Lower repair costs for farm+raid to increase amount standard hits.

In order to increase more fighting activity, since there are so many accounts not fighting, simply growing, I think we should decrease repair costs. Decreasing repair costs would also lead to more fighting activity, since players with huge strike would profit from lower gains, without repair costs decrease would be impossible for them to hit smaller players, because players with lower strike would hit them sooner (this works as long as repair costs are huge)

I recommend lowering the repair costs for basic strike missions (stealing kuwal and raiding units).
Attackers and Defenders weapons would be lowered by a lower percentage with each hit.
losses might remain the same.

It should be carefully decided by how much repair costs should fall.

Repair costs for invasion, assault and other missions should remain as they are.

large players already have a significant benefit with using better weapons than smaller players.

reducing repair costs will make it even harder for smaller players to keep what little income they produce

When the game started I had people from both sides who tried to complain to me.
Defenders said attacker has too much advantage
Attackers said repair costs are too high

they were both right, as long as they don't taste the other side of the coin. I did, and it was pretty balanced. Not your run of the mill rampant farming.

I d say its pretty balanced as it is.

In Real life if a nation wants to go to war it ll burn up its national reserves or build up its national debt... the longer its at war for, the more the reserves drop, or the more the debt climbs. Best example is the UK/ British empire in world war 1 - it entered world war 1 as the clear superpower of the world, wth massive national reserves (the most in the world i think?), it came out of world war 1 bankrupt due to the sheer scale of the costs, and the prolonged fighting. World war 2 it entered with virtually no national reserves (compared to what it entered world war 1 with)... and the UK only finished paying off the world war 2 debts about 2 or 3 years ago.....

On AW the same applies - the more accounts you fight (prolonging the war), the more costly it gets. In the RL a nation can't simply decide to go to war on a whim.... same applies to AW

ian wrote:I d say its pretty balanced as it is.

In Real life if a nation wants to go to war it ll burn up its national reserves or build up its national debt... the longer its at war for, the more the reserves drop, or the more the debt climbs. Best example is the UK/ British empire in world war 1 - it entered world war 1 as the clear superpower of the world, wth massive national reserves (the most in the world i think?), it came out of world war 1 bankrupt due to the sheer scale of the costs, and the prolonged fighting. World war 2 it entered with virtually no national reserves (compared to what it entered world war 1 with)... and the UK only finished paying off the world war 2 debts about 2 or 3 years ago.....

On AW the same applies - the more accounts you fight (prolonging the war), the more costly it gets. In the RL a nation can't simply decide to go to war on a whim.... same applies to AW

I don't know about UK, but i agree.