Lore wrote:But the difference in army sizes comes in during long term warfare. The larger army size can rebuild quicker and will spend less resources doing so. The smaller army size will farm more which will cost AT and repair naq plus unit losses.
During a full on war the smaller will actually have an advantage at first as he can farm the larger for more income. But in the long run he will fall first as the larger will eventually be able to build a def the smaller can no longer break. It would take a conciderable amount of time for the full sinerio to play out and a battle between a 30 and a 50 mill army size could go either way if the smaller hits first and can do a complete massing with the death of all defenders and spies as it is possible to have had 10+ mill in those areas.
Now a 30 mill versus a 100 mill will end much more quickly as the resources avalible to a 100 mill army are so much higher and the sale of say 10 mill UU could completely rebuild the military of the 100 mill man stronger then it was before.
JMO
Yea for sure a longer drawn out conflict means army size is more important, but as far as i can see, it would take months of hardcore fighting for a 100 mil army to 'beat' a 30 mil army. Im not saying it will be easy, and for sure the 100 mil army will have an 'easier' time of it, i was talking purely about capability. At the end of the day, everyone would agree 100 mil would be able to easily be number 1 in stats, no question.
@Hells_Angel, you said you would argue, but haven't really given any 'evidence'. I haven't exactly given much either, but please if your going to say something, say at least something more to proove your point >_>
Lore wrote:But the difference in army sizes comes in during long term warfare. The larger army size can rebuild quicker and will spend less resources doing so. The smaller army size will farm more which will cost AT and repair naq plus unit losses.
Firstly, there really hasn't been much/any long term warfare. The recent CoP vs ... was probably the biggest we've seen in a while, and lots of accounts got decimated, but really no accounts actually got too badly 'hurt' to still be as useful as before. Teal'auc, my loving CO, went down to about 22 mil (shes now back to 37 mil), and she was perfectly able to fight as well as before. I know some people in personal wars, where its 5 mil against 50, and the 5 mil holds his own (though only because he spends more time).
Secondly, i'd agree that the larger army can rebuild quicker, but only if they keep their income. Once the initial massing is done, the larger has no more capacity to build than the smaller one, simply because the smaller can attack for naq/UU as well, and 'passive' income counts for nothing if you can just steal it. But i do agree with you in theory, just in practice it can be different, if the player is dedicated.
So what it comes down to is the cap during peace times, stops the bigger getting bigger faster than the smaller. But in war times, it has an even greater effect, in lowering the capacity to grow.
