Lengthen combat to broaden combat Fronts?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • I had to think about Kurt's response about how everyone will just make a stack of doom anyways. One way to mitigate, but not eliminate, this issue is to have supply lines be a thing. Trace a supply line of friendly provinces back to a homeland city or operate at reduced effectiveness and possibly take damage. Otherwise you are correct - I have a very nice line of defense across my border, a stack of doom came through and took my cities in the back, and is free to take everything else as well.

      Another way to deal with this is to start reducing melee effectiveness at 5 units instead of 10. This is actually as a much simpler method, and could be used as a first step towards moving in the direction of a "battle line" being something that is useful and exists.

      Having thought about zones of control - these won't be necessary if the number of provinces is reduced.

      It COULD be done. Things CAN move in the direction being discussed in this thread. I'd like to hear a couple of things from the developers (ok we'd all like a LOT of things!).

      Number 1: do they have an opinion on this turning CON into the kind of game that is being discussed here
      Number 2: if not, in about a week after they have had a chance to think about it and discuss it (or just dismiss it out right), what are there thoughts about the possibility of anything like this becoming reality?
    • well if you really want to benefit the defender(which in my point is necessary) then you need to introduce sefense buildings such as guard towers and anti air batteries.

      the attacker can choose where he starts a concetrated attaxk the defenser has to guess. which will always give him a disadvantage in numbers.

      AirForce is multiplying this disadvantage through speed and flexibility.
      @Dorado If you Close the Forum and move everything to Discord you will lose my Feedback for sure.
    • Kurt - agreed.

      However, benefitting the defender has to be put into context of how this affects overall game play. And how much is realistic when the defender is not even online until maybe 12 hours after the battle is initiated. If they WERE going to go down this path, then here are some baby steps for how it could be done.

      Double the hp of melee units. Military hospitals heal 1 unit of healing, 1hp for air units, and 5hp for ground units. Thus air units will heal at the same speed, while melee units would heal at 5x the speed that they currently do.

      Make it possible to retreat portions of a stack. So you have 2 infantry units and 3 armor units in a city - with 5 being the new limit - you can retreat 3 damaged armor units and then move 3 healed up units to replace them. The damaged units can go back to heal up in a military hospital city.

      The details like "double the hp" and "5x healing speed for ground units" need to be tested and adjusted. The attacker would have the same possibilities. At this point - the question changes very much to: with the current rules set up and such, at this point is attack too strong, or is defense too strong???

      That would require a large amount of testing. Note that doubling the hps of melee units would automatically make artillery units and air units a bit less powerful. Tweaking the damage of both of those would also be necessary.

      I like the idea of guard towers, which I assume would work like fixed artillery units, and anti-air batteries. They would have to be integrated into the game mechanics so that they would be useful, but not invulnerable.

      I think this could be done mostly using existing code. The testing part is where the expense would be.