The Rebalance Created a more Realistic Battlefield Game

[StarTrekAlliance]

“I think any student of military strategy would tell you that in order to attack a position, you should have a ratio of approximately 3 to 1 in favor of the attacker. And in order to attack a position that is heavily dug in and barricaded, such as the one we had here, you should have a ratio of 5 to 1, in the way of troops, in favor of the attacker. . . .”
~General Norman Schwarzkopf

General Schwarzkopf nails it and I agree. To translate for Dominations, in order to 5 Star an equally matched opponent, you should need to attack loaded for bear, including Mercenaries, Tactics, Troop Cards, and a well thought out battle plan. Not to say you couldn’t 5 Star an opponent without Troop Cards, if you had a well devised strategy, but this should be the exception and not the rule. In my opinion, the average run of the mill attack - without Troop Cards - should result in a 3 Star victory, with 5 Star victories under these conditions exceedingly rare.

The bottom line: The rebalance has made the game more realistic.

One more thought, and a pet peeve of mine, prior to the rebalance, it was utterly ridiculous how some would attack, without a plan, and carelessly drop HTs and Decoys all over the battlefield and then walk away with a 5 Star victory. If fact, I would support ‘hamstringing’ HTs even further, by adding a new building that launches planes, such as Warthogs on Defense, that specifically target HTs.

 

[skychan]

I think that you are missing perhaps the most important point.

We HAVE to attack, and unlike tacticians in history we CAN NOT spend the time to build up our forces to get a 3-1 advantage in attackers.

Think about your Heavy Tank analogy. 6 attacking Heavy tanks, will face at least 4 defending heavy tanks. So you start with a 3-2 advantage for the attacker. BUT then you have to remember that those defending heavy tanks are not alone. They will be joined by dozens upon dozens of regular tanks, infantry, buildings and more. While the attacker if they went with heavy tanks can't bring anything else. So what Nexion has done is made a situation more akin to where we MUST attack when the balance of force is 1 to 5, instead of the reverse!

So no, this isn't more realistic, because in the real world you have a choice not to attack, or to build up more troops.

Yes in multi-player we do this by dropping medals and then attacking down. In WorldWar we cannot do this, and so must do the opposite, attack heavy defenses, while outnumbered in troops.

 

[FroggyKilla]

Still plenty of better solutions. Some of them so stupidly simple Nexon didn’t think of them.

 

[StarTrekAlliance]

We can agree to disagree. I think the rebalance was sorely needed. Just two months ago everyone was complaining about all the stalemates in WW. Why? Because everyone was 5 Star’n their opponents on both sides. Ridiculous. It should be tough to 5 Star an opponent, and again, even in WW, the average should be a 3 Star victory.

 

[yemen]

So we are going to discuss realism, in a game where the most powerful unit is still men carrying bows and riding on elephants? In fact, where those units were nearly the entire cause of the "excessive" 5 star problem that is being fixed? Yeah, get back to me when elephant archers aren't in the game anymore. Make those perfect score alliances be in 0TT wars, and there won't be one stalemate to discuss.

In any case, the game explicitly controls the attacker to defender ratio, not in the interest of realism but difficulty balance, at whatever point the game designers decide is appropriate. That is their prerogative. Ours is to decide whether the game is still fun enough to play when they are done. Scales are tilting towards no...

 

[KniferX]

Once upon a time, this forum made sense.

 

[KniferX]

You also left out:
- being unable to command your units separately only having one rally for all of them
- units have no preservation whatsoever only charging to their targets regardless if it brings them into imminent danger (i.e. bad AI in a lot of cases)
- a town with not even 2 dozen citizens fielding hundreds and hundreds of units
- no civilian infrastructure except TC, houses, roads and farms
- every building and later forests taking longer to complete as ages go by, while ironically ages are shorter in real life time span as you go along
- no naval warfare whatsoever

So on and so on..

 

[Xabar]

“I think any student of military strategy would tell you that in order to attack a position, you should have a ratio of approximately 3 to 1 in favor of the attacker. And in order to attack a position that is heavily dug in and barricaded, such as the one we had here, you should have a ratio of 5 to 1, in the way of troops, in favor of the attacker. . . .”
~General Norman Schwarzkopf

General Schwarzkopf nails it and I agree. To translate for Dominations, in order to 5 Star an equally matched opponent, you should need to attack loaded for bear, icluding Mercenaries, Tactics, Troop Cards, and a well thought out battle plan. Not to say you couldn’t 5 Star an opponent without Troop Cards, if you had a well devised strategy, but this should be the exception and not the rule. In my opinion, the average run of the mill attack - without Troop Cards - should result in a 3 Star victory, with 5 Star victories under these conditions exceedingly rare.

The bottom line: The rebalance has made the game more realistic.

One more thought, and a pet peeve of mine, prior to the rebalance, it was utterly ridiculous how some would attack, without a plan, and carelessly drop HTs and Decoys all over the battlefield and then walk away with a 5 Star victory. If fact, I would support ‘hamstringing’ HTs even further, by adding a new building that launches planes, such as Warthogs on Defense, that specifically target HTs.

I partialy agree with general idea

a new building that launches planes, such as Warthogs on Defense, that specifically target HTs.

respec to the last, there is a building for that Th rocket... (You have to fnish haile)

 

[Xabar]

I agree with StarTrekAlliance. But Nexon is failing in comunicate it. I think that they kwnow the reaction of the only full atack Players.

 

[Xabar]

I also think that the forum does not represent the vast majority of players. In general, most of those who speak are only to complain.

 

[Cannibals]

I agree, and I think it is the reason why Nexon “doesn’t listen” to this forum.

 

[yemen]

I certainly wouldn't be posting much or at all if I was happy with everything they were doing. Except to cheer for occasional good changes (video retrain twice a day is fantastic). But for every concern I bring up, there are at least 10 other people in my alliance who share it and don't bother posting here.

Some things, like war matchmaking, seem to be universal complaints and have been posted about on here for 2+ years now. Nexon doesn't listen to those either.

 

[Corne]

I think you are wrong, in my alliance nobody likes the rebalance. And in our sister alliances same story. People are quitting. Its sad. I play much less than before. Like everybody else is saying the fun is gone..

 

[Manifesto]

The ratio of attackers is fine when you have total and constant control over your army, not so much with Dominations.
But I agree with the OP when it comes to HT and decoys. No skill involved.
If Nexon had any sense they would have left the tactics at one space each but limited each tactic to a max of 2 for each type. ie: 2 Sab, 2 Protect, 2 Decoy, etc.

 

[shukra]

> a new building that launches planes, such as Warthogs on Defense, that specifically target HTs.

you could say the rocket arsenal does that, a little bit.

 

[Blood]

“I think any student of military strategy would tell you that in order to attack a position, you should have a ratio of approximately 3 to 1 in favor of the attacker. And in order to attack a position that is heavily dug in and barricaded, such as the one we had here, you should have a ratio of 5 to 1, in the way of troops, in favor of the attacker. . . .”
~General Norman Schwarzkopf

General Schwarzkopf nails it and I agree. To translate for Dominations, in order to 5 Star an equally matched opponent, you should need to attack loaded for bear, including Mercenaries, Tactics, Troop Cards, and a well thought out battle plan. Not to say you couldn’t 5 Star an opponent without Troop Cards, if you had a well devised strategy, but this should be the exception and not the rule. In my opinion, the average run of the mill attack - without Troop Cards - should result in a 3 Star victory, with 5 Star victories under these conditions exceedingly rare.

The bottom line: The rebalance has made the game more realistic.

One more thought, and a pet peeve of mine, prior to the rebalance, it was utterly ridiculous how some would attack, without a plan, and carelessly drop HTs and Decoys all over the battlefield and then walk away with a 5 Star victory. If fact, I would support ‘hamstringing’ HTs even further, by adding a new building that launches planes, such as Warthogs on Defense, that specifically target HTs.

Crack head

 

[No Angel]

The rebalance created more money?

 

[Alexey]

The picture of realism is not complete without motorcycle raiders carrying oil barrels away with the help of the Holy Spirit, since they are usually dead at the end of the raid)

 

[LordStark263AC]

Explain please. You know for a fact StarTrekAlliance dabbles in crack cocaine? I wanna know the details. Do tell...

 

[cosmid]

Most people didn’t bother and just quit. People you think that are ‘complaining’ are trying to save the game. How is losing customer help a company?