Dear GM

Regarding the war game.

If you go back to the original event, and discussion, that resulted in War Levels. I was there. I was one the the bad guys, the hyper-aggressive, hyper-active players, that these extra measures of defense were created to stop.

Truth be told. Both sides had a point. Aggressively raiding players, and trashing their countries, is toxic. But also, playing the power game, w/o basic war game knowledge, and ostracizing would be war players, so that no one knows how to fight, is also toxic.

A decade of gradually increasing the strength of defense, has suffocated the political game, and generic enthusiasm. But at the same time, w/o that, there will always be those that use any exploit, or weakness, to their advantage, and cause just as much harm.

With the introduction of wind farms, and huge incomes, it has created the effect that players can do, much, much more than they could before. And

I agree 100% with these options and what Orbiter has said. As a player who has been around and left several times only to come back over the years, I believe the war game is important. It has been broken for a long time and seems worse than it used to be. There are too many different weapons and no guide for what they do or what is effective against what. The defense appears incredibly strong, even in low level c3s. I spent far more in lost weapons than I gained by taking a wl3 c3 country. That's absurd, and I am a retuning player with some knowledge of how to do it. A truly new player could easily fail and just leave.
I get why WL exist because building a country takes time and effort and losing it a warlord would be no fun. WL also stifle the game though. Removing them would create real incentive for collaboration and federations to protect everyone. If WL existed in the real world, NATO wouldn't exist. The EU may not even exist. The risks o

There is actually a detailed description as to what is effective against what. I was just reading through it yesterday, and it is very detailed, right down to % chance to hit, and % damage, that each unit causes to each of the possible targets.

That being said:
I have to agree that it seems far less obvious than in most war games.
It is not even clear how to refill units that have been in combat, and bring them back to full strength for the next offense or defense.

I could easily disband the damaged ones, and reform them at full strength, but I'm still trying to figure out how to simply replenish them.

I'm not convinced that protecting countries from capture is a solution in a war game. I remember when I first played, years ago, and I read about the limit of 50 countries in an empire, and thought that it was a strange limitation in a war game.

As an alternative: it could be in some ways more costly to hav

Please read the section about the balancing of the war game.

several actions have taken place and are making a difference.