War System Revamp

[Ogaden]

Currently the war system is an air power system. Air can kill ground better than ground can kill ground, with the new reduced ground losses change, and air can kill ships better than ships can kill ships.  Air can massacre all units including other air.

 

I don't mind air being able to kill air pretty effectively, but there needs to be a serious nerf of both air superiority modifiers, airstrike damage on tanks and airstrike damage on ships.

 

Like with ground attacks, there should be a baseline defense against air and naval attacks, so even with 0 air or 0 ships the attacker should take some casualties.  Airstrikes on ships or tanks or troops should also presume an anti-air capability from the units involved and the attacking airforce should suffer at least some losses, and damage to tanks and ships from airstrikes should be reduced by 1/2.

 

Blockades should be renamed Naval Superiority which includes the blockade but also reduces the number of aircraft you can use by 1/3rd (which stacks with ground control so if you have both only 1/3rd of the enemy airforce can be used) which implies lack of access to overseas airbases and aircraft carriers.  Like with blockades if you are blockaded all your wars suffer the 1/3rd air penalty.

 

Air superiority currently reduces tank power by 50%, this is too much.  Air superiority should increase the number of casualties for the enemy by +50% instead.

 

To balance these nerfs, Air power should destroy improvements, the same way ground and naval does.

 

While you're at it, Iron Dome is too powerful, it should be nerfed to 33%.

 

All unit types should do 10 resistance damage per attack and require 2 action point per attack type, including missiles, and just remove fortify.  This will speed up the game.

Edited March 28, 2017 by Ogaden

[Conner Temple]

Wont be implemented but good ideas.

[Donald Trump]

Can we just stop changing it whenever some person gets butthurt because he sucks at the game? 

[Dillon A McCann]

I wonder what alliance these changes would benefit???

[Cypher]

I wonder what alliance these changes would benefit???

If we're going down that route, I'd just like to say nerfing the ability to fortify (Sheepy's version) harms the losing side enough that they'll struggle to make a come back and therefore making it take more time and energy to get back to prewar levels.

[Bluebear]

100% true. I don't know how Alex can claim to want a RPS type system but then keep air so much more powerful than ground and naval. A necessary element of Rock Paper Scissors is the exactly equal strength of Rock Paper and Scissors.

[WISD0MTREE]

100% true. I don't know how Alex can claim to want a RPS type system but then keep air so much more powerful than ground and naval. A necessary element of Rock Paper Scissors is the exactly equal strength of Rock Paper and Scissors.

Because war is peace, obviously. 

[Ripper]

Because war is peace, obviously. 

 

"Si vis pacem, para bellum."

[Bhuto]

is TKR bombing ships and tanks badly Arrgh! ???  

jk anyway yes it is indeed required to reduce airpower by a bit 
like in RL there are surface to air missiles as well which can take down planes. 

[Ripper]

is TKR bombing ships and tanks badly Arrgh! ???  

 

jk anyway yes it is indeed required to reduce airpower by a bit 

like in RL there are surface to air missiles as well which can take down planes. 

 

If the suggestions of Ogaden had as a goal to benefit Arrgh, then he wouldn't propose removing entirely the fortification system.

Alex has constantly stated that his goal is to balance the various military bodies. Ogaden's proposal of nerfing planes is the simplest one I can think towards that goal.

[Ryleh]

is TKR bombing ships and tanks badly Arrgh! ???  

 

jk anyway yes it is indeed required to reduce airpower by a bit 

like in RL there are surface to air missiles as well which can take down planes. 

And auto cannons are great at taking out air.

Also, ships are pretty good against air irl.