Proper Damage Totals in War

[Myseri]

Okay I was thinking of this, and have been working on it for a while now trying to get it down to a suggested format.

We all know that the current damage totals in a war are flawed. That means that someone can 1 turn with a 200 bill strike and get trillions of points for their side for hitting a 0 defense. Which is quite bad. So here is my theory.

Instead of have it what your are massing with, why not have it what you have massed.

You mass a 200 bill defense, then your alliance gets 200 bill of damage dealt. You reduce a covert action from 250 billion down to 5 billion, you alliance gets 245 billion in damage dealt. You can add in planet defenses, motherships. Any of those. If you base it off what the enemy loses, then it cannot be abused as you have to have the enemy build a defense to get massed.

The only flaw I see with this is the alliances that declare war, mass the enemy and then sit without a defense for the rest of the war. This is not far for the one who had war declared on them.

Only solution I can come to that is you have to have a mandatory minimum defense of lets say....300 million at least once every 24 hours. If not the enemy gets a "boost" of some sorts. The problem with this is the inactives in the alliance would make the enemies stronger. So maybe if you don't do that, you automatically get kicked from the alliance?

[gooseman the first]

makes sense, has my support

[R3B3L]

So maybe if you don't do that, you automatically get kicked from the alliance?

I'd say No, not automatically, as some people might not be around (I.e, connection problems.)

So I'd say leave this part up to the leader of the alliance, as it will be his/her decision to kick people.

[BL1P]

hmm the who wins thing cant be left too surrender alone.
there are too many ways that could be abused

if the war isnt limited too a time then 1 side has too be able too win in some way.

using the current system there are ways too create a winner

if damage on target score is ever double damage on initiator then theres a winner and visa versa (of cause this is calculated on the 5th day and then everyday so that the initiator doesnt win on his first attack)

if either side was too drop below 20% of there initial power they should lose aswell.

as a side note on this i myself belive that if 1 side has strike more than 10x the other sides defences and the strike is also stronger than the ofther sides strike there realms would be over taken in a war
by ocupation yes there are chances of a resistance by the other sides strike but minimal. this would just mean a win obviously

so too sum up

4 ways too win

1. surrender
2. causing 2x more damage on them than they cause on you (5day intervals)
3. smashing there power too below 20% its original power (5day then everyday)
4. overwhelming there defenses in power then rape n pillage

taken from this topic
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=70381

as you can see the attacking side couldnt then remove all defences as it would mean the none agressor wins because of the 10x or 20x more strike than defence rule

[Taure]

This is a good idea.

The only flaw I see with this is the alliances that declare war, mass the enemy and then sit without a defense for the rest of the war. This is not far for the one who had war declared on them.

To get around this, instead of all that complicated "have to have a 300mil defence or get kicked" thing, you could simply say that, if a person sells their defence, then the value of that defence that was sold is counted as damage taken by the damage meter.

[Chris M]

Okay I was thinking of this, and have been working on it for a while now trying to get it down to a suggested format.

We all know that the current damage totals in a war are flawed. That means that someone can 1 turn with a 200 bill strike and get trillions of points for their side for hitting a 0 defense. Which is quite bad. So here is my theory.

Instead of have it what your are massing with, why not have it what you have massed.

You mass a 200 bill defense, then your alliance gets 200 bill of damage dealt. You reduce a covert action from 250 billion down to 5 billion, you alliance gets 245 billion in damage dealt. You can add in planet defenses, motherships. Any of those. If you base it off what the enemy loses, then it cannot be abused as you have to have the enemy build a defense to get massed.

The only flaw I see with this is the alliances that declare war, mass the enemy and then sit without a defense for the rest of the war. This is not far for the one who had war declared on them.

Only solution I can come to that is you have to have a mandatory minimum defense of lets say....300 million at least once every 24 hours. If not the enemy gets a "boost" of some sorts. The problem with this is the inactives in the alliance would make the enemies stronger. So maybe if you don't do that, you automatically get kicked from the alliance?

i agree fully.
also like to see trooop losses

[Myseri]

I am bumping this as I don't think it got much consideration