Dec 8th 2010, 20:05:51
I'm against stacking. If you want to encourage midfeeding and stuff you have to allow people to attack with a balanced military and get good amount of land while being able to maintain a solid defense against special attacks and having a chance of making a retal bounce.
The more likely retals are successful on similar size countries, the less incentive there is to take the risk of attacking a similar sized country. If you can get 4000 acres and bounce an attack 40% of the time, that is more productive IMO then getting 4000 acres with a 95% chance that the other country will take back 2700 acres.
The more the bonuses stack, the less a country is capable of defending themselves (unless they attack a much smaller country). This had the end effect of attacking the smallest country you can being the safest way to grow in land.
I'd much rather have a military strength bonus for more turns but less powerful. A 5% bonus over more turns is better. There are enough disadvantages on the defensive side already (planned strike +50%, 2 vs 3 def to off ally imit). The first country declaring war having a 10% bonus.
The more likely retals are successful on similar size countries, the less incentive there is to take the risk of attacking a similar sized country. If you can get 4000 acres and bounce an attack 40% of the time, that is more productive IMO then getting 4000 acres with a 95% chance that the other country will take back 2700 acres.
The more the bonuses stack, the less a country is capable of defending themselves (unless they attack a much smaller country). This had the end effect of attacking the smallest country you can being the safest way to grow in land.
I'd much rather have a military strength bonus for more turns but less powerful. A 5% bonus over more turns is better. There are enough disadvantages on the defensive side already (planned strike +50%, 2 vs 3 def to off ally imit). The first country declaring war having a 10% bonus.