Merging Strike/Defense

[Sleipnir]

Have you ever wondered how it is that your enemies die when they attack you, while the only thing you're using is a sarcofagus or a time dilation device. Seems rather odd doesn't it?

I was thinking, maybe it requires some more realism. Merge the strike and defense armies into one which will have defense equipment to absorb damage, and strike weapons to dish it out. A sample battle, XXXX is attacking YYYY:

The forces of XXXX rush in full force, and inflict 242,144,288 damage on YYYY's forces! 196,123,888 was absorbed by YYYY's defenses. The assault breached the defenses, dealing 46,020,400 to YYYY's troops. It was confirmed that 26 of YYYY's forces fell at the hands of XXXX's assault.

The forces of YYYY fought back with all they could, and managed to inflict 97,470,172 damage on XXXX's forces! 39,008,000 was absorbed by XXXX's defensive equipment. Their protection breached, XXXX's troops suffer 58,462,172 damage. 30 of XXXX's troops were slaughtered.

The forces of XXXX were able to invade the realm of YYYY. However, XXXX could not secure a foothold in the realms of YYYY!
The forces of XXXX flee from the battlefield! One could see glory on the face of the victors, and spite on the defeated!



Possible outcomes and results would be:

- XXXX Doesn't breach YYYY's defense. YYYY doesn't breach XXXX's defense, battle is a draw, no naq taken. Low casualties/damage either side.
- XXXX Doesn't breach YYYY's defense. YYYY does breach XXXX's defense. XXXX is chased from YYYY's realm in a humiliating fashion. More damage and casualties to XXXX, less to YYYY.
- XXXX Does breach YYYY's defense. YYYY doesn't breach XXXX's defense. XXXX wins overwhelmingly. More damage and casualties to YYYY. High naq steal percentage. Lower casualties/repairs to XXXX.
- XXXX Does breach YYYY's defense. YYYY does breach XXXX's defense. XXXX deals more damage than YYYY. XXXX still wins, but has less time to gather naq. No enhanced/reduced damage on either side.
- XXXX Does breach YYYY's defense. YYYY does breach XXXX's defense. XXXX deals less damage than YYYY. XXXX gets in, but has no time to gather naq. No enhanced/reduced damage on either side.

As you can see, to win you need to first breach the enemy defenses, and then make sure that you keep the defenders off you long enough to take some naq. If you can keep them from hurting you back, you have more time to gather the naq, if you can't, you have to get out of there sooner. If they're hurting you more than you hurt them, you have to get out right away, and forget about the naq. If you can't even breach their defense, pray they can't break through yours either, so you have some more time to get out safely. If they breach yours, you gotta make a run for it, taking more damage on your way out.

So, why, besides realism, would we wanna upgrade to such a setup? Well, for one, it reduces the effect of single stat boosting. Having only attack will get you nowhere, because everytime you've beat someone's defense, you get shot to pieces before you can take anything. And if you get attacked, you will take lots of damage because your weapons are not defended. If you boost only defense, everytime someone does get by it, you have now way of chasing them out, so you lose lots of naq. And if they don't get through, but choose to mass you, you'll be dealing no damage back to them, making it cheaper to mass you.
Also, strike is no longer invincible. All weapons take damage during both attack and defense battles.

[Rukia]

or a army rating instead of separate defense & offense.

defense tactic settings: ambush/ head on defend, draw/envelop, meet head on
attack tactic settings: cautious, normal, aggressive

aggressive attack makes ambush or envelop defense slightly more effective while head-on is affected more by the 25% random factor
cautious attack makes ambush or envelop defense slightly less effective.
all tactics only modify the attack efficency % as 75% is lowest possible and 100% is highest possible. just to make the % of possible damage less dependent on the 25% random factor.

example:
the forces of A initiate the battle causing 40 million damage and 5 casualties. the forces of B deal the invaders causing 24 million damage and 4 casualties as they rapidly fall back.

the forces of A agressively charge forward causing 50 million damage and 15 casualties. the forces of B counter as they envelop the forces of A completely. 70 million damage is done as the forces of A are utterly surprised and 20 casualties result.

the overall result is 90 million damage and 20 casualties on the defending army. the invaders take 94 million damage and 24 casualties forcing them to retreat. [insert race specific ending here]

[Tyicius]

It's a very interesting idea It would add more flavor to the game if implemented. More power to yah

[Respenus]

Sorry, but I'm against it. It would bring more spice to the game, but it would make it more difficult and overall complicated.

[SGC_Sam Fisher]

Sounds good.

[Ishmayeck]

I say go for it!

[Vegito]

definetly is original

[Rukia]

mine or sleip's?

[Artiglio]

indeed, this is most definatly an interesting idea, and it should add alot more realism to the game

... go for it

[schuesseled]

the mothership already works like this why alter the workings of the game to implement it when there is alrady a partial element of this suggestion in the game.

Additionally i like the fact that def and offence is seperate, and doing this merging attack and defence would mean that tauri lose lots more troops when fighting people because of their low defence

[Artiglio]

the mothership already works like this why alter the workings of the game to implement it when there is alrady a partial element of this suggestion in the game.

Additionally i like the fact that def and offence is seperate, and doing this merging attack and defence would mean that tauri lose lots more troops when fighting people because of their low defence

haha, stupid tauri

its simple enougth to build lots of defence dudes ... or just change race

[Sleipnir]

the mothership already works like this why alter the workings of the game to implement it when there is alrady a partial element of this suggestion in the game.

Additionally i like the fact that def and offence is seperate, and doing this merging attack and defence would mean that tauri lose lots more troops when fighting people because of their low defence

Why do people always forget the fact that tauri have a bigger offense, but never that they have a smaller defense. You can bring fewer guys for offense, and more for defense, so that should pretty much even out.

And why keep things inconsistent? If motherships work this way, why not normal battles? It promotes balance. It discourages coward tactics (hiding with no defense so you can't be harmed). Those seem desirable qualities to me.

[Lord Dougy]

Have you ever wondered how it is that your enemies die when they attack you, while the only thing you're using is a sarcofagus or a time dilation device. Seems rather odd doesn't it?

I was thinking, maybe it requires some more realism. Merge the strike and defense armies into one which will have defense equipment to absorb damage, and strike weapons to dish it out. A sample battle, XXXX is attacking YYYY:

The forces of XXXX rush in full force, and inflict 242,144,288 damage on YYYY's forces! 196,123,888 was absorbed by YYYY's defenses. The assault breached the defenses, dealing 46,020,400 to YYYY's troops. It was confirmed that 26 of YYYY's forces fell at the hands of XXXX's assault.

The forces of YYYY fought back with all they could, and managed to inflict 97,470,172 damage on XXXX's forces! 39,008,000 was absorbed by XXXX's defensive equipment. Their protection breached, XXXX's troops suffer 58,462,172 damage. 30 of XXXX's troops were slaughtered.

The forces of XXXX were able to invade the realm of YYYY. However, XXXX could not secure a foothold in the realms of YYYY!
The forces of XXXX flee from the battlefield! One could see glory on the face of the victors, and spite on the defeated!



Possible outcomes and results would be:

- XXXX Doesn't breach YYYY's defense. YYYY doesn't breach XXXX's defense, battle is a draw, no naq taken. Low casualties/damage either side.
- XXXX Doesn't breach YYYY's defense. YYYY does breach XXXX's defense. XXXX is chased from YYYY's realm in a humiliating fashion. More damage and casualties to XXXX, less to YYYY.
- XXXX Does breach YYYY's defense. YYYY doesn't breach XXXX's defense. XXXX wins overwhelmingly. More damage and casualties to YYYY. High naq steal percentage. Lower casualties/repairs to XXXX.
- XXXX Does breach YYYY's defense. YYYY does breach XXXX's defense. XXXX deals more damage than YYYY. XXXX still wins, but has less time to gather naq. No enhanced/reduced damage on either side.
- XXXX Does breach YYYY's defense. YYYY does breach XXXX's defense. XXXX deals less damage than YYYY. XXXX gets in, but has no time to gather naq. No enhanced/reduced damage on either side.

As you can see, to win you need to first breach the enemy defenses, and then make sure that you keep the defenders off you long enough to take some naq. If you can keep them from hurting you back, you have more time to gather the naq, if you can't, you have to get out of there sooner. If they're hurting you more than you hurt them, you have to get out right away, and forget about the naq. If you can't even breach their defense, pray they can't break through yours either, so you have some more time to get out safely. If they breach yours, you gotta make a run for it, taking more damage on your way out.

So, why, besides realism, would we wanna upgrade to such a setup? Well, for one, it reduces the effect of single stat boosting. Having only attack will get you nowhere, because everytime you've beat someone's defense, you get shot to pieces before you can take anything. And if you get attacked, you will take lots of damage because your weapons are not defended. If you boost only defense, everytime someone does get by it, you have now way of chasing them out, so you lose lots of naq. And if they don't get through, but choose to mass you, you'll be dealing no damage back to them, making it cheaper to mass you.
Also, strike is no longer invincible. All weapons take damage during both attack and defense battles.

i like the idea, but i think its too big a change to be implimented, ie too late an update.

[Sleipnir]

i like the idea, but i think its too big a change to be implimented, ie too late an update.

Well.....yeah.....I considered that.....but still, you gotta admit, it sounds nice And there's always quantum, and chaos. Or maybe someday uber-ascension

[Napoleon]

or a army rating instead of separate defense & offense.

defense tactic settings: ambush/ head on defend, draw/envelop, meet head on
attack tactic settings: cautious, normal, aggressive

aggressive attack makes ambush or envelop defense slightly more effective while head-on is affected more by the 25% random factor
cautious attack makes ambush or envelop defense slightly less effective.
all tactics only modify the attack efficency % as 75% is lowest possible and 100% is highest possible. just to make the % of possible damage less dependent on the 25% random factor.

example:
the forces of A initiate the battle causing 40 million damage and 5 casualties. the forces of B deal the invaders causing 24 million damage and 4 casualties as they rapidly fall back.

the forces of A agressively charge forward causing 50 million damage and 15 casualties. the forces of B counter as they envelop the forces of A completely. 70 million damage is done as the forces of A are utterly surprised and 20 casualties result.

the overall result is 90 million damage and 20 casualties on the defending army. the invaders take 94 million damage and 24 casualties forcing them to retreat. [insert race specific ending here]

This seems really complicated though, is the attacker just supposed to guess what setting the defender is on?