MPP's vs CO's
•
by Natster
14 MPP's taken out of Canada's treasury in the last 30 days.
I have opposed them for some of them, and hindsight says, I should have opposed them all.
Now, not all MPP's are useless, but most are and here's why.
One MPP (Mutual Protection Pact) costs 10K CC's, and lasts for 30 days.
Basically, it costs $333/day.
Now, one CO (that's where you get paid for it), would cost to counter the CO of the other country, 50 cc's approx. for every 1 million damage.
333/50 = 6. 6 CO's taken out at $50 per million gives us 6 million damage per day PAID per MPP @ 14 MPP's that's a lot of damage (84 million damage per day.
We weren't fighting every day, but anything over 20 cc's, I would gladly fight. I have traveled and done so. One war, I even bought 2.5 million damage rocket, and still walked away with over 1k in profit.
We would have had money in the bank to fight off this invasion the whole time. MPP's are glorified pieces of paper that in no way guarantee any amount of damage from those who sign it. There are plenty of wars in which the countries who signed our MPP's didn't even fight in (this one included), but I BET you if there was a CO, we would even possibly get an enemy CO fighting for us occasionally.
However, our treasury is drained now, and screw the tax system. A better strategy needs to come in play and come into play hard. EVERY ONE of our MPP's needs to be SERIOUSLY evaluated before renewing again. That money is better spent elsewhere.
My ADVICE. Ditch most of the MPP's, on renewal and pay for Canada's independence.
Now, to stir up the pot, isn't it convenient that there's a sudden splurge on MPP's then a rent of one of our regions to a hostile country and the eventual wipe attempt (and will probably be a long term one) of ECanada? Sounds pretty nefarious to me. Empty our treasury with MPP's. Why not? Instead, we should focus on making Canada free. Not all CO's are going to cost 50, and some may cost a bit more to ensure that we win. This is how you run an economy. This is how you win wars. There is calculations, probabilities, etc., and the ultimate bottom is the long term sustainability of it.
For now, Natster OUT!
A KHAN Arises!
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Good one Natster
o7
You should talk with some people who coordinate the CO funding. I don't think 14k is a lot for CO funding.
It is, I look at average funding of co's and very few are up that high for a budget, plus, remember that this ROI increases every day that we aren't at war. And, also remember that we won't always have to pay 50 cc's. Ultimately, I would drop a lot of damage for 25 cc's and above for sure! Also, you lost a zero. Those MPP's cost us 140k. 10k @ 14 = 140k cc's. That's a mighty big monthly budget for co's
140k cc a month for MPP, that's not enough COs to win a single round.
Strength and honour. o7
*14 MPP's taken out of Canada's treasury in the last 30 days.*
______________
1. Our Leto alliance counts 10 members. It is nice to have Greece and Serbia in our MPP deck etc.
2. Anyone invading us can outspend us by a mile. By ten miles if we have no MPPs.
3. MPPs do not map to a specific amount of guaranteed damage. Generally, however, they reliably produce much more damage than can be bought with MPPs.
4. MPPs are an integral part of the strategic balance which includes the prevention and progress of war in other parts of our eWorld, not just in eCanada.
5. MPPs are given a fair amount of thought from what I have seen these past many years. The cost and benefit are weighed and discussed. My strong impression is that the calculating you call for is in fact being done.
6. The way you seem to see it we should calculate the total damage which could be bought by the money we otherwise spend on Mpps. I used your figures and arrived at 2.5 billion per month. That is nothing. We are better off with the Mpps.
7. There is a distressing implication in your article: that eCanadians and our eAllies fight only for Combat Order money. Perhaps I misread, or perhaps the game has sunk to a new profound low.
Enjoyed the article - thanks.
1 - I will not address here. Too long of a response and too many toes
2- numbers speak volumes
3-i would like to see an example. I have yet to see one of our wars generate 84 million damage per day and that would be bare minimum. A well started mp is much more effective
4- again, I can't address this point right away.
5-no, the contrary appears to be true, or show me the numbers!
6- how perchance did you come to this figure?
7-i argue for what is sustainable, I do sometimes fight for a loss, but cannot do so indefinitely. If, I could at least break even, all the better. After a few losses in a row, all I can afford to do is fight for combat money.
Thank you for your comments. Feel free to post a link to the numbers you come up with.
you have figured that taking the MPP money and using it for CombatOrders would generate 84 million damage per day. Multiply the daily damage by 30 days to arrive at 2.5 billion per month.
You doubt that during a war we do at least 84 million damage in a day. You are kidding right? I am a nobody and I did over 700 million damage recently, though that was strenuous. I can hit for 30 million with utter ease, and I am a weakling who does not look for CombatOrders to fight. We do a lot more than 84 million per battle, never mind per day.
You doubt that Croatia can outspend us? Go look at their treasury and tax revenues on the country page. FYROM could easily outspend us, and so could just about any other invader except for one little fly in their ointment: our allies tend to beat them up and make it more expensive than if we had no MPPs.
Now, I may have misunderstood the article and your reply comment in which case kindly accept my apology: I am sometimes a bit dense. 🙂
Regards
I agree a few need cutting, the question is which MPP's offer value for money with regards to strength, population and the probability of their fighters moving to Canada to fight when we are reduced to just RW's.
the president presented his proposed stack some time ago, which has been under under fruitful discussion: the Mpps with Australia and Sweden were not renewed for instance. Our deck comprises 13 MPPs. Argentina and Hungary are due to expire within days and I trust will be renewed. I am confident that the congress will examine the benefits of each subsequent renewal in the context of the circumstances then existing. Although it goes without saying that proper attention needs be given to these outlays, the tone of the article is that the bulk of them should not be renewed. I think that would be error and the justification presented in the article seems patently wrong.
Actually I got part of that wrong: this article specifically says 'Ditch most of the MPP's,....' not a few need cutting. How does that sit with you Hugh?
I wouldn't ditch most of them but there is a good argument for at least 4-5 being cut saving 40-50,000cc per month until we get back on our feet.
I agreed with the article that MPP's do need cutting but disagree when it comes to MPP's being glorified pieces of paper, obviously if you don't have an MPP with a nation then they can't set Daily Orders to assist and fight for you. Though without regions MPP's are in theory worthless as foreign fighters still have to pay the cost of traveling to fight for you anyway, but who plans on being wiped for a long time? And if you free one region then the MPP's come into play.
nice - balanced
Just a note, 3 were paid out of pocket by Darkmos and Myself because we felt strongly that good friend should be included despite their size or strength. Unfortunately Australia and Sweden went on the chopping block but I would not ask Canada to pay for something they did not want with war looming over our heads.
Strength and Honour
Since humility only goes so far, here's a link for Naster.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/citizen/profile/4085844
Scroll down a bit to view my damage. I NEVER take a Canadian CO and RARELY take a friends CO. Sometimes if I'm just blowing off damage and there is no one I like fighting I may take someone's CO to pay for my damage.
I'm talking about fighting sustainably. Technically, we could let them take a co out on us for 50 cc's and offer 20 cc's for my division and we could afford 10 cc's for the likes of hitters like you. Money wins or loses wars, and the reality is if one thinks like a capitalist, one will be much more effective in this. Co's are there, so one can cover moving costs, and fighting costs. I still stand by my most for mpp's because they can be used so much more effectively. I would right an article about this, but I consider information like that top secret. Why show a poker hand if you don't have to? Anyways, I blab.
COs cost a lot more than MPPs do. Dropping MPPs makes us lose damage, for example a 10k cc CO lasts mere minutes in critical battles, the budget just doesn't update in that time or I usually refill it.
I agree with oliver's points otherwise.
Also you mention 20 cc COs for your division...
That won't fly, no one in D2 would fight for that CO when they can get paid more elsewhere. Can you expand on this: http://prntscr.com/5ngwbd if not in an article you can PM me.