City maximum defense

[blitzkrieg]

I propose that each city can only have a certain amount of defenders as a maximum. The reason for this is that a new player can very easily get into the game and some cities because they know their attack will be successful.

My idea is that a city can sustain 0.5% of it's population as defenders. So a 1,000,000 population city can support a defence of 5,000. As the city's population increases the effect of this limitation basically disappears because at the moment 10,000 should be enough to win most (except mine ) cities on the map.

It should mean it is not worth a larger net worth player fighting smaller players to hold on to a smaller city.

Bonus cities could be exempt from this rule.

This feature will need to be intergrated after the merge/split armies function is integrated though because you could attack a 1,000,000 city with 15,000 troops win and be left with 10,000. 5,000 would stay in the city and 5,000 would automatically be split into a new army and be sitting outside the city awaiting new orders.

Thoughts?

blitzkrieg

[blitzkrieg]

Also if you buy troops in the city, a dialogue box will appear when you reach your maximum saying that the city is unable to sustain more troops. And maybe something about splitting the army....

[Lukepuuk]

It might mess up the screen and the server a little because everyone would send lots of armies outside the cities....so you still have the same as before, but now they are not inside the city, but mostly sitting outside it.
Well, thats what I would do.

[blitzkrieg]

Well the idea is, at least for financial purposes, that it would be inefficient for a high net worth player to control a small city because it's a soft target. It would cost you geos per 5 minutes to control that city. It might not work, it's just an idea to open the game up a little more. More are needed or lets look at this one and try to find the right balance to make it work.

I like it anyway, other thoughts?

blitzkrieg

[speedfreak227]

it's a good idea to keep super rich guys from holding cities but i don't like the idea that someone would know the max soldiers possible in a city and be able to bring in an army capapble of winning for sure.

i like the mystery and i think if someone is willing to spend more money to support an army than a city gives them back then they should be able to have it.

speedfreak227

[His Lord Uberdude]

Hmm...this does make sense...and it will cut the scale of the game a little...(a good thing in my opinion...)

[Lukepuuk]

it's a good idea to keep super rich guys from holding cities but i don't like the idea that someone would know the max soldiers possible in a city and be able to bring in an army capapble of winning for sure.

i like the mystery and i think if someone is willing to spend more money to support an army than a city gives them back then they should be able to have it.

speedfreak227

Hmm he really makes a good point there. The mystery would be gone. You'd know the maximum force in the city, and that might be a bad idea.