| SuperSoldierRCP | Tuesday, November 20, 2012 - 12:57 am 
I posted this in the voting section, i hope everyone can please vote it in thanks 
----------------------------------------------
Id like to propose that the number of Cities, Towns, Countys be reduced. The main reason is the LARGE amount of them during C3 warring making it difficult to lower to index due to the large amounts of them that are present. During my Current C3 war i have destroyed all the cities twice over, the capital 2-3times, as well as factories several times over) and i have barely broken the 20WI points by killing the pop. With a 12M population nation a C3 has.
1 Capital (This give 1 war index point),
9 Cities (This gives .3 of a war index point),
20 Towns (This gives .1 of a war index point),
26 Counties (Gives .05 or lower of a war index point)
…….I found that a 115K population city only gives around 4,000kills(Keep in mind that 12,000kills = 1WI point) as where a 250K population factory gives 13K kills. Id like to suggest the number of these be cut in half. It would not only decrease the amount of them but help with the cluster problems that can be seen when viewing maps. It would help both current and new players when warring allowing more kills and giving more of an index boost. Id also like to suggest that when warring the type of weapon used should give more or less kills. It only makes sence that tanks/artillery attacking a target would do far more kills then missiles being fired from far way.
-----------------------------------------------
I wanted to post this to see if this is something andy you think is possiable and to hear player reactions to |
| Crafty | Wednesday, November 21, 2012 - 10:36 pm
So you are saying you cant defeat C3s soldier?
I suggest you review your tactics, I havent seen anyone else say about it. |
| sbroccoli | Wednesday, November 21, 2012 - 11:40 pm
My guess is it was deliberately designed this way to make conquest hard.
That makes sense to me, sorry. |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Thursday, November 22, 2012 - 12:30 am
I understand it was made to make conquest hard, and i can defeat a C3.
My comment was that lets say you blow up 10 Factories. Each gives 10,000 kills minimum.
Thats 100,000 Dead, if you need 13,000 killed per WI point that comes out to just under 8WI points in kills alone. As where in the case of cities destoring all the targets i listed above only gives 6.5 War index points.
My point was that if you blow up ALL population centers that you get less points and less kills then factories. 10 factories vs 56population centers, what would you assume gets more kills?
I see it like this lets say we cut the number in of cities and all in half? and merged them together. We would end up with
13 Countries
10 Towns
5 Cities
1 Capital
Give or take that when merging we would end up with more then that so really we are just doubling the pop of the cities but wed still have 5-7cities in a C3. This would reduce the number of the smaller targets increasing the size of cities and the capital making it worth more WI points. |
| Mr T | Thursday, November 22, 2012 - 05:42 am
defenses would also be further consolidated evening a
out any advantages to the attacker....I think players should have more control over population growth in individual cities so I can create huge metropolises and for role playing purposes obviously not a priority but just a thought...sorry about the hi jacking |
| Drew | Thursday, November 22, 2012 - 05:59 am
I agree with the goal here but not the solution. Why conquer a city if you kill like 1% of the pop and get like 1 war point. Then the city is now un-attackable. If your army knows the war is over by killing a lot of people one should expect more of a genocidal approach to attacking cities in which too little kills happen.
But on another note I don't think its right that the city count should be cut just so the people can be grouped together to be mowed down easier. For one, it does remove some challenge with funky garrison controls. But also it takes away some parts of the game to compensate for deficiencies in the war game, and I can't support that either. The obvious solution would just be increase the causality amount or lower the pop needed for war points. But I know you tried those to no avail already. So I guess good luck but it may be time to put this one to bed. |
| Crafty | Thursday, November 22, 2012 - 05:51 pm
Ethically I would of thought that killing the minimal amount of people would be the aim.
Bases and airports really should be high value targets. Secondly - electricity generating plants, maybe they could be introduced in ratio to the population size. Or it could be elec corps. Transport, water etc would also be main targets. Why are bases normally overlooked for war index points? why are they worth so little? They are hard to take out and very important to the enemy. In the real world surely they are the most heavily defended targets.
These things certainly make more sense as military targets than population centres. Some corps could be included as high value, eg. any military related corps, especially ones that contract to the country. Ports could (and should) also be a feature of countries. These too would be good targets, making navies un-resupplyable and causing major defence loss.
Just some more real suggestions. |
