War Mechanics

[Esentia]

There have been some suggestions recently, so I thought I would toss this one out... It seems a little silly for tiny attacks (say with 1 Ship) which generate an Immense Triumph to reduce Resistance by the same amount as a large one which does the same.  How abut tying the Resistance Loss to how close you are to having your maximum number of that unit type?  Or perhaps the maximum number of your opponents.   Could be Maximum (based on current BFHS) or Maximum Potential (based on Cities * 5 BFHS).  The most frequent case I see of this is when Nation A is smashing away at Nation B with Air and Ground, but has no Ships.  Nation B has no Infantry, Tanks, or Planes, but does have a handful of Ships.  Too few for Nation A to bother bombing since even if they do Nation B can just build 1 Ship to do a NA with and generate -14 Resistance.

The other effects of an Attack all scale with the number of Units used... only Resistance is fixed.

Another possibility would be to have an Immense Triumph increase your own Resistance.  Just a couple of thoughts to keep Wars from ending so fast.

Edited November 9, 2019 by Esentia

[Lank]

The current system isn’t realistic, but it’s balanced to keep wars interesting. It makes it possible for the losing side to continue fighting instead of being pinned down after the first blitz/counter.

[Guest Elijah Mikaelson]

On 11/9/2019 at 6:25 AM, Lank said:

The current system isn’t realistic, but it’s balanced to keep wars interesting. It makes it possible for the losing side to continue fighting instead of being pinned down after the first blitz/counter.

Ask Col A if they feel this is true?

The war system is not balanced at all

[Lank]

On 11/16/2019 at 9:33 AM, Elijah Mikaelson said:

Ask Col A if they feel this is true?

The war system is not balanced at all

Sorry, I meant compared to what OP is proposing.