Necessary edits for the next round

Posted October 30 2017 - 12:12
The game is evolving and getting better every day, but in this development there is a need for certain changes. Actually, I want to talk with you about these changes.

The last two rounds of the game, I always depended on the intelligence of the enemy defense, sometimes for these reconnaissance data I had to spend about half a thousand of energy and sacrifice agents unsuccessfully trying to penetrate the rear of the enemy.
The tendency to need intelligence data has been preserved, but as I see the usual intelligence has lost all meaning. The player sacrifices 1 machine and 10 militia, or if he needs to get data faster - 10 bikers and eventually gets a similar report.

(Sorry, I could not insert the picture.)

(â„–?#?!) VS ACRE 95

Our overwatch team has spotted an enemy convoy heading towards our position!

Score summary

Attacker Defender
Troops: 45 1250
Structures: - 4550
Bonus score: 15.75 +5220
Surprise: +0 -
Total score: 60.75 11020

Infiltrate??? Is it necessary now !?
Penetrating to the rear of the enemy is hard and to get all the necessary information will need 2-3 successful penetration.
So much energy is much more useful to spend on blasting bunkers, ambush patrols and missile strikes.

Let us return to the matter.

Defending mortar result:
Mortars returned fire on the attacking troops and were able to destroy, 5 Bikers, hindering the advance.

Total casualties

Our defenses in place made it very difficult for the attacking troops, killing: 0 militia, 0 policemen, 0 agents, 0 soldiers, 0 bikers and 0 mortar teams

Defender Attacker
Car 0 0
Militia 0 0
Policemen 0 0
Agent 0 0
Biker 0 10
Soldier 0 0
Mortar team 3 0

After a failed attack, without an attempt to reconnoiter the enemy with 100% certainty knows how much defense weakened.
This in fact indicates the next absence of the need for Infiltrate ops.

By the way. A non-guarded acre is attacked by 10 bikers, 9 of them were killed fighting through defensive structures.

Guarded by mortar men killed 10, but in this battle, the defensive works did NOT kill any enemy. This nuance cost me just three mortars against a +1 dead biker.

What do you think is needed to correct the situation?

First, you need to change the appearance of the reports in case of victory or defeat.

Attacker Defender
Biker 10 -
Mortar team - 250

The attacker will obviously lose this battle! He has no chance of success.

Shooting mortars and defenses destroy part of the troops.

Attacker Defender
Troops: 45 1250
Structures: - 4550
Bonus score: 15.75 +5220
Surprise: +0 -
Total score: 60.75 11020

In the battle, not a single attack unit survived. In my opinion, the attacker should receive such a report:

Attacker Defender
Troops: 45 ???
Structures: - ???
Bonus score: 15.75 ???
Surprise: +0 -
Total score: 60.75 ???

Why? It's very simple, the dead can not talk. It is strange that the player in principle received any report. I can at all recommend to write that none of the fighters returned alive, to hide information how many were killed under mortar shelling and from the resistance of defensive structures.

Secondly, the losing party does not have reliable information about the enemy.

Let's go through the logical questions - from where attacking mortar with confidence to know how many structures and troops they killed in the shelling !?
The report can get information "I shot and saw what I got" which means the most accurate this information can be in relation to defensive structures and the least accurate in relation to the number of enemy troops.

Already inspecting the field after the victory of the attacking party can make an accurate assessment of who died from the bullet, and who from the explosion of the projectile.
Returning to the previous point, we can draw another conclusion - the more attacking troops lost during the defeat, the less reliable information can be.

The surviving mortar can report that he was shot in the guard tower, a logical question - and the dead mortar can make an account of their actions on the battlefield?

The same applies to militia, policemen and other fighters who participated in the fight.

As a result, a report about the dead can have this kind of appearance:
Defender Attacker
Car ? 0
Militia ? 0
Policemen ? 0
Agent ? 0
Biker ? 10
Soldier ? 0
Mortar team ? 0

Or here is an example of a defending report if the attacker won
An example is made of the defeated camp of bandits.

Defender Attacker
Car 16 +/-5 (actually 3)
Militia 150 +/-5 (actually 5)
Policemen 51 +/-75 (actually 70)
Agent 76 +/-75 (actually 76)
Biker 52 +/-15 (actually 13)
Soldier 13 +/-15 (actually 27)
Mortar team 51 0

The attacker, who received the victory, has reliable information about both his losses and the losses of the defender.

Thirdly, it is necessary to hide the strength of the attacking and defending friend from the other.

Now, after the bout in the reports, there is such a table:
Attacker Defender
Troops: 5563 1297
Structures: - 1625
Bonus score: +278.15 +438.3
Surprise: +0 -
Total score: 7009.15 3360.3

In real life, if reconnaissance is conducted by combat or combat, the report describes the degree of superiority of the enemy and his resistance (or vice versa).
That there is this report may look something like this:

Attacker Defender
Troops: 5563 Ñ…0.2
Structures: - Ñ…0.25
Bonus score: +278.15 ???
Surprise: +0 -
Total score: 7009.15 Ñ…0.5

Troops: 7009.15 / 1491.55 1297 + 15%=4.699 multiple superiority
Which means that the enemy's living forces were about five times weaker in comparison with the attacking army (0.2 or one to five)

Structures: 7009.15 / 1868.75 1625 + 15%=3.750
Which means that the defensive forces of the enemy were about four times weaker in comparison with the attacking army (0.25 or one to four)

Total score: 7009.15 / 3360.3 = 2.085
Which means that the enemy's resistance was about two times weaker in comparison with the attacking army.

If the attacking army is defeated, the report must have a slightly different principle.

The player, whether he is an attacker or a loser, has survivors who are rushing to say that the gamble failed and we were defeated.

They can not confidently report for the dead in battle, but they describe the course of the battle from their point of view.
First, we were fired from mortars killing some of the troops, namely:
Mortar counter fire:
The defending mortars returned fire and were able to destroy, +/-106 Agent, +/-20 Soldier, +/- 3 Biker, +/-30 Heavy Mortar team, +/-20 vehicles

After that, we entered the battle, trying to break through the defense. Naturally, the approximate data of the battle with defensive structures.

And later the survivors report how much the fierce battle in their opinion was this battle. Again - the error, the more it did not survive - the greater the error.
The accuracy of the report depends on the surviving fighters:

Soldiers have the most accurate estimate, they can clearly indicate that the resistance, according to their estimation, had a ratio of forces of 1 to 3, and the strength of the enemy was approximately 1 to 1.

Militia estimates almost any fight as difficult, in their assessment the battle of a 100-militia detachment with a detachment of 110 militia can be assessed as a heavy fight with a considerably superior strength and strength.

As the saying goes, "Fear has big eyes," one soldier can confidently state that 10 militia is an equal number of opponents, since he easily kills them. 10 people - a full machine up to the top, but for a soldier this is not enough.

Naturally militia can confidently indicate the superiority of the defense forces to about x1.3 - x1.5
The agent is more accurate, within the limits of up to x2
And the soldier clearly points out that the superiority of the enemy's forces turned out to be threefold.

Why all these difficulties?
40 guard towers + 10 bunkers = 3300 defense. Defense bonus 40% = 4620
In battle, 500 bikers enter, they are defeated.
Eyewitnesses can confidently point out that the defense forces proved to be stronger in 1.2 - 1.4 times.
Without conducting reconnaissance, the enemy can increase the attacking army to 700+ bikers, attack and defeat.

In the battle enters 50 bikers, about half of them die, the remaining live say:
- "The fight was too difficult"
- "How much?"
"Our attack points turned out to be 13.2 times less than it was necessary."
"So I'll send 50 * 13.2 + insurance to win."

Firstly, it is ridiculous, in the second, bikers who feel this 13.2 times the load are dead, and thirdly, each person has common sense and own feelings that do not have an exact idea how hard it is.
For someone it is difficult 1.5 times the load, for someone 4 times.

And this is the actual meaning, the bikers will indicate their possible limit, with not responding for the entire sent group of bikers, but only the survivors.
So the player will smell, 26 bikers have escaped, they assert that the defense was extremely powerful (for their forces), more than four times.
This will not tell the player anything, but again, if the difference in strength is insignificant, he will know that the strength of the defense was approximately from the surviving forces.
Posted October 30 2017 - 12:32
"Use this information well...... Many lives were sacrificed to obtain it."
Posted October 30 2017 - 12:44
Yes, this recon trick with droppin 10 units is as old as Outbreak and no idea why never was fixed, especially that is more and more popular every round. IMHO minimal limit of units able to attack should be around 100 to still keep such kind of recon possible but not so damn cheap. At least in k1 and k2, for k3 I would be more restrained with adding new limits.
Posted October 30 2017 - 14:53
Now the nuance with the defense.
40 guard towers, 10 bunkers, clark officer, 5 level of defense technology and strengthening the perimeter of the acres in total gives 6270 defense points.

If you leave it as it is, then an ordinary group of thugs will not be able to capture this acre, but players with a large army have a chance.
From this player draws a conclusion and sends reinforcements, say 100 soldiers.

A band of bandits came in theory until reinforcements and after reinforcements.

Before the reinforcements, they were struck by defensive structures and retreated without a single chance to win. The player restored the blown up structures.

After reinforcements of the same size, a group of bandits (or a player) is defeated, but now he picks up a pile of corpses behind him.


It is necessary to change the course of the battle, if the enemy's troops are unable to overcome defensive structures, or more precisely their overall strength is much lower than defensive structures - then in fact the attacking army can not calmly get to the troops and crush on them, despite the rain of cartridges from defensive structures.

Mortar men are another topic, we do not consider them.

Therefore, the strength of the attacking troops is 4000, the defense is 6270 and how many defense troops there are with ??? points. Hence, the attacking army has a significant, and better, very significant penalty to the killings of the defensive forces.
However, if the attacking forces at 6300 points and defensive structures are pulled at 6270 - I do not mind that this penalty is completely absent.

No, vsmysle penalty from the failure of defensive structures. If the attackers lose, then obviously they will kill less and lose part of the troops when retreating. But can they kill many people if even the fence could not be overcome - I do not know ...
Posted October 30 2017 - 15:29
Wander still further.
6270 defense points and 4000 attacks.
Is it worth it to leave players with the right to fight to the end? Thought is reckless, what is the point of immeasurably killing your troops about the unchanged 6270 defense points ?!

In real military operations, the attacking army overcoming defense deactivates it in effect, respite and round two leads to new losses but brings them closer to their goal.
Let's assess the situation, 500 soldiers with a total attack of 4000 points storm Akr. Can they fire a guard post on them, which they just overcame in the offensive !?

Let's look at this situation by the method of the ratio of forces:
6270/4000 = 1.5675
The superiority of defense is 1.5 times. Means to overcome the defense a half times harder.

4000 / 1.5675 = 2551.83 points to overcome. Minus corpses of course.
This allows you to overcome up to 26 sentry towers. Overcome - not participating in the battle.
(20 * 50 + 10 * 130) * 1.9 = 4370
4370 / (4000 minus corpses) = 1.1>

To this all do not spoil - there must be rules.

First, such operations require the energy of a special operation, say 500.
Secondly, only agents and soldiers can participate in this battle. The reasons for this are skills, responsibility, discipline.

In the third there will be no attempt. Soldiers and agents were wounded, tired, ammunition became scarce and they simply can not continue the battle.

Let's estimate the situation - the acre is protected by militia. In my experience - they are very effective in defense with the appropriate technology, but they die like flies.
The attack of half a thousand bikers led to the death of about 350 bikers and twice the militia.
Logically, the soldiers invaded the acre and killed the poorly protected (armor) militia, but lost the battle. Overgrazing the same week quickly struck the acre again and won.
In practice, this will happen rarely, but everything is possible.

Additionally. The strength of the troops guarding the acre is usually less, 1-2 thousand versus 3-6 thousand. This force of troops (surviving after the round) interrupts the force of overcoming, so more structures will remain in the ranks.
It is an incentive to protect the acre with troops, and not only constructions.
Posted October 30 2017 - 15:39
At the expense of militia and police.
I propose to do:
Militia attack 1 and defense 2
Police Attack 2 and Defense 2

What's the point. Militia is not adapted to attack, dies like flies, etc.
The police have a bonus - they prevent riots and die less intensively.
If you do not like changing the ratio to the rest of the troops - you can 1.5 defense, or slightly rebalance the characteristics of troops and defensive structures.

About the riots - this is the one who invented them. Who - I do not know.
Sorry they are not yet implemented.
Posted October 30 2017 - 15:40
There are more edits, but it seems that the listed one is more necessary, the rest is secondary. Maybe another time in another topic I'll tell.