| Sunday, December 14, 2003 - 01:43 pm |
Fortifications and unhittable corporations make it impossible to kill certain countries even when undefended.
When a new corporation is created it is assigned coordinates of 0.0,0.0 and is untargetable on teh attack map. This makes it impossible to score points for the business and trade reduction, which in turn makes it impossible to kill certain countries. Most countries at war can exploit this 'feature' to retain invulernability, even if they lack any defense ata ll and every major target has been destroyed.
A slightly less solid wall of unconquerability is achieved by buying many thousand of fortifications. This 'wall' nevertheless makes conquest impossible for all inents and purposes. They are cheap, cost almost nothing to maintain in terms of manpower, and can be bought even when bases are destroyed. As I have suggested elsewhere, I think a 20-fold increase in base price (to 1 billion dolleuros) and a 50-fold increase in manpower cost (to about a thousand) is about right. This is not a small change, but the imbalance is not small either.
A recent example of both issues combiend into one is the coutnry named 'sd06.' All defense swere destroyed. All fortifications were destroyed (over 500, before replacements eventually arrived). All cities, bases, towns, and counties were destroyed. The corporations could not be hit, as they had no coordinates. Therefore the country cannot fall, but is still able to purchase defensive weapons to aid its empire along with more fortifications.
This is very silly, and need to be fixed.
| Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 03:32 pm |
I agree about the fortifications. Though I never experimentet with them the way Hectors Dream did, I nevertheless found the ability to purchase so many in one month silly. I´d say either make the more expensive in terms of manpower and money, or rename them to "foxholes" ;)
| Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 06:23 pm |
That is and excellent I idea perlamo. They really are more like foxholes, or bunkers. Or really any kinda obstacle in the path of an invading army. The more there are, the more that army has to slow down and be careful to inspect each one for the enemy so that the back lines aren't compromised.
| Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 07:34 pm |
You can call them "sticky dogshit traps" and it amounts to the same thing. They create an unplayable element to the game if used in the perfectly legal and tactically neccary fashion described by Matt, who also correctly describes them as a game breaker.
| Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 07:35 pm |
neccary = necessary
| Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 07:37 pm |
And stop talking about back lines. The military portion of the game has no back lines, front lines, or any other kind of lines. Lines imply geography, lines of attack, operational tactics and things like that. :o)
| Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 08:35 pm |
I'm not saying they don't need to be fixed. Sorry if your upset because I was implying that. Just agreeing with perlamo that a name change could lend to a more plausible explanation of their funtion.
| Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 08:40 pm |
shheeeesshhh, ist´s christmas guys Can you feel the love?
| Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 09:00 pm |
Sorry, I'm just overly sensitive to have my freedom of thought squelched, because somebody else doesn't like what I have to say. I've tolerated it for so long out of politeness, that I'm just railing against it now.
I'm trying to chill out, too. Apparently I'm being unsuccessful. (must try harder).