Look through a different Lens - What's your ACTUAL Day 5, 10, 15, 20, ... Order of Battle (OOB)

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • I beg to disagree.

      After 40 days, a hospital will have an effect. You will have 0.2 pop more than the city without !

      (joking, of course. The effect is so ludicrously small it's like it didn't exist)

      KFGauss wrote:

      LastLiving wrote:

      How do you get these cities total by day 20? In the best map that I played in, I had only 40 cities by day 20. Is there something I am missing, or am I just bad.
      In a recent WW3 game, with a 5-player coalition and opponents that mostly either dropped out early, suicided into each other, or dropped out once they realized they were way behind (in other words, typical opponents), this data shows how our city count grew over time.
      Consistent with what Opulon wrote above, the coalition members with the faster growth were using units that are good for harvesting inactives, AI, and weaker opponents. The members with slower growth were our insurance policy and were well-prepared for a stronger opponent, but only one mediocre opponent made a stand at the end of the game, and that was with SAMs and Tanks.

      I stopped counting these before we collected enough VPs to win. Toward the end there wasn't much to learn from continuing to track how fast cities were falling.

      The coalition averaged taking about two cities per coalition-member each day, with a range of between of 3 and 1 per day. If your opposition is weak, I recommend trying to grow at similar rates.

      I'll post some OOBs for these five countries soon. I have the OOB info for Days 6, 10 15, and 22.


      OccupiedCities.PNG
      Nice data.

      The 2 to 3 cities a day is consistent with what i typically observe as a good growth rate in the middle of the usual lambda inactive players.

      Of course, and your data shows it well : it's in mid game that there is an acceleration (supposedly) of conquest.

      A point, though. A coalition of 5 often has to do more logistics to get to the next conquest, it may sometimes reduce the growth rate.

      I had 59 cities at day 15, but i had only 2 teammates, so less countries to "share" or less territory to cross to respect borders and spoils of war.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • This set of country OOBs goes with the Occupied cities info I posted earlier (Look through a different Lens - What's your ACTUAL Day 20 Order of Battle (OOB)) (they are from the same, largely uncontested, WW3 game/map).

      I find the ways that Days 6 and 10 are similar and different across the 5 players is the most interesting part of this.

      OOBs.PNG

      The post was edited 1 time, last by KFGauss ().

    • as a huge fan of statistics this game could offer a lot more information out of the box.

      Ingame: How many kills in total. What kind of units. Net value of forces split by branch etc. such as biggest navy
      Alle sagten: Das geht nicht. Dann kam einer, der wusste das nicht und hat es einfach gemacht.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by kurtvonstein ().

    • 78 cities on day change 20, which is close to what i expected.

      The main problem being of course the 9 ongoing wars because, and it's to their great credit, they are still fighting (even if France, United Kingdom, Cuba, the United States, Belarus, and Iran, have been mostly obliterated militarily speaking). The national guard budget is out of control.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.


    • Oh, and this is ludicrous. Half of the ships sunk were SUBS and DESTROYERS.

      At that point, i need to insist that it would make no sense to establish a number of cities at day 25, or 30.

      I am killing all the active players, there, and there is a huge lot of rogue state cities in all those active players being killed.




      Those are the losses for the wars from day 15 to 20, but there is maybe 30 cities that i will need to take out of rogue state hands, pushing me easily to around 110-120 by day 25. Map is done.

      Kudos to Israel that was inactive 19 days, just to come back and join the enemy coalition, and try to rush toward my capital.


      76 Cities by day 20 will, as a result, be my final "legitimate growth" as the map is finished and now it's mopping up VP points (which i will probably not do and just archive, tbh)


      Oh, as for army size :

      131 units, a lot of which is National Guards lol.


      Their diplomacy will remain the funniest part of the whole war against them.



      In terms of Economy, i'm at 41K day 18, which is very spectacularly inferior to the 70k that Kurtvonstein has day 22.

      Lesson : Stacking war penalties is a real slowdown of war industry, so avoid it if you can.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Opulon ().

    • Opulon wrote:

      At that point, i need to insist that it would make no sense to establish a number of cities at day 25, or 30.
      In the game you're describing I understand that "cities-owned" doesn't tell us much about your position.

      If I remember correctly, when I kicked off this thread, I was thinking that a cities-count would be a (very) simple/crude proxy for resource production and military success.

      If a player wanted to imitate what they saw someone report in this thread they could do it with the number of cities the earlier player reported (If the new player was fighting against the same opponents, from the same starting position, with the same allies, . . .).

      If the city count was small, the player trying to duplicate the previous result would probably need to build many Arms Industries. If the city-count was large, the player might not need any Arms Industries (to duplicate was they read).

      I agree 100% that the number of cities a player owns is a clumsy way to measure a player's progress/success, but at least a cities-owned number gives you a hint about what was occurring in a game.

      Is there better, simple alternative(s)?

      PS: Like @kurtvonstein and many others, I would love to be able to turn on/off getting a good set of daily progress stats sent to me automatically in my games.
    • Maybe the raw economical production is a better indicator of success ? Not precise, but a bit more "general".
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • Raw economocical production on the other hand depends a lot on the kind of cities: Supply gives about twice the amount of rare

      Also the amount of core cities: with 5 core cities it takes quite the effort to catch up to 9 core cities :D


      Same goes for starting location:
      Australia has a much harder time to expand than for example Germany? :D

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Kalrakh ().

    • Even for people that don't speak german, if they can't translate "Tag 27", they don't deserve to be part of this discussion XD
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • Day 20 all depends on which country i am.

      If i am an island nation, by day 20.

      20 Frigates will have secured me the entire ocean.
      3 Ballistic missile submarines
      15 Infantry

      Then ill be deciding how to best proceed.


      If i am jungle landbased, ill usually have
      25 Fighter aircraft
      10 Strike aircraft
      10 Helicopters
      25 Republican Guard


      I tend to finish most of my games around day 30-40, even if they go to day 60. Its usally just a mop up.

      There are other games where ill get 10 railguns or start building SAS.
      Where i have had 15 battle tanks, 5 mobile artillery and some AA and infantry.

      But day 20 is all about attrition.
      You want to get to day 20 without losing to much, while still having decent expansion.
      Key battles are usually a few days away, tanks just get worn down and hard to replace, aircraft and frigates can take hits and keep trucking.

      Alot of people mention strike fighters, they are good but you just lack numbers and airfields are hard to maintain.
      I usually amass strike after day 30-40 when their are battles to be waged, but the war is pretty much over, they are just not reliable enough to strike airfields.
      If i see people massive strike fighters, i either hit them early with fighterplanes, or target their airfields with SF or Ballistic strikes.

      I tend to favour fighters over strike before day 20.
      Simple because usually very limited naval vessels you need to sink before this period.
    • The more I read this thread, the more I'm certain I'll never be ready to join an Alliance as an asset. I never have these huge collections of units by day 20. I don't know if it's my style, or I'm doing something incredibly wrong, but at least I'm still mostly winning. :(
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • @ Dealer of Death

      You shouldn't feel like you couldn't be an asset... but rather you should understand what kind of asset you are.

      I know you love MRL and those are late builds... So it makes sense that you wouldn't have a huge unit count until later... and that you would need to build your resources up for the mid-late game.
      I checked your stats and you seem to have a general winning strategy. (to say the least)

      I'm not in an alliance but I think a good team member is active (first and foremost) and can fulfill a part of the team strategy.
    • Smallsword wrote:

      @ Dealer of Death

      You shouldn't feel like you couldn't be an asset... but rather you should understand what kind of asset you are.

      I know you love MRL and those are late builds... So it makes sense that you wouldn't have a huge unit count until later... and that you would need to build your resources up for the mid-late game.
      I checked your stats and you seem to have a general winning strategy. (to say the least)

      I'm not in an alliance but I think a good team member is active (first and foremost) and can fulfill a part of the team strategy.
      To be honest, I can't fathom how anyone is putting together the resources for these huge builds unless they are almost completely ignoring buildings and tech upgrades.

      But then again, I always play with a big navy focus that also usually includes a heavy ASF focus early on.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • It's through early conquests.
      If you expand in the early game you'll have a much larger economy...
      If one conquered city gives you 400 supplies a day and you take it on day 2 that's 400+ per day for the rest of the game...
      If you take that same city on day 7 you've essentially lost 2000+ supplies to time.

      Then apply what you can build/mobilize with those resources in the early game... build two army base 2s instead of one... 2 units per day instead of 1... the earlier you can start the build the more units you have by day-XYZ

      Make more sense?
    • crazystoner wrote:

      Day 20 all depends on which country i am. . . .
      CrazyStoner - Thanks for adding what you recall and/or what you plan :thumbup: - However, this thread becomes really valuable when people record what they actually had/have in a game (and maybe some notes about their goals), like was done in this post Look through a different Lens - What's your ACTUAL Day 20 Order of Battle (OOB) .

      If you happen to take a few notes in your next game, please share the results with us. I'm personally very interested in reading what actually happened in each/any game as players worked to accomplish a set of plans (plans exactly like the ones you outlined in your post).

      Also - I realized that my original post didn't line up well with what I just now wrote here, so I went back and edited that OP.

      KFG

      The post was edited 1 time, last by KFGauss ().

    • Kalrakh wrote:

      It depends a lot on activity, geographic position and the luck to have many inactive or stupid neighbours.
      Invading on day 2-3 usually means your against an active player... and you really have to out play them because they have basically the same units.
      Honestly, I find it to be the most exciting part of the game and in many ways the most demanding.
      That being said, if successful, you're really far ahead of most of the map.
    • KFGauss wrote:

      Folks,

      [Edit]

      TLDR: In a typical public game, when you're in a successful (so far) coalition, when the game clock reaches 12:00 on Days 5, 10, 15, and 20, if we freeze the game and count up your units, what will we find?

      I've noticed discussions here about units' values or importance, and about combat or economic strategies, often get mired in confusion when posts refer to wildly different periods of a "typical" game, or mix together public-game and alliance-game experiences and wisdom, or stray to far from an original question.

      So, I've got a question that doesn't involve debating who's right or wrong; I'm hoping the answers will be useful and that we'll get more than 1 or 2 answers before the discussion inevitably falls off the rails. :S .

      The (Public game) questions are:

      • What are your Days 5, 10, 15, and/or 20, or anything similar, Orders of Battle?
      • Also, it would be nice to know
        • If you have one or more coalition ally(s).
        • If your and your ally(s) positions are roughly similar (you've all been equally successful or unsuccessful).
        • Your home country.
        • How many cities (Home/Annexed/Occupied) you control now.
        • If (so far) in this game you had to travel through varying terrains
        • If (so far) in this game you had some Naval interactions
        • If there are any other coalitions similar to your coalition in the game


      There is nothing wrong with offering/posting OOBs from different games. However, please stick to what actually occurs in your games.

      Remember please - This *is* about what you have at Day 5/10/15/20. It's *not* about why you have that stuff, and it's *not* about what you're going to do next.

      Also, this isn't about what you would tell someone they *should* have. It's about what you usually *actually* have.

      And, before the conversation (assuming one does occur) dives into comparisons, and/or criticism and debate rabbit holes, I'm really hopeful that we can see as many as 6 or 7 diverse replies posted.

      [\Edit]

      KFG
      you took out your own OOB you sneaky squirt
      "doug" -nobody