Page 1 of 1
% on attack/defence loses
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:51 pm
by SÅTÅN 666
They are shoking...You hit a 50b defence with 350b strike and you lose 20k UUs + and they lose 10 - 15k...I remeber in the day the smaller the defence less loses...so I'd only have like 5k - 7k loses and not 20k +, can this be removed?
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:16 am
by Rich™
_Ancient God Anubis_ wrote:You hit a 50b defence with 350b strike and you lose 20k UUs + and they lose 10 - 15k
lol, i dont
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:35 am
by Rich™
actually i was wrong
05:33 XXXX 30,129,445,822 Naquadah stolen 15 46,632 28,558
30k = like 18bil + training to make supers again, plus 600mil weapon repair, + 15 AT, plus a few shields almost makes the hit not worth it
edit: actually need to wake up, you said 50bil defense not 150 (the guy above had a 158 i think), so on a 50 i'd imagine to loose 10k tops.
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:30 am
by RobinInDaHood
The losses are based on the army size involved, not only the attack/defense ratio. If you hit a 1 billion defense with a 1 trillion strike, you will always take higher losses because the attacking force is larger.
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:53 pm
by deathguard
what thats stupid if there was actualy a war if those forces clashed it would be a rout with most of the defending army dead unless the army marched up slowly with no thoguht for self preservation i dont see how this works
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:52 am
by Almost38
ir it was a real battle the army with more men would more likely lose more since theres more people to kill so easier targets
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 5:14 am
by Rich™
yeap that's why i like playing 1 v 3 (with me being the one)
i'll either die with no kills, or kill 2/3 of them and win that round. it's hardly ever 1 for 1.
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 5:47 am
by DarkSchneider
Jack wrote:Anyone who has ever played an FPS (First Person Shooter) game online with highly unbalanced teams (number of players on each team) then you would know, more people to = more kills
Not entirely true. If you meet a few guys that are organized and run around in a pack or squad, they will pwn most everyone. Happens on Halo 3 all the time. One guy takes the brunt of the attack, the others flank and take them down. The guy that took the attack moves to the back and becomes a flanker so they can recharge or heal.
I can see both sides to this argument, though...
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 2:01 pm
by Zeratul
could ya take the non-sgw game discussion elsewhere? it pretty much doesnt have anything to do with the topic...
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:24 am
by Omoc
Almost38 wrote:ir it was a real battle the army with more men would more likely lose more since theres more people to kill so easier targets
Yes, but if it was a real battle, the army with more men would kill all (maybe left few of them who were hidding)... but this is not the real battle... it's a game!
And i agree as well, higher the attack minus defence is, less losses should happen on the attacking side 
just my two cents
cheers
Re: % on attack/defence loses
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:11 pm
by hidden
ooo starcraft ums tug o war 1v2 the 1 will always win
anyway i think if you attack really overpowers the defence then the attack should take less damage