Use this forum to ask for new features or suggest changes to the game.
Take war out of Cities
|
Tunguska Posts: 7
9/17/2017
|
There has just been a post in Local Channels about the war between ARK and Utopia stating that continuation could result in the "........razing of six or seven more cities on earth".
Therefore I request that attacks on cities shouldn't affect population. Let's just assume all Industry is in an area just outside the city limits. I don't see how razing cities and affecting players not involved in the conflict can be good for the game. I've no objection to war but would rather it didn't affect anyone not involved. If I'd just started this game in Mexico City and seen the population drop by 95% overnight, I doubt I'd have much interest in continuing. Especially if I found out that I was simply unlucky to get caught in the crossfire.
If that's not acceptable, how about you simply remove the logistics penalty from Military for any Base that is incapable of moving, Rail Gun, Missile Turret etc. So at least I could build a defence for my city without having a huge logistics penalty.
Finally, there is also the possibility that a small group of people could just decide to leave the game and cause as much damage as possible on the way out.
I hope you take this onboard, I just don't see how the current system benefits the game.
|
|
|
0
link
|
|
Vulpex Posts: 390
9/17/2017
|
This is actually not a general problem but a very specific problem to Earth.
There are two reasons for this.
First - on Earth you have the Terran Federation Forces protecting every city. This is good to protect new players but it also means that even if all I want to do is blow up a small production facility I have to go in with a large force (to overcome the terran federation forces) and that results in far more population damage than would normally be expected. Outside of earth all I need is a commando unit which will do very little damage to the population, on earth I take no chances and go in with a massive offensive capacity.
Second - outside of earth it is much much easier to intercept and destroy forces and/or facilities before they become entrenched therefore resulting in much smaller fights to the same effect.
Regarding your suggestion about removing logistics from static defenses.... this has two problems.
First - static defenses are already the strongest units in the game by a wide margin if you consider their cost effectiveness. Their only constraint is that they cannot move. Removing their logistics penalties means that in practice there is no limit to how many of those can be in a city which would lead to very silly situations and require counters which you probably would not like.
Second - building up huge defences will have the opposite effect of what you try to achieve - it only means that when someone attacks you they will bring in an even bigger force to overcome your huge defences - that is how populations caught in the cross fire get decimated.
It should also be pointed out that destroying city populations was always meant as a viable military/economic strategy to take down your enemies.
|
|
|
0
link
|
|
BakonKnight Posts: 5
9/21/2017
|
Something I have been thinking about is if we had another apc for the static defences. Its a big cost to make a level 5 military base just to make some other defences, but perhaps the point is that investing in the military and fortifying cities is not going to be cheap. It is unfortunate when people get caught up in the effects of war but it does happen and its not good for the people involved either
|
|
|
0
link
|