| Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 05:05 pm |
sorry i meant interceptors, tired, gonna stop writing
| Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 05:23 pm |
I was ignoring the new units for now.
in your scenario the drones woud get through, butto no avail. damageing a few targets and losing all those units would be completly useless. they would 'beat it' for only the first attack, and the survivors would be kileld before doing damage in the secnd attack.
at the moment 5k RDU and some aa batts can 'beat' a 200k DH defense, but so what? only 18k of the DH will be lost before all the RDUs are destroyed, and the numbers men reuired to man 200k Dh and 10k RDU are somewhat simialr (the 200k DH require fewer)
In order to win a war, you need to defeat the defneses not once, but tens, dozens, and sometimes hundreds of times (even thousands, but that is silly and I think need to be balnced as well. The only def units I think needs to have its manpower requirements changed are fortifications...by about a factor of 100).
The first few shots dont matter that much, and if you use up most or all of your amry just in damaging the defensing air force, then you have already lost the war.
Although it is probaly not surprising, I think you are being farrrr too conservative. If small scale waragems might help yous ee my point, im more than willing to fight challenge you to a duel with myself as the defender, as ive already stated
| Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 05:23 pm |
So you would lose 100k Attack Drones to damage just one target. Defense is still king. If you're arguing that even that negligible amount of damage shouldn't be done, and are still sticking with the "it should be realistic" argument, then take a look at the real world. Even hopelessly outnumbered forces will do at least some damage to their target. That isn't always the case in simcountry though since defense gets to hit first.
To be honest Elle, you don't sound like a defensive-minded player, you sound like an anti-war player. At least that's the way it seems to me. You really are listing just about any thing that makes war possible (even though currently without the new units it isn't possible) and complaining about it.
| Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 05:25 pm |
Bah, I'll just go away now.
| Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 05:28 pm |
lol grey i thought we were just discussing it in a friendly way..
And if we are talking realism then only 1 country in the world has any chance of invading a developed nation..the US. And it would struggle if it faced a relatively minor power such as say..britain for instance because of the logistical issues
off home, have fun ;p
| Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 05:54 pm |
The Peaceful countries option can be implemented very quickly. Splitting awards will take longer but can be delayed several weeks and limits can be lifted a little later when evrybody had his opportunity to convert.
On the limits we can do the following:
1. Lift them gradually starting with doubling the numbers. and see how it works.
2. If an attacked country is a member of a federation, the limits can be doubled again.
Once we know how it works, we increase the limits again. If we find un unfair situation, we fix it and continue.
The population growth is a long term problem and it cannot be solved with low population in CCCs.
This will create an impossible conditions for new players.
We will have to think of a better solution for population growth.
The processing time did not stop us from developing more. We were very busy lately and we have to make some money for living and did some consulting part of the time.
The new GR server now runs the whole thing in less than 5 hours despite some relaxing of order sizes that we hope will stabalize demand and supply. We used to reindex our database frequently to reduce processing time and we stopped doing so and this servers remain fast enough. So don't worry about processing time.
The other three worlds do not have a population problem and we do not need to replace the servers, just upgrade the operating system software.
We have found a strange condition in the reaction of the defensive airforce and we are looking at the effect of fixing it. It was not used as effective as it should with the available number of airplanes. This condition may also explain some strage effects when very small numbers are used. None of this is very significant.
RDUs have been tuned down yesterday. (forgot to put it in the game news, will do it tomorrow). Their fire power is lower and they are more volnurable. They are now less effective than they used to be.
If you know of any other weapon that becomes davastating when we implement these changes, please let us know even before we get to see the war logs.
CEO stockpiling is ugly. It is not meant to be and changes the balance of power. Is this fair?
| Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 05:55 pm |
Food for thought elle:
When I wrote the war guide, the dfendinsive air force was assumed to haeva minor role.
1. I fought many wars on Fearelss before thre were any weapons limits.
2. there were no trasnfer lmimts either.
3. Some of them were against opponents several times my size until I had had the chance to grow, and once later on I was forced into similar wars against a much larger and more skilled opponent
4. In all of these wars, my defending air units were wiped out (or mostly wiped out, besides the ones hiddne far away and mvoed back in in small shipments, or hidden in nearby unfederated countries)
5. I never lost a war I was online for, except one -and that one was a near thing, lost only due to treachery
more food for thought:
When we were planning our war against kenenth all that time ago, in constructing a defensive strategy for you, it was assumed that the defending air units would be immediately wiped out. Despite this, we planned what we thought would be an effective defense. I managed to use identical tactics in other countries to great effect, and did not lose a single country that day.
contrast this with teh repsent situation: 10k attack limmits make any strike on all but the smallest oppoent impossible, defensive units use far fewer men per person and cost less than in those ancient times, defensive armies have been made far larger, federations are more skilled, and there are limits on how many weapons can be moved in a month.
Frankly speaking there are many tactical options that have been removed since these times. I had to THINK to win those wars. Sitting behind an invulnerable defense requires no though.
And even given all of these things, you still worry about someone managing to damage a few targets at the cost of losing an army the same size as the defending one...in the first few attacks? Such losses would require 100 times of everything on the attackers part -time, men, money, attacks, and strategy, rather than the 3 to 4 times we both seem to support.
I think matty is right. perhaps you want to be behind an invulnerable shield of weapons, and not required to fight a war. This is OK! Jozis suggestion is perfect for such players.
The 'peace only' country would be ideal for players who think like that - perhaps, who think like you do (I am not even sure you know exactly what to think! ). They would achieve invulnerability without bothering the players who wanted to actually compete with weapons as well as with corporations.
It might be easier to say these things than it is for you, since you have not actually won wars in which most of your defending weapons were destroyed. However, I repeat that I would love the opportunity to demonstrate.
| Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 05:59 pm |
Just a side issue.
In reality there is never war between democracies. (so US versus UK is off). We should have every user make a choice of state form (kindom, dictatorship etc.) and see whether in this world too democraties will never fight wars among themselves.
| Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 06:01 pm |
I think your last post is a good approach jozi. it will give you time to respond to changes in the gameplay.
May I say thank you for participating, thank you very very much, and also...its about time!!
I am really very sorry to post so much, but this topic is perhaps the most important one in my mind to the future of simcountry. If it can be fixed sucessully, and I think your suggestion is very good, then I expect that the playerbase will increase very rapidly.
regarding bugs, if it will help, I will mail war logs.
OK! im really really gone now!!