A Response to a Response to the Hospital Issue.
Day 790, 13:39
•
Published in USA 
•
by
•
by system0101
DoD Orders | Briefing Room | Congress | State | Welcoming Committee | The SA | Militia Support | Army Times | EDEN News | Education | AGG | The FF | Lottery
http://erepmarket.com/counter/counter.php">
Full-size pic
Full-size pic
This was the eUS before the great invasion. We had 47 hospitals, including 3 Q5s and several Q3/Q4's. What isn't being discussed is the fact that our retention rate with a hospital in nearly every state was worse than it is today. In addition, we lost thousands of gold in infrastructure when we were invaded and reduced to one state.
The reason we had 47 hospitals was because people kept pushing the issue, and they thought we were invincible since we hadn't been invaded.
The reason why we were able to turn around the Great Invasion was because we kept all of our wars open, so we were able to retaliate.
The reason why this was possible was because we had 9000 people in Florida, which would have cost something to the effect of 2300 gold to attack and double that just to tank the wall to zero over our 2-clicker resistance.
This is the Fortress Strategy.
Yet now that we've been on the offensive for a month or two and everyone seems to forget the fact that we were on the ropes, ready to bow out. And our fortress saved our country.
We won't be on top forever. This is very cyclical. In a month or two, Phoenix will be exacting revenge for events happening today, just as we are exacting revenge for events that happened two months ago.
This hospital debate has nothing to do with retention. The spread between our base retention and what we could get with a handful of Q2's is minuscule.
This hospital debate is about what saved our nation from ourselves, and what continues to make us an undefeatable force here and abroad.
At this point, all I can say to Aeros is: I like ur style, but ur doing it rong.
Full-size pic
Full-size pic
Full-size pic
This was the eUS before the great invasion. We had 47 hospitals, including 3 Q5s and several Q3/Q4's. What isn't being discussed is the fact that our retention rate with a hospital in nearly every state was worse than it is today. In addition, we lost thousands of gold in infrastructure when we were invaded and reduced to one state.
The reason we had 47 hospitals was because people kept pushing the issue, and they thought we were invincible since we hadn't been invaded.
The reason why we were able to turn around the Great Invasion was because we kept all of our wars open, so we were able to retaliate.
The reason why this was possible was because we had 9000 people in Florida, which would have cost something to the effect of 2300 gold to attack and double that just to tank the wall to zero over our 2-clicker resistance.
This is the Fortress Strategy.
Yet now that we've been on the offensive for a month or two and everyone seems to forget the fact that we were on the ropes, ready to bow out. And our fortress saved our country.
We won't be on top forever. This is very cyclical. In a month or two, Phoenix will be exacting revenge for events happening today, just as we are exacting revenge for events that happened two months ago.
This hospital debate has nothing to do with retention. The spread between our base retention and what we could get with a handful of Q2's is minuscule.
This hospital debate is about what saved our nation from ourselves, and what continues to make us an undefeatable force here and abroad.
At this point, all I can say to Aeros is: I like ur style, but ur doing it rong.
Full-size pic
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
http://eusforum.com/index.php/topic,17693.msg334906.html#msg334906" target="_blank">http://eusforum.com/index.php/topic,1769[..]34906
ZOMG
PUT Q5 ON EVERY STATE!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank God someone said this. Thanks, system.
It is incredibly a bad idea to put Q5s in every state (I'm not saying that's what Aeros said, just what the Rangu person above me in this Comments section said). Diluting the Fortress Strategy to that level would leave us without any viable fortresses and allow our enemies to plow right through us like they did before, except this time they would finish the job.
I LIKE AEROS' STYLE TOO
there is no need to increase our hospitals, all we need is our fortress strategy and thats it
Ummm yes, having Florida did save us, but we have to face the fact that WE AREN'T GAINING POPULATION. You didn't address the fact that we have THOUSANDS of people joining the game and we only retain a fraction of them.
Also, Aeros has explicitly stated that he doesn't want hospitals in EVERY state, but by providing these hospitals we allow these people to adjust to the game and realize they need to move. So what if we have 20 out of a 100 people stay in a state because they like it? 80 people staying in the game from a single state is a lot for any country, WE HAVE 51 STATES/DISTRICT. That would be ROUGHLY 4080 PEOPLE A WEEK. OTHER COUNTRIES WOULD KILL FOR THAT!
But that's where you're wrong, we are gaining population. It's slow and steady.
What is there to adjust to, Jeep? You can two-click and fight in five minutes a day?
The logic for this idea is dead wrong.
+1
I like system0101. Subscribe to this guy.
system0101 is a respected mind in the infrastructure discussion circles.
Great work. This is a great article about all the idiotic arguments to place hospitals everywhere.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/happiness-is-a-warm-gun-1151478/1/20" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/happ[..]/1/20
The idea of placing tons of hospitals everywhere is a red herring and indicative of what is going wrong with American Elite culture. The opposition suggestion is not for placing tons of q5s in every state in order to boost retention rates but some number of low quality hospitals (Aero's suggested q2s) in a series of states to allow people to fight to some degree while they are waiting on the government to get to them. Since this argument is harder to debase, the pro-fortress crowd seems content to ignore it and, instead, argue against the points that Brazillian trolls are making as if that is what Aeros has argued. (I am not refering to Astra Kat.)
We ar growing "steadily" but only due to the fact that we are gaining a large number of people. This is because of our larger population of internet users in real life and not because of "better" government policies. If it was, then we would be keeping a larger percentage of our people. Aeros may or may not be right about placing Q2s in such places as Texas and New York; however, he is right to warn us against focusing on military position to the abject detriment of development.
When you first join, you have no idea what you're doing. Besides the fact that we AREN'T GAINING population (explain a 400 person drop please?) What you're saying is that if we give them Q2s, they'll just stay their instead of moving to a Q5. What we're saying is that by giving them the Q2s, it allows them to get their stuff together, start learning the game, and move to a Q5 on their own free will. Wasteland does a pretty good job, but imagine us getting a 50k boom like Poland. There would be NO WAY we could we could support it like Poland has. Why dont we just experiment with the idea by placing a q2/q3 in Texas/New York/both and see how it turns out?
A Few Q2's For a BOOM!!
Logic in my eRep ? GTFO
hum, what?
someone cared about that obviousily for the lolz comment?
Idk Rangu, people are starting to scare me with taking everything they see seriously
i dont know why were even having this argument before we see how v2 changes the game