Massing proposal

Read first and then vote please
Multiple choice + Vote Cancelling poll

I just tried out some massing on the test server and I must say that I find it a little bit odd:

Your field scouts report on the status of the enemy: The invaders deal 377,596,778 damage on the enemy!
This results in 343 casualties amongst the defending troops!

The defending forces return fire and inflict 20,120,278 damage on their opponents!
They manage to cause 541 casualties in their enemies ranks!

If I deal 377.000.000 damage and kill 343 units,
and he deals only 20.000.000 damage and kills 541 units, I don't find this right.


Furthermore I just figured out that you cannot bring the enemy defense to zero and the kill/loss ratio becomes even more ridiculous

Your field scouts report on the status of the enemy: The invaders deal 303,005,059 damage on the enemy!
This results in 76 casualties amongst the defending troops!

The defending forces return fire and inflict 3,522,539 damage on their opponents!
They manage to cause 233 casualties in their enemies ranks!

I deal 100 times more damage and suffer 3 times more losses.

PS: To keep assaults balanced I was using a standard assault versus a standard defense.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The attacking force were 37.000 supers with tanks and artilleries
vs roughly 10.000 supers with machine guns, mortars and APC

30 assaults brought the defense down from 80 million to 3 million (still not 0)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are my suggestions:

Rule 1) The amount of killed units should be always 5% of the armed units of the bigger army on the defenders. Attackers would loose more units if their strike was same as defense.
If we were to assume 1 dead defender for each 2 dead attackers

If attacker has 50.000 armed units, and defender 50.000 armed units.
5.000 attackers and 2.500 defenders would die in this assault

If attacker has 100.000 armed units, and defender 50.000 armed units.
10.000 attackers and 5.000 defenders would die in this assault

If attacker has 100.000 armed units, and defender 10.000 armed units.
10.000 attackers and 5.000 defenders would die in this assault

If attacker has 100.000 armed units, and defender 4.000 armed units.
8.000 attackers and 4.000 defenders would die in this assault


Rule 2) If I have much more strike than the enemy defense I will loose less units than the enemy. At the same time there must be a ratio cap
1:3 and 3:1
The attacker can never loose more than 3 units per 1 killed, and also may not kill more than 3 per 1 lost (assuming same weapon level and supers used on both sides)

kill:death ratio should depend on the attack action :defense action ratio

I propose the following ratio

2 * (square root of (defense action / attack action)) = A
A attack supers killed : 1 defense super killed

defense action 1
attack action 1
formula = 2
This means that say 2000 attackers and 1000 defenders die

defense action 2
attack action 1
formula = 2.83
This means that say 2830 attackers die and 1000 defenders die

defense action 3
attack action 1
formula = 3.46
This means that say 3000 attackers die and 1000 defenders die because of the ratio cap

defense action 5
attack action 1
formula = 4.47
This means that say 3000 attackers die and 1000 defenders die because of the ratio cap



defense action 1
attack action 2
formula = 1.41
This means that say 1410 attackers and 1000 defenders die

defense action 1
attack action 3
formula = 1.15
This means that say 1150 attackers and 1000 defenders die

defense action 1
attack action 4
formula = 1
This means that say 1000 attackers and 1000 defenders die

defense action 1
attack action 5
formula = 0.89
This means that say 890 attackers and 1000 defenders die

defense action 1
attack action 10
formula = 0.63
This means that say 630 attackers and 1000 defenders die

defense action 1
attack action 20
formula = 0.45
This means that say 450 attackers and 1000 defenders die

defense action 1
attack action 50
formula = 0.28
This means that say 333 attackers and 1000 defenders die because of the ratio cap




Result:
It will be possible to mass a defense to 0, and it will take anywhere from 1 to 25 assaults (if we have 5% set), depending on how small the defense compared to strike is.

A defense 10 times smaller than enemy strike would fall after 3 assaults.
A defense 2 times smaller than enemy strike would fall after roughly 12 assaults.

If you mass a defense much smaller than own strike, it will result in more kills than losses.


PS: we can also agree on other caps.

For example max 2 dead defenders per 1 dead attacker AND max 4 dead attackers per 1 dead defender

I fully disagree with your "caps" idea. The numbers are way out of line anyway, they would need to be up to like 10/25 maybe 50 to 1 to be viable.

Admin also explained, defenses can be Zeroed now. Use sabotage and assassination to do so.

I can say I agree with the jest of the idea your putting forth. It sucks to be 100 times stronger then a foe and lose 10 times as many men attacking them, but I also believe that a dug in defensive troop thats familiar with the surroundings will defeat or kill more men then the attacking force who are unfamiliar and advancing in open terrain.

[08 Jan] 22:13 ioz 4,381,594,769 Kuwal Stolen 27 785 128,407,795 4,796,344,800

he loses 27 supers
i lose 785
his defense is 128mil
my strike is 4.8bil

That is 37.5 larger strike then his defense and i take 29 times the loses.


I figure this can support some1s argument ^^

have fun

How much is your weapon repair cost? I believe that none?

I hope this brings you some argument why loses are like that.

PS. I'm undecided, so i didn't voted.

Nomad wrote:Admin also explained, defenses can be Zeroed now. Use sabotage and assassination to do so.

Well, fyi Sab and assassination always offered the option to go past the max Kill % and actually even ZERO the targeted stat, however most people will have not noticed this since it actually required you to send 60 spies to kill one weapon of the same level as your spy skill (basically a 3:1 exchange ratio in units lost vs units/weapons killed)

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:How much is your weapon repair cost? I believe that none?
I hope this brings you some argument why loses are like that.

Vesper wrote:That is 37.5 larger strike then his defense and i take 29 times the loses.

You should compare the % of units killed

Afaik the rule has been even with the current MAIN setup, you lose more units (in terms of numbers) the larger the strike than the target defense. However as a result you also kill enemy units faster, hence saving yourself attack turns.

Coming back onto the formula: Assault => 5% attackers killed, 4% defenders killed
Step 1) If strike is 5 times larger (i.e. 500k attackers and 100k defenders) then normally you would lose 25k attackers and kill 4k defenders.
Step 2) So that's why the formula gets affected by ratio of powers, duh (even sgw has this)
Step 3) There's 3 options, increase number of defenders killed by the ratio (4k x 5 = 20k killed) or decrease the number of attackers killed (25k / 5 = 5k killed) or do both, which is the case with AW.
Step 4) Obviously doing simply both would be minorly stupid since 20k defenders killed vs 5k attackers killed is about as smart as Step 1)
Step 5) Hence ratio gets square rooted, and when it's 5 we get ~2.23
Step 6) 25k / 2.23 = 11.2k attackers killed and 4k * 2.23 = 8.92k defenders killed.
Step 7) Comparing to 100k attackers vs 100k defenders => 5k attackers and 4k defenders killed

If you want to kill units faster, pay the price in your own units.
If you want to save units, pay more turns

btw in step 3 5k*5 = 25k not 20k

k fixed cos it should have been 4k not 5k

Agreed.

Universe wrote:Greed.

say wha?

no really, please refrain from one word posts

My mistake, I meant 'Agreed', in response to your remark about the player who wants to mass balancing costs in units versus costs in AT/ST.