Fronin Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 The large number of raider nations fully focused on war is unrealistic and unbalanced. People who build their economies cannot hope to defend against someone with 100% military improvements, when in order to improve their economy, they have to at least turn some sort of profit. This encourages a sort of parasitism in which the balance tilts towards raiders. I offer three suggestions: War Exhaustion: People aren't willing to bear an infinite number of children just to be drafted and die. Two things are certain in life: death and taxes, and people try to avoid both. Every 1% of the population in soldiers that are casualties in a war of aggression (started by the player, not defending), this increases war exhaustion by 1%. This decreases the population by 1%. The national average commerce reduces war exhaustion by 0.(commerce)% per turn. So a national average commerce of 28% results in a reduction from 2% war exhaustion to 1.72% (or a decrease by 3.36% per day). War exhaustion doesn't decrease while the nation is at war. POWs: This makes recovering from war easier and makes it more difficult to raid inactives. Half of all soldier casualties from war would be POWs, and after the war, the POWs would be returned to the number of soldiers a nation has. It won't be possible to have more soldiers then barracks to avoid gaming the system. Given that at the end of a war, the loser usually has nearly zero soldiers and tanks, this helps recovering. War Salvage: If the defending nation loses, they receive 25% of the steel of all destroyed tanks in the conflict, and 25% of the aluminum of all destroyed aircraft in the conflict. Otherwise, the side that suffers the most losses is usually the losing side, which is usually the defending side, and only raiders benefit. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isolatar Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 This game wasn't designed to be realistic however the war salvage and the POWs suggestion is actually pretty good. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moreau Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 ^ Quote Signed by Sultan Moreau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilal the Great Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 I'm all aboard with POWs and war salvage. 1 Quote King Bilal the Great Mediocre The Average monarch of Billonesia Wikia page (if you're into roleplay things). We Tvtropes now. (down the rabbit hole!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Otherwise, the side that suffers the most losses is usually the losing side What a stupid !@#$ing statement... 3 Quote ☾☆ Warrior of Dio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 POWs sound great! Lets expand on the idea though - the winning nation should be able to nerve staple its POWs and used them as forced labor and/or in barrage battalions before the war is over. We should also be able to have x% converted to the winners religion and pay remittances forever. Your war salvage is unbalanced. If you want to return x% to BOTH sides after the war then maybe. It kinda makes sense that the losing side loses. To fix this for your nation you could endeavor to not lose. 1 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadir Aminu Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 I like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fronin Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 X forces lost 3,933 soldiers and 84 tanks, while your defenders lost 21,982 soldiers and 677 tanks. I mean seriously. There needs to be war salvage, because that's what actually happens in war, equipment is repaired and reused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 There needs to be war salvage, because that's what actually happens in war, equipment is repaired and reused. Is that what actually happens in war? Anyway, its a game and even if your statement was factual it does not apply to a browser game. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrezj Kolarov Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 It's a bit weird that soldiers/tanks don't drop munitions and gas when they're defeated, considering that they would be carrying that stuff with them. Quote People's Republic of Velika: National Information Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magicboyd25 Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Not a bad idea, may have a few flaws and could use tweaks but the overall idea is great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fronin Posted February 18, 2016 Author Share Posted February 18, 2016 It's a bit weird that soldiers/tanks don't drop munitions and gas when they're defeated, considering that they would be carrying that stuff with them. Watch tank cook-off videos on youtube. They aren't carrying that stuff after they're destroyed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) The side that suffers the most losses is often the defender, so ironically your war exhaustion and POW suggestion would make raiding much easier. Also making wars more "attritiony" wouldn't do anything to stop raiding, raids are short and usually the raider takes next to no damage. Alliance wars would be completely screwed by your suggestion though, since the losing side would literally not be able to produce soldiers after about a week. Edited February 18, 2016 by Ogaden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fronin Posted February 19, 2016 Author Share Posted February 19, 2016 The side that suffers the most losses is often the defender, so ironically your war exhaustion and POW suggestion would make raiding much easier. Also making wars more "attritiony" wouldn't do anything to stop raiding, raids are short and usually the raider takes next to no damage. Alliance wars would be completely screwed by your suggestion though, since the losing side would literally not be able to produce soldiers after about a week. Right now population doesn't cap barrack recruitment (AFAIK), I don't think Sheepy is going to make that part more realistic if he implements war exhaustion. War exhaustion really serves to reduce tax income. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Right now population doesn't cap barrack recruitment (AFAIK), I don't think Sheepy is going to make that part more realistic if he implements war exhaustion. War exhaustion really serves to reduce tax income. Pop does cap Soldiers. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur James Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 I like this as the game have a never exhausted manpower regenerated from the society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fronin Posted February 20, 2016 Author Share Posted February 20, 2016 Still, it will discourage situations in which a nation with ten cities, but with a few hundred infrastructure, can continually raid for months without running out of manpower. They'd have to eventually build their infrastructure and pursue peace for a week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.