War points

[Kastor (Old Account)]

It might cause the underdog to not even try if it's likely to just give the opponent more maps.

Doubtful.

[SoS]

Doubtful.

How do you figure? If I were losing more than half my attacks, I wouldn't continue feeding points to my opponent so he could do more damage to me. Totally favors the aggressor.

 

Would be better if the loser of a defensive attack wins a point.

[Kastor (Old Account)]

How do you figure? If I were losing more than half my attacks, I wouldn't continue feeding points to my opponent so he could do more damage to me. Totally favors the aggressor.

 

Would be better if the loser of a defensive attack wins a point.

No.

[Baboon]

No.

 

This is the game suggestions forum, keep your comments useful or don't comment at all. Warned.

[Kastor (Old Account)]

I'm going to bump this rather then make a new thread. Sheepy, please address this.

[Dwynn]

Ok, at first read, I did not like this idea. However, on further thought, I'm actually for this. Initially, defenders started out with more MAPs. Somewhere along the line that changed, and put the balance even more towards the attacker. This proposed change would allow the defenders the slightest chance to catchup from the initial attacks.

 

And like I said, it used to be that defenders started with two more maps than attackers. This simply re-enables that. Because if the first two attacks being ground attacks would give the defender 8 MAPs to work with. Allowing more flexibility for counter-attacks.

 

+1 from me.

[Atzuya]

This... is a good idea, actually. I'm not really sure how this would go in an alliance war, but in cases where you get raided, you get two launch a missile back at the attacker for every two GAs they perform (6MAPs on 6+2). This could be fun

[Vincent]

No. Then this will be a deterrent for anyone to attack a nation with Nuke weapon. They just need you to attack them with 4 ground attack ,1 naval and 1 air strike - 6 points plus the initial 6 they got...they can unleash their nuke and game over.

 

If not mistaken one nuke strike will put the opponent into beige mode immediate. Can someone correct me if I am wrong?

Edited April 27, 2015 by Vincent

[vonnorman]

But thats not a bad thing, youre talking WAR here. The defender being able to strike back is tantamount to the situation. If the attacker gives the defender two extra points on ground assaults militarily the defender can use a missile immediately instead of four hours later. Points are hardly "exchanged" between the two it just allows a first strike advantage to be nullified and both parties have to strategize their attacks considering they will give a point to their enemy. Any developed nation would prefer taking a nuke and beige over constant missiles. Way cheaper. I am all for this 100% cmon sheepy lets do this

Edited April 27, 2015 by vonnorman

[Atzuya]

4 ground attack,1 naval battle, and 1 air strike? Dude you alone need 20 MAPs just to get enough to do that much attack, by that point the enemy would also have 20 enough to nuke you already even without any sort of bonuses

Edited April 27, 2015 by Atzuya

[Ayayay]

And like I said, it used to be that defenders started with two more maps than attackers. This simply re-enables that. Because if the first two attacks being ground attacks would give the defender 8 MAPs to work with. Allowing more flexibility for counter-attacks.

Umm... they never did? It has always been 6 each.

[vonnorman]

Well it needs to support the defender more to make war less lopsided

[Bilal the Great]

Yeah, this could make the war more fast-paced and damaging because there' more war points flowing about. I support this.