Re: Questions?

by Kenzu Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:49 pm

Nomad wrote:No, I did not, but then again I thought if you send armed men in, and armed men dies I just assumed you would lose weapons. That assumption was wrong so all is as it is suppose to be. I just dont understand the logic behind it.

The weapons for commandos have been added so that raising assassin action isnt cheaper than raising strike or defense action. attakers and defenders lose weapons as it helps increase the cost of farming, however making commando weapons get destroyed when used is not necessary for game mechanics purposes. But you are right that it's not logical that commando weapons don't get destroyed (when attacker and defender weapons do).

Right now I can't give you a logical answer for this, except that it's better for gameplay.

In real life, if small arms are used, I believe that in battles only a small number of weapons gets destroyed if the person holding them gets killed (most are probably damaged by explosions), thus most small arms can be captured and are intact, while military vehicles tend to end up in a very bad shape, if their crews die. In a completely realistic battle, some weapons should be destroyed and some should not be destroyed. Currently RA uses both extremes, either all weapons are destroyed if an army is destroyed, or no weapons are destroyed if they are commando weapons.

by Manleva Sat Jan 21, 2012 7:25 pm

Kenzu wrote:
Right now I can't give you a logical answer for this, except that it's better for gameplay.

Actually I would see that as being the most logical answer but would also add that the most logical answer when an assassin dies would be that his weapon is lost.

In real life, if small arms are used, I believe that in battles only a small number of weapons gets destroyed if the person holding them gets killed (most are probably damaged by explosions), thus most small arms can be captured and are intact, while military vehicles tend to end up in a very bad shape, if their crews die. In a completely realistic battle, some weapons should be destroyed and some should not be destroyed. Currently RA uses both extremes, either all weapons are destroyed if an army is destroyed, or no weapons are destroyed if they are commando weapons.

I see that you have also missed the third option where the soldier is killed without his weapon being damaged but it is left on the battlefield. In this situation there are three main options available, the weapon remains lost, the soldier next to him picks it up, or a soldier from the opposition picks it up

by Nomad Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:29 pm

Well true logic would be defensive assassins killed get their weapons gathered up by your own guys.

Offensive attacks with assassins should result in lost weapons.

It just seemed odd to me so I asked. You say its the way it is suppose to be so all is good.

by Sponsored content