulting in FIRE/ WR believing TIE to be about to attack - resulted in massive hostility towards TIE which in turn led us to believe we were about to be attacked under the justifications of a "preemptive strike" (like we were last time by FIRE). This resulted in us preempting their preemptive strike... and hey presto war.

The proposed agreement would deal with all 3 points. If ever there's random sabbings of WR/ FIRE they can send an ambassador and will know its not TIE. IF ever TIE's randomly sabbed likewise we can do the same. Both would know information gained from temporary ingame HC access (i.e. alliance economic & military review sheets) wouldn't be used against them due to a existing peace-treaty (something we have not had before). Both sides would keep the other's informed about their various agreements - so there is no attempts to "hide" thing's or plot behind one another's back etc...

@ Phyurie. Yes The Imperium began its attack about an hour to 45minutes before the agreed N.A.P expired. However i d remind you in the past:

- WR attacked The Imperium in the first war when no-state of war existed (they still had about an hour before our ultimatum expired at which point after that we would have decided whether or not to declare war)
- WR attacked The Imperium a 2nd time in that war after we had stopped attacking them for over 4 weeks, and spent those 4 weeks asking for a WR diplomat to come forward and arrange a long-lasting peace.
- FIRE attacked The Imperium with a suprise assault a mere 12hours or so after LI's promising they wouldn't and that they would cooperate with myself & TIE in finding who was Cabal....

So... don't for a second be ignorant enough to think that breaking of agreements/ promises is solely a TIE trait. Your sides just as bad as us....

by Phyurie Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:30 pm

ian wrote:So... don't for a second be ignorant enough to think that breaking of agreements/ promises is solely a TIE trait. Your sides just as bad as us....

Sounds like this war won't end till one side is dead cuz we can't trust the other then bom

by WhatsASniper1 Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:42 pm

Phyurie wrote:
ian wrote:So... don't for a second be ignorant enough to think that breaking of agreements/ promises is solely a TIE trait. Your sides just as bad as us....

Sounds like this war won't end till one side is dead cuz we can't trust the other then

I don't know, I honestly doubt that they would violate a peace treaty of their own creation. Call me naive, but when someone makes a policy specifically for peace, I expect them to honor it. The temporary NAP things have been ignored by both sides as Ian has stated, so those obviously aren't very effective.

Personally, I'm not for nor against this war, so whatever TOC decides to do with this offer is what I will do. If a democratic vote were taken, there is a chance that TOC might agree to this, but the guys who make the decisions want war, so that's probably what it's going to be.

by seaborgium Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:42 pm

Thats fine with us, but some in both sides have talked peace so it was placed on the table but since your against it. You know that if war goes long enough and 1 side becomes the dominant side that peace that is offered above will not be what is on the paper when this is over.

Ian pull it, lets get this taken care of.

by Phyurie Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:44 pm

I'll stop fighting if Lord Ishurue commands it. However, I'm not done yet if TOC leadership isn't Very Happy

by ian Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:12 pm

seaborgium wrote:Thats fine with us, but some in both sides have talked peace so it was placed on the table but since your against it. You know that if war goes long enough and 1 side becomes the dominant side that peace that is offered above will not be what is on the paper when this is over.

Ian pull it, lets get this taken care of.

I ll leave the offer on the table for today... but honestly its pretty funny that TOC seems to be gambling on T.I.E running out of ST & Funds Very Happy

. You see... there is a tiny flaw in that gamble:

- Massings use up lots of ST & funds only when there is lots to kill i.e. a good example would 7billion+ defences and tons of miners & assassins.

Unless i m very much mistaken - in the entire FIRE, WR & Emperor's ranks there is now maybe 3 player's with defences above 5billion power - and in terms of spies, assassins & miners their numbers are very limited so won't require anywhere near as many ST as it did to take down some previous targets i.e. Candyman & Best.

On top of that some of our more active members massed by TOC have rebuilt back to a point where they can field medium (i.e. 1billion to 2billion) level strikes again - which with the higher-end TOC defences by and large no longer existing... will become increasingly more useful in taking down the medium level players (we ll only need the sort of strikes like me and SA47 have been fielding to finish off the handful of remaining defences above 5billion (don't think there's any large assassin power players left in TOC's ranks either) - after that its just a matter of moving onto the medium level players which can be done with smaller, cheaper strikes which more members can field).

While all of this is going on more and more lower end TOC member's continue to get savaged by TIE's individual members using their own initiative.

Personally i think its a pretty good act of faith by TIE to offer a peace-treaty now before we ve really started damaging most of TOC's medium level players and before we ve targetted other "major" players like Kenzu & Sara. I.e. if peace is agreed soon there is no need for more players to get massed... but we ll see what TOC want Smile

by Lord Ishurue Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:27 pm

Reaper

was also massed before he went on PPT

by Sponsored content