Logo Platform
logo amplifiers simplified

War Support losses should be proportional

Reply
Copied to clipboard!
3 years ago
Aug 31, 2021, 8:59:27 PM

One thing that is making wars to "fast" to resolve is that War Support losses are fixed no matter if you defeat an army of 12 units or a single scout. WS losses should be capped as they are now, but also proportional to some other value, say total power of army or total population. That would be more realistic anyways, but more importantly, would help in smoothing out the as of now too definitive battles against single units.


I would increase the cap a little to a max WS loss of 10, but make the loss directly proportional to at least army size/power, if not population or a combination of both. Should be very easy to program the change, if I am not mistaken.

0Send private message
3 years ago
Aug 31, 2021, 9:03:57 PM

I agree. Someone put it brilliantly on reddit:



Spokesperson: We are pleased to report that we have encircled the Carthaginian 5th Army and decisively destroyed their entire invasion force, including eighteen regiments of motorized rifles and their 2nd carrier battle group. Casualty numbers are still being tabulated, but current estimates indicate that we lost about a thousand troops while inflicting twenty-thousand casualties on the enemy.

Reporter 1: The British people demand accountability, ma'am. This victory in the only large battle of the war in no way compensates for the defeats of the previous six months. What about the retreat of the 7th Dragoons? What about the retreat of the 1st Carrier Battle Group? What about the retreat of the 5th Infantry Division?

Spokesperson: We would like to emphasize that we have taken less than a hundred casualties in the past six months.

Reporter 1: But those troops retreated from battle, instead of being slaughtered to a man! The British people desire an end to this conflict, regardless of what demands the enemy might impose upon us. Cede London to the Carthaginians, else there will be uprisings in the streets!

Spokesperson: You wouldn't happen to be a Carthaginian covert operative, would you?

Reporter 2: Ms. Spokesperson, I'm with the London Times. Our readers have been clamoring to hear the tale of the Battle of 17 Easting, where our glorious 1st Army encircled and entirely destroyed a company of one hundred Carthaginian infantrymen equipped with muskets.

Spokesperson: Well, I'm sure that the 1st Army -

Reporter 2: The British people love our heroes. Stories of the heroic way that the 7th Air Wing dropped over six thousand pounds of laser-guided precision bombs on the hapless Carthaginian musketeers, before the 7th Royal Armored Corps valorously rolled twenty Challenger tanks over their corpses, have truly inspired our people to believe that we can win this justified war!



Updated 3 years ago.
0Send private message
3 years ago
Aug 31, 2021, 10:03:18 PM

Yes please. At the very minimum the CS of both armies should factor into it. Ideally, their era too.

0Send private message
3 years ago
Aug 31, 2021, 10:42:44 PM

I would say


Enemies eliminated/retreated v. Overall enemy army Strength

AND

Enemies Eliminated v. Your Loses


So if the enemy army is big, or you lost a lot in the victory the War support gained/lost is small, (say +-2) but if you Wiped out their entire army with no losses its large (say +-20)

Updated 3 years ago.
0Send private message
3 years ago
Aug 31, 2021, 10:46:51 PM

I agree. It's more interesting to chase solo scout now to force the ennemy to surrender, than to destroy entire armies.

0Send private message
3 years ago
Sep 1, 2021, 9:29:36 AM

I agree too, good idea. Currently, I try to make armies retreat before attacking again, to double the war support, and running after a scout with tanks has a too big reward imo! I would continue to do that without reward, though.

0Send private message
?

Click here to login

Reply
Comment