Unacceptable situation

first let me say that i do not take any side in the current conflict on fearless blue, i am an outside observer.

i am shocked to see the #1 (or 3) defensive country with 300.000.000 population fall to a country with 20.000.000 pop without considerable damage to the attacker.

why is such a thing possible. i did an inspection a couple days prior and the country had well garnished garnisson, many many mobile unit, good air force etc.

i came to the conclusion that defense is useless. why would someone waste financial ressources to keep a good defense index, when your enemy can buy 12 boat the day of the attack, and spend less then 1B in upkeep, and with lots of ammunition, take out all defences with no loss.

i think that mobile navy unit need to be a thing asap. assuming they actually target navy.

I am never ever leaving war level 0 because there is no way to defend myself. i know that stimulating the war game is wanted by the GM, but this is so wrong. if someone spend 100's of Billions every single month to keep his country safe, in fact the best defense on the server, he deserve to at least put a serious dent on the attacker.

also, i think a pop to pop ratio final damage modifier should be in place. if someone with a 10.000.000 attack a 100.000.000 pop country, one risks very little while one risk more.

any thoughts ?

This isn't new. That's the second time that country has fell to a navy in very similar circumstances. It is what it is. Infact I think it's good for the war game if everyone was to get onboard.

Plus there is a way to defend which I have realised. I wont be posting it here though.

Why don't you post under your real name testthings?

this is my real name. i play on fb.

also like i said, i dont take sides. im pretty new but i played back in the days.i don't know how things started and im not interessed.

my point is that if a 20.000.000 pop country can take down the #1 defense country, with 300.000.000 pop, it's sad. with only 1 kind of weapon.

i changed it to hans by the way

Well Hans I was the same as you at first. But after using them I realise the potential for the war game. We could get some nice wars going with countries changing hands many times back and fourth. Gaining and loosing ground.

Im all for the war game and stuff don't get me wrong.

Im just saying that to take out a 300.000.000 pop country, you should have to put "more" on the line than just stacking ammo for 1 single type of weapons.

But then again I will just play under war level 3, since defensive weapons can't defend me.

Oh yhea and by changing hands, you mean giving them to "friends" under war level 3, but that's another subject and since im not concerned I really don't care who gets the spoils of war. My point is 20kk vs 300kk, and the lack of defensive options against navy.

Ok Han or whoever you are. I've a fair idea who you are and you've already benefited from the navies. Remember that.

You get the wrong idea by taking it personal. I am a totally random outsider.

I don't know who started it and for what, but I saw the declarations of wars and monitored the situation, because I was wondering how a war against the #1 in defensive would work.

And then what I saw was that with 1 kind of weapon and ammunition, with no lost of man whatsoever !?!, a country with the population of the usa lost to a country with the population of Ghana, Yemen, or Romania.

It's good for you if you get a kick out of it really I have no assets in this situation whatsoever. I just expected better from this much mobile units.

I'm not taking it personal. What bothers me is you posting under another account when your clearly a vet. Like I said I know who you are, Or I have a good idea. I don't really care anyway. You could post under your usual name and say whatever the heck you like. It's not personal to me. I know the issues but there are benefits which just about everyone is using at the minute. Yourself included. There's a good defence against them. Contact me with your usual name and I'll tell you.

sadly, the best way to get things like this to change, is to use it until the GM come to some ones rescue

What the heck. Are the navy weapons that strong!?

What the heck. Are the navy weapons that strong!?

this is kinda funny. defense hasn't worked since the early days. now it's about quality level. pay through the teeth for good defense or spend a little to conquer.

Oh looky looky it is Ricky Bobby from the olden days, the one wif the rude tongue.

Can somebody please explain what this 'navy bug' is? Are there weapons in the navy that can't be defended against?

You can see this as a navy bug but a quick look at the weapons document, shows that navy ships can be attacked by defensive destroyers of the defending country.

Most of the defense against navy attacks is indeed based on the defenders navy.

Many do not have any defensive navy and indeed, there is a major risk.

We do think that a large country with a good defense should include many defensive destroyers. The weapons document is showing exactly which weapons can defend against a navy attack.

To make life easier, we will allow defensive land forces to participate in the defense against the navy. Ships that can attack land targets, will be counter attacked by land forces.

Starting next week, both defensive missiles and defensive helicopters will participate in the defense of the country, against attack vessels.

This will exclude attack submarines.
Attack submarines can only attack navy ships and the defense is by defensive destroyers.

The same update will also include a reduction in the cost of all navy vessels, but also other offensive weapons.

Don't the destroyers only respond if the navy unit is attacked directly? What your saying suggests they act like an air defence. Even attacking a city they would still respond?

I was about to build a mega navy country. Bought all the ships for it too. Ah well, was good whilst it lasted. They where a super weapon that's for sure.

Now they'll be pretty much useless with there current configurations. Andy I've suggested this before and this is a good time to bring it back up. Make the navies about controlling the sea lanes. Only navy on navy battles can take place. Anyone wanting to fight across continents need to first win at sea or there supply routes will be compromised. Will add a whole new dimension to the war game. You's could add it to the higher war levels aswell for c3's.

It would add a lot of realism to the game at the same time. Apart from the navy on navy only part, but it's certainly more realistic than supply units driving across the oceans.

I might have mislead you.
I will check exactly what happens when you attack a land unit.

Navies will not become worthless.
The defense will have to be large and make many hits before a ship is sunk.

also, we have reduced the price of these vessels by 10 to 15% and will reduce more if the cost of an attack ship remains too high compared with the cost of the defense.

Ok Andy. I'll take that back. Your right, I can't tell if they'll be worthless until the changes are made.

Thank you.
We will wait and see.
If needed we will tune the numbers.

In general, the defense should be cheaper than the attack but not absurdly cheaper or attacking will become impossible.

I have c2 country on LU and I'm mainly defense, I've paid 8 trillion to make and maintain my defense. However I also keep a offense of multiple aircraft carrier groups helicopter carrier groups attack sub's and thousands of attack boats. I have fought off 3 attempted invasions and half a dozen attacks.

Sorry not c2 country's but c3 country's

Just a random remark here but I have a landlocked country. How can I even have a navy (or be attacked by one)?

Ships fly, as do trains.