Krameleon

This is just a few thoughts I have in regards to this change. Take them with a grain of salt because I only 40% know what I'm talking about. If the point of this change is to solve the issue of massive down-declares, why is it also helping up-declares? I understand how a larger city nation declaring on a lower city nation puts the smaller one at a disadvantage, and to what degree that advantage is fair can be a discussion. If fully milled C40s can really regularly down-declare on C20s and create an unfair war environment, then maybe some change is necessary. However, if someone is up-declaring, they are at some level of a disadvantage and they are accepting that disadvantage by declaring the war themselves. By declaring that war they are accepting that by city-count they are at a disadvantage and they still believe they can effectively achieve their goals despite that. I don't think that up-declaring is in trouble, and therefore don't see why it needs to also be buffed with a change such as this. If a smaller nation decides to attack a larger one, they shouldn't be rewarded any extra for doing so. They should accept the disadvantage they are putting themselves in. The purpose of the war range mechanic is to limit a nation's ability to down- or up-declare based on nation score. If down-declaring is really a problem, why is the proposed change not looking at this system instead? Possibly increase the score each city provides, so people with more cities are more quickly pushed out of war range from those with less. Or, if C40-C20 down declares are a huge issue and we're looking specifically at city count, why not implement a downward-only restriction based on number of cities? Like you can only down-declare on nation that have a LEAST a certain portion of your cities, say 3/5 or 3/4. Then have no upside limit, so anyone can up-declare C20-C40 if they want to take on that challenge, so long as they are in war range.

This is an interesting idea. It would add a little more nuance to war, and could make going to war a larger decision. I, however, think this would work a lot better if wars were fought by cities and not by nations. If the wars were city-by-city, you could add these improvements to a city to make a battle at that city more difficult for the attacker. To do it that way would require some fairly large adjustments to the war system. It might work if you got to target a specific city with every attack. But then I feel like some additional changes would need to be made in order to make attacks hold more weight (especially in higher-city count wars). I personally think I would enjoy a major rehaul of the war system, and this would be a change I'd be willing to see. However, many people are probably content with the current war system and don't want it to change. Plus, a rehaul of the war system would take a lot of time and effort that would take Alex and the rest of the dev team's attention away from other stuff that also needs worked on. Overall interesting, but I think it's unlikely to be implemented anytime soon with the current state of the game (and, more specifically, the war system).