View Profile
View Forum Posts
This sucks. That ratio is way off.Originally Posted by War_Peace
"The city of Jerusalem, Israel was attacked by War_Peace. 10 defending armies (5,234 troops) were killed in the battle. 10,715 attacking troops were killed. Eyespymyeye lost the city."
That was only the largest army. There were a 4,100 and 8 more 100-troop armies which makes a total of 10,134 troops...
It would be awkward if it were like 5,234 troops got killed by 10,715
Now I can see that the "Troop-losses debate" comes out of this little thingy...
Last edited by War_Peace; 09-18-2005 at 02:33 AM.
This sucks. That ratio is way off.
It's probably a "defensive advantage" sorta thing.
What the "four stars" are you talking about!!?
I said that only the largest army takes place in calculation... Duhh!!...
It is 10,134 defending troops versus 10,715 attacking ones in fact, not 5,234...
And, this has nothing to do with any kind of advantage! Reverse may also happen...
I haven't heard that that had been changed, but I have always been saying that a defensive army deserves an advantage, more like real life. All the most recent battles seem to be skewed toward the defender
As of now, there is no defensive advantage - it's always an even battle.
All right!!... Yeeaah!... Thanks...
But you will fix that right?? Displaying the total number, not only the largest one? Or display no military intel maybe:P ?? What?...
I know there's no defensive advantage. A few days ago I lost 8000 troops to JD2005's 'almost' 3000. He was the attacker.
Even is better all right...
Another example:
"The city of Lagos, Nigeria was attacked by War_Peace. 8 defending armies (10,100 troops) were killed in the battle. 78,621 attacking troops were killed. elk-tamer lost the city"
Should be,
The city of Lagos, Nigeria was attacked by War_Peace. 8 defending armies (70,514 troops) were killed in the battle. 78,621 attacking troops were killed. elk-tamer lost the city.
Oh I placed the exact same in the vengeance thread. DIdn't want to make a new thread for it but the numbers are ridiculous.
8 to 1...and I see it more often(though not this much).
It's like attacking a well equipped army with pitchforks and torches.
Last edited by Lukepuuk; 09-18-2005 at 07:38 PM.
You've been a bad boy.
I don't think many of these "across the board" options should be in play. Vagaries are at issue. War is messy. You're cleaning it up.
Some sense of "it may, or may not be an even battle" should be in play. "Stuff happens" and all that.
As long as we don't have force individuation (air forces, special forces, experienced veterans), whether a particular army has an advantage will always need to be the product of some gratuitious randomness. We need some of that 'cause that's reality, but the sooner you can implement force differentiation in a way that makes it more difficult for both parties in an action to determine the outcome, the better. Just now the calculus has been reduced to mere force numbers and whether anyone's outnumbered. Not a rich engagement milieu!
I can't believe that you are such a strong candidate for being the next Einstein!! (Least I can say...)
It is not 10,100 versus 78,621 but 70,514 versus 78,621 actually!!...
The thing here is, the text shows only the largest army(in this case 10,100)
Got that!!?... Geez...
Actually I didn't get that. I thought the latest activity page would show ALL troops defeated?
Must admit I didn't read the topic. Just followed your link on the Vengeance Thread.
Let's wait till Mickey fixes that...
Visit Homepage
Private Message
