You make a bold statement here and don't back it up with any facts. So allow me to supply those facts. Let's tally up the successes on both sides.
AAA are being mercurial about their goals, so their goals can only be inferred from the data:
- 3 months ago The Nameless were present in 5 systems, one of which they controlled. Now they are present in only 2 systems and have lost control of Carcosa. Whatever AAAs overall goals are, in the BGS they have achieved three player opposed retreats by locking up all of the free influence in those three systems. I have already explained how hard this is to achieve so will not do so again.
- A bit over a week ago they took control of Robardin Rock in Carcosa with a 4-0 victory. Currently there is another war in Carcosa between EEF and The Nameless for control of Amber Dock, where the score is 2-0 to EEF. Does anyone know if EEF is part of AAA btw? That has not been mentioned anywhere. Assuming they are not, that means AAA are behind this war and are presumably fighting it. At the same time there is a control war between EN and SECD in Carcosa, which EN are winning 3-0. Now you've been vocal about saying that SECD will stab EN in the back, but that scoreline suggests that this is either a transfer of station ownership or the beginning of a perma-war state to lock The Nameless out from ever controlling Robardin again. It will be interesting to see what happens with Aragon Silo, but at this rate we will find out in a week. Similarly I wonder what they would do with the installation in Carcosa. If it was me I would try to control them all, but if they are going the perma-war route it makes sense to leave The Nameless in control of that.
- That leaves Earth Expeditionary Fleet where it is not possible to retreat The Nameless since there are only three factions present. Again, all from the data, you can see that AAA have locked EEF and EN into a war repeatedly for nearly a month now, stopping the Nameless from getting into a control war. Each war has been lost 4-0. From this you can infer that:
a) AAA are not fighting the wars in EEF. They are just triggering them to lock up influence and,
b) given the pattern of forcing retreats in the other three systems and the impossibility of doing so in EEF at this time, it follows that they are probably waiting for an expansion before they go for a retreat there.
Now to tally up your successes. You are very open about your goal being to tire the opposition by forcing them to fight war after war over and over again. You have publicly listed which systems you are attacking which, off the top of my head include Coeus, Pergamon and Hephaestus and some vague statements about attacking in the bubble.
With EN, the data is indeed showing a slight downward trend in their systems and you have obviously triggered a control war in Coeus, where the score is currently 0-0 as this is the first day of war. There is an active retreat ongoing in Morpheus, for the second time actually, but without any influence locks so it is unlikely to succeed. Did you guys do this? If so you would force them to work on the fifth day of retreat active but without a lock it won't take much work to escape. Given they have not controlled any assets in that system in any of the data I am looking at right now (going back to May this year) I wonder if they even care about Morpheus. Edge Fraternity Landing is the only other system where EN have taken a noticable influence hit, but again no assets controlled historically so as with Morpheus I wonder if they care.
With SECD, there is an active war in Edge Fraternity Landing where they would gain control of the sole installation there and the score is 0-0. Again, did you do this? I don't know if SECD would want to control that installation, but if they do AND you triggered this war then yes, this would give them some work to do. In Los they have an active retreat, again without an influence lock so this is the same as Morpheus for EN. In general, SECD are showing slight downward influence trends in Deriso, Hephaestus, Kopernik, Sollaro and Union. Notice that Pergamon is not on that list.
So the score for AAA:
- 3 succesful retreats in Phoenix, Santos Dumont and Union
- 1 succesful control war in Carcosa
Possibly another retreat to follow at some point and on current trends probable control of the remaining assets in Carcosa
BGS results for Lorens Reapers, to date that's zero. Nothing. You have not taken anything from them at all.
All of the above data comes from Inara btw.
However, there is of course in game data and your goal, as you have stated, is to tire them and make them work. So let's look at their work from what we can see in game. I'll look at the combat leaderboard, since triggering wars is central to your strategy. Civitas Dei still sit in 4th place on the combat leaderboard and their rate of combat points per day has stayed roughly consistent around 70k points per day since the season restarted last week. Prior to the last season ending (which happened during the war for control of Robardin that The Nameless lost) Civitas Dei were constistently averaging 120k points per day in the month that I was watching. In other words, they are working less. ENs workrate on combat has crashed however from an average of 70k per day over the four weeks I was watching to just over 10k per since the season started. Again, working less.
Reminder, they are winning all their wars. This is why I say to you that you actually have to fight the wars you trigger to make them work for it. I fully appreciate what goemon is saying about cycling which wars you do CZs in to introduce an element of uncertainty but you are clearly NOT following that strategy as the combat leaderboards show your opposition is working less and are winning clean sweeps in every war they are fighting.
Meanwhile. i just cruised around the Colonia systems for an hour checking Top 5 bounty leaderboards in the aforementioned systems and reapers names are written all over them. Paul Smith, Absyron, Jellicoe, The Inhabitant and Romilayoo, to name those that stand out. You're murdering all over the place, which is a lot of fun of course so fair play there, but who is working?
That's the important question here. Your strategy is to make them work and who is actually working?
So there's my vision. An empirical assesment of what has been achieved by both sides since May and an empirical assesment of your strategy in the last week and half.
All you have to offer is grand statements that you don't back up with facts. You ignore everyone and everything that does not fit into your narrative. In one post you are thanking people for helping you. In another you threaten neutrals saying they had either step up or else. You contradict yourselves all over these forums and you don't even seem to realise it. How do you think you are perceived?
I do get it. You are lore based primarily and in that sense you're doing great. Making a great "story" for youself, or rather, a fiction. There's nothing empirical about it. No self-reflection or self-awareness. You are posting your strategy FOR PUBLIC DICUSSION AGAINST A SIDE THAT SAYS NOTHING.....
The only conclusions I can come to is that you are hopelessly lost and that at best your greatest lore achievement will be writing The Idiots Guide to How Not To Do Strategy.
I won't post here again as it is obviously a waste of time trying to talk to people who have tunnel vision. As usual the forums are just a waste of time.
Best of luck to you all and fly safe.
I hope thats right, I like this as a strategy if its possible.
