A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

View previous topic View next topic Go down

A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Manleva on Sun Mar 11, 2012 10:54 am

Well I suppose it must be due to the weather, divine intervention or possibly it’s just the silly season but it appears that many are wanting to start discussions on different aspects of the game, so here is another one.

Like all of the others it is open to everyone and all input is welcome.

Since the opening up of the Test server and the creation of the long awaited implementation of the Airforce component of the game I have found myself wondering where the game is heading and if we are actually heading in the right direction.

I have had concerns around the costs for building the Airforce and it’s impact on new players and how it actually fits in with what we currently have and despite some discussion I have as yet to see any realistic answers, so here are some very radical ideas for others to pull apart.

Before we begin I will say that they would be major changes and are very wide ranging and will include things that are possibly being discussed in more focused topics. I will make no apologies for this because all things are actually inter-related and impact on each other.

So lets start with some questions. Please note I do not want to see any answers for these questions

1. Why is it so expensive to build even the lowest levels of the Airforce?
2. If airforce units can destroy ground based items why are there no options outside of the airforce to protect them?
3. Why if we have bombers dropping lots of bombs are we not seeing any losses of ground based units i.e. Soldiers, Spies, Assassins and the economy units?
4. Why if we have four different races do we have only have 1 set of weapons and only 1 type of UU.
5. Why if we have 4 different races with different abilities is this only reflected in terms of Kuwal cost?
6. Why are our soldiers split into Strike and Defense?

Just a few simple questions but when considered together and logically they do make you wonder if there are better ways to do things.

So here is the proposal for discussion.

1. Change the base power of the Units for each race to reflect their specialization.
this could possibly also be reflected in alterations of costs as well.

2. Combine Strike and Defense units into a single military unit that does both jobs. Units can also be assigned to defend specific factories, training centers and hangers, possibly even SAMs and Airctaft. This assignment would also have a time factor involved that impacts on when these units can be reassigned.

3. Implement a additional military unit a bit like the old supers that were here but actually more along the lines of special forces. These units would be trained from existing military units with both a failure rate and a limiting ratio of special forces to standard military units. There role is to Target the facilities mentioned above and are therefore not available for normal strike and specific defensive actions although they could be utilized for general defensive action

4. Add Defensive structures and items. i.e. Trenches, walls, Air raid shelters, bunkers, body armor etc.

The general concepts here are based around the fact that in RL there is no difference between attacking and defensive units. Generally no one will commit all of their units to battle but will keep some back for reserves. I don’t see this as working here so instead have given players the ability to assign soldiers to protect their facilities on a facility by facility basis.

I have brought back the old super concept but have altered them somewhat to fulfill the role that now days are filled by special forces. I would expect that they would be extremely well trained and highly effective and possibly even go so far as to say 1 special forces unit is equal to 10 soldiers. I have also specified that they must be upgraded from normal soldiers and that there should be a failure rate, Only the best of the best will make the grade which is realistic. I would also limit them to say around 10% of the total number of normal soldiers. I would also expect that generally they would always do some damage to their intended target unless facing overwhelming opposition.

On the defensive side I do not see research adding to the power side of the calculation but rather as a mechanism that is used after the initial battle calculation and is then used as a modifier to reduce losses.

With regard to the race suggestion I would see Danning Units being stronger when attacking, Miarya stronger when defending and Kyora better at espionage. This would mean that Danning would be stronger than the other races when attacking except for Miarya whose defensive ability would counteract their attack bonus. Economically there should be no change as rather than reducing costs for training I am increasing the units power so the power to Kuwal ratio should remain unchanged.

I would suppose that overall I am trying to provide some more flexibility for players. Providing more control over the disposition of their forces while also including an element of risk as well. Essentially a well balanced account with well deployed units should be in the same state as they are now. Those who want to move the balance in favor of a stronger strike can do so but at the risk of a weaker defense while those who move toward a stronger defense take the opposite risk.

So there it is, have at it.

There’s obviously a few issues the need to be considered as well around existing defense research and techs and while I have some thoughts on the matter I wait for comments first.

P.S. There may be cookies and chocolate milk for those who can come up with the best ideas.
avatar
Manleva
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : 999
Alliance : TMI
Age : 59
Number of posts : 659
Location : New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Kenzu on Sun Mar 11, 2012 9:33 pm

Why are you asking these questions if you don't want an answer?

I see attack and defense soldiers as soldiers that are stationed on different duty stations. Defense soldiers are within your empire, spread out to defend various objects, and maybe in spaceships guarding frontiers, while attack soldiers are located at bases with spaceships that allow them easy access to enemy empires, from outposts in deep space.

Why do you want Daning stronger when attacking, if a player who choses Daning will most likely assign more stat points to Attack and thus his soldiers will be better at attack?
avatar
Kenzu
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

Age : 30
Number of posts : 3034
Registration date : 2008-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Manleva on Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:22 am

The question are there simply to get the reader to consider some things before they post. The answers to them are not that important as all I want then to do is to actually think before the jump in to the discussion.

I can somewhat agree with you on the attack and defense. I can agree that defenders would be stationed at various facilities around your empire. (I will not comments on the imaginary spaceships as they are totally irrelevant).

My point here is to provide the opportunity for more strategy to be involved in the game.

Perhaps I should ask you to name any country that splits it's army into to distinctly separate forces.

My view is that quite simply there should be only one force of soldiers. Some of which will be assigned to a defensive role by stationing them at the different facilities.

Lets face it the current mechanism is nothing more than brute force, When you attack you throw every strike unit against all of the oppositions defensive units. Now if I follow your outline above then essentially The attacker is attacking on every front at once, not a very sound strategy and not something that has happened for a very long time and basically I think we are well past the time where army's get up in the morning, have a nice breakfast, line up neatly and march out to the battle field and take turns shooting each other during the day and then the survivors return to camp at the end of the day. Meanwhile the Generals sit nice and safely on a hill drinking cups of tea.

The introduction of the special forces units and the assignment of units to defend specific facilities actually goes somewhat along the same direction as Kingkongfan1 was raising and allows for more strategic decisions in battle. You send your spies out to locate the oppositions weaknesses and target them before you launch your full assault.

There is even the possibility for some implementation around moral to be introduced by adding a mechanism that introduces R&R for your soldiers

As for the Daning comment, I think that you have missed something there. At the moment each race has a different strength or possibly aptitude. I am not actually making any race stronger than it currently is.
The current mechanism employed to facilitate the difference between the races is only Kuwal based. I'm saying that it should be changed so that it is the unit it's self that is different. If we use Daning as an example then their strength over the other races is solely due to the fact that more units can be trained etc than with the other races for the same investment in Kuwal while I am saying produce a stronger unit for the same cost .

Here's an example to demonstrate (and no the costs are not applicable)

Current mechanism
Specialised race - Train units @ 90 K
Other races Train units at 100 K

100 units at 100 K = 10,000 K spent for Other races while 10,000 K / 90 = 111 units for the same cost.

Proposal turns it the other way around and you train 90 specialized race units for 10,000 K but the units power is equal to 100 units trained for 10,000 K
avatar
Manleva
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : 999
Alliance : TMI
Age : 59
Number of posts : 659
Location : New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Nomad on Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:59 pm

Manleva wrote:Proposal turns it the other way around and you train 90 specialized race units for 10,000 K but the units power is equal to 100 units trained for 10,000 K

This would effect losses, but would do so for all races, Less losses in strike for Danning, less losses in def for miraya, less losses in covert for Kyora, and a very small change in losses for Huala in all area. Assuming all "power" levels are equal, not unit count.


What always bothered me about the split defense and strike has always been that no matter where the "strike" force is, why does it sit there idle as it watches its home planet/nation/country get ravaged and watch its people (defenders) get slaughtered?

I am for the 1 army system, but it will never work in this style game. Not in my opinion. There would need to be a massive overhaul of the entire game taking it into a new direction. The main issue is where is an army when farming? can it both attack and protect at the same time? If player A send s 100% of its armed forces against player B could player C not walk in and take what he wanted form a undefended realm? The brass tacks is in a world where everything is "instantaneous" the system will fail. All you will end up with is a strike or defense twice as big and used for both. Presently to mass someone you have to have the men, weapons, and reserves to take a defense, then turn around and take a strike. Stopping at the defense gives the person attacked a chance to fire back. Going to a 1 army system means they all die at once, when the defense falls, so does the offense and any chance of retaliation.
avatar
Nomad
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

ID : WORD OF THE DAY
Hipocracy
hy·poc·ri·sy
Show Spelled[hi-pok-ruh-see]
–noun, plural -sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behavior, esp the pretense of virtue and piety
3. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

Number of posts : 4259
Location : Everywhere and nowhere at all.
Registration date : 2008-12-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Manleva on Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:00 am

Nomad wrote:
Manleva wrote:Proposal turns it the other way around and you train 90 specialized race units for 10,000 K but the units power is equal to 100 units trained for 10,000 K

This would effect losses, but would do so for all races, Less losses in strike for Danning, less losses in def for miraya, less losses in covert for Kyora, and a very small change in losses for Huala in all area. Assuming all "power" levels are equal, not unit count.

You are correct with your conclusions, I am not suggesting we change the impacts that these actions have on players accounts rather I was trying to explain it in Kuwal terms for Kenzu


What always bothered me about the split defense and strike has always been that no matter where the "strike" force is, why does it sit there idle as it watches its home planet/nation/country get ravaged and watch its people (defenders) get slaughtered?

This is also what has bothered me as well and does not make sense to me. If a massive army can move instantaneously and attack a defense the the defenders strike force should be able to come to the assistance if the defenders instantaneously

I am for the 1 army system, but it will never work in this style game. Not in my opinion. There would need to be a massive overhaul of the entire game taking it into a new direction. The main issue is where is an army when farming? can it both attack and protect at the same time? If player A send s 100% of its armed forces against player B could player C not walk in and take what he wanted form a undefended realm?
In Real life this would be a concern as there will always be a time factor involved because we don't have any means of instantaneous travel.
The brass tacks is in a world where everything is "instantaneous" the system will fail.
Even here where things can happen in milliseconds things still have to happen sequentially. You cannot have toe peices of code updating the same data at the same time.
All you will end up with is a strike or defense twice as big and used for both. Presently to mass someone you have to have the men, weapons, and reserves to take a defense, then turn around and take a strike. Stopping at the defense gives the person attacked a chance to fire back. Going to a 1 army system means they all die at once, when the defense falls, so does the offense and any chance of retaliation.

Your assumptions on losses are partially correct but you also need to consider that while losses will be bigger they will be bigger on both sides.
Perhaps I need to explain it this way.

The proposal is for a single army composed of normal soldiers and special forces (both expensive and limited to a % of the total army size)
The normal soldiers have two roles, Attack and Defense. Special forces only have 1 role, Attacking Facilities and the bank.
Unassigned Normal Soldiers will defend Kuwal, UU and economic units and are also the Strike force.
Assigned Normal Soldiers are a purely defensive force and will only defend the specific facility to which they are assigned.
These facilities are Training Facilities, Weapons Factories, SAM. Aircraft & Munitions Factories and Hangers. Changing the assignments of Normal Soldiers will also have an extensive Time factor included. eg Their assignment might last days, weeks or months.

The idea is that the player has to make some choices with the disposition of their forces. To much defense in one area can leave another area exposed.
There may also be a need to look at the actual attack formulas and make some adjustments. This would be done in a Test enviroment
avatar
Manleva
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : 999
Alliance : TMI
Age : 59
Number of posts : 659
Location : New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Nomad on Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:45 pm

To your idea, is the defensive force ever weakened by sending out attack groups?
avatar
Nomad
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

ID : WORD OF THE DAY
Hipocracy
hy·poc·ri·sy
Show Spelled[hi-pok-ruh-see]
–noun, plural -sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behavior, esp the pretense of virtue and piety
3. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

Number of posts : 4259
Location : Everywhere and nowhere at all.
Registration date : 2008-12-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Manleva on Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:29 am

Well to be honest I have not really gone down that track very far. As far as I was concerned the soldiers assigned to defend a specific facility would only do that so if you assigned 10,000 to defend your Training Facilities then that is all they will do. They won't run off to help defend anything else. Also since they are supposed to be defending against attacks by very highly trained Special Forces units I would also consider that an attack would generally cause some damage unless overwhelming opposition was encountered.

I also have to say that the more that I think on the subject the more I believe that Moral needs to play a part in the proposal as well. Low moral of units would cause poorer strike and defense action. Oh and we could also get to construct R&R facilities that need their capacity could be updated. You could also add a Tech that would improve the quality of the R&R and reduce the time it takes to raise moral.

Something more to spend Kuwal on Very Happy
avatar
Manleva
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : 999
Alliance : TMI
Age : 59
Number of posts : 659
Location : New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Manleva on Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:30 am

Well to be honest I have not really gone down that track very far. As far as I was concerned the soldiers assigned to defend a specific facility would only do that so if you assigned 10,000 to defend your Training Facilities then that is all they will do. They won't run off to help defend anything else. Also since they are supposed to be defending against attacks by very highly trained Special Forces units I would also consider that an attack would generally cause some damage unless overwhelming opposition was encountered.

I also have to say that the more that I think on the subject the more I believe that Moral needs to play a part in the proposal as well. Low moral of units would cause poorer strike and defense action. Oh and we could also get to construct R&R facilities that need their capacity could be updated. You could also add a Tech that would improve the quality of the R&R and reduce the time it takes to raise moral.

Something more to spend Kuwal on Very Happy
avatar
Manleva
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : 999
Alliance : TMI
Age : 59
Number of posts : 659
Location : New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Nomad on Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:33 pm

What causes the changes in moral?


If I am understanding your idea, it is something as follows, (please correct anything I get wrong)

You no longer have a separated army of defense and offense. You now have 1 army, but units from said army can be posted to strictly defensive positions. This means they will only act in a defense manner when the specific item they are assigned to is attacked. The rest of the unassigned army is free to both defend the entire realm, and to be sent to and fro in attacks against other realms.

I would assume units assigned can be unassigned and moved as needed?
avatar
Nomad
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

ID : WORD OF THE DAY
Hipocracy
hy·poc·ri·sy
Show Spelled[hi-pok-ruh-see]
–noun, plural -sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behavior, esp the pretense of virtue and piety
3. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

Number of posts : 4259
Location : Everywhere and nowhere at all.
Registration date : 2008-12-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Manleva on Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:16 pm

Your understanding is correct.

With regard to assignment and unassignment my thoughts were that you could move units around as needed but there would be some limits to this ans was thinking that when assigned to a defensive role the units would have to stay in that role for a minimum period.

Moral would drop naturally over time due to boredom and could also drop because the units were overworked. Moral would be increased through R&R eg through the units being sent on leave
avatar
Manleva
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : 999
Alliance : TMI
Age : 59
Number of posts : 659
Location : New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Nomad on Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:10 pm

units on leave can not attack or defend?
avatar
Nomad
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

ID : WORD OF THE DAY
Hipocracy
hy·poc·ri·sy
Show Spelled[hi-pok-ruh-see]
–noun, plural -sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behavior, esp the pretense of virtue and piety
3. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

Number of posts : 4259
Location : Everywhere and nowhere at all.
Registration date : 2008-12-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Manleva on Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:25 am

I would not have thought so but they could of course be recalled. It would take time as the could be widely dispersed as in may take some time for the recall notices to reach them. Also if their Moral had not fully recovered they would be weakened still.
avatar
Manleva
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : 999
Alliance : TMI
Age : 59
Number of posts : 659
Location : New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Nomad on Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:49 am

so help me understand, lets say I have 100K men. I have 25K "dedicated" to certain things. 50K in my freestanding army, and 25K on leave. Cal I just rotate them daily to keep moral at maximum?
avatar
Nomad
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

ID : WORD OF THE DAY
Hipocracy
hy·poc·ri·sy
Show Spelled[hi-pok-ruh-see]
–noun, plural -sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behavior, esp the pretense of virtue and piety
3. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

Number of posts : 4259
Location : Everywhere and nowhere at all.
Registration date : 2008-12-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Manleva on Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:59 am

I don't know to be honest. You have grasped the concept well which is all I was putting forward.

The actual mechanics would have to be developed. Daily rotation is one option but it needs to be carefully considered. To short of a rotation period would mean that it is not really effective and actually gains us very little and could almost be classed as an exploit while to long a period could also be an issue.

It really a balancing act and to be honest we need more input
avatar
Manleva
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : 999
Alliance : TMI
Age : 59
Number of posts : 659
Location : New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Nomad on Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:10 pm

Well there are only 6 maybe 7 of us who even use forums anymore so,,,,,


As for a possible exploit I see in the system,,, what stops you from keeping 1/2 or even 2/3 or 3/4 of your men in R&R? You could literally have another army resting bigger then the one you have presenting. Now Admin Martin has talked about having some sort of reserves in the past, so that may be something he likes,,,, but ultimately it could lead to an account being massed to 0 and then recalling a force as big or bigger then the one just killed faster then he could make one.


Last edited by Nomad on Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:11 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : correction)
avatar
Nomad
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

ID : WORD OF THE DAY
Hipocracy
hy·poc·ri·sy
Show Spelled[hi-pok-ruh-see]
–noun, plural -sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behavior, esp the pretense of virtue and piety
3. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

Number of posts : 4259
Location : Everywhere and nowhere at all.
Registration date : 2008-12-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Manleva on Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:08 pm

It is entirely possible that this could happen but surely your spies would not be stupid enough the leave the enemy's leave records behind so you really should know the status, composition and disbursement of the enemies complete army .
avatar
Manleva
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : 999
Alliance : TMI
Age : 59
Number of posts : 659
Location : New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Nomad on Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:14 pm

good point,,,, wish I knew how to say 2 shay correctly.


Guess that still leaves the issue of having multiple standing armies tho. That and how to properly balance rotation, plus cause and effect of moral changes.
avatar
Nomad
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

ID : WORD OF THE DAY
Hipocracy
hy·poc·ri·sy
Show Spelled[hi-pok-ruh-see]
–noun, plural -sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behavior, esp the pretense of virtue and piety
3. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

Number of posts : 4259
Location : Everywhere and nowhere at all.
Registration date : 2008-12-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by kingkongfan1 on Fri Mar 16, 2012 3:01 am

Nomad wrote:good point,,,, wish I knew how to say 2 shay correctly.


Touche'
avatar
kingkongfan1
Coalition Officer
Coalition Officer

ID : kingkongfan1(98)
Alliance : [The Marauder's Imperium]
Age : 49
Number of posts : 1387
Location : Skull Island
Registration date : 2010-01-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Nomad on Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:33 am

Touche' there Mr Kong.
avatar
Nomad
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

ID : WORD OF THE DAY
Hipocracy
hy·poc·ri·sy
Show Spelled[hi-pok-ruh-see]
–noun, plural -sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behavior, esp the pretense of virtue and piety
3. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

Number of posts : 4259
Location : Everywhere and nowhere at all.
Registration date : 2008-12-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by seaborgium on Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:11 am

Haha nomad got spanked by a monkey

seaborgium
2nd in Command
2nd in Command

Number of posts : 2551
Registration date : 2009-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A much larger debate on Strike and Defense

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum