| Sunday, July 15, 2012 - 10:47 pm |
Here is something that I found quite annoying:
We can modify the existing tiny/small garrison templates, but we can't create new garrison templates that only have 107 or 291 (I think this number is correct, but don't quote me on it) weapons. Why not? What if I need a few different versions of the tiny/small garrison? For example, let's say that I have a fortification that is defended by a small garrison, and I also have a city that is defended by a small garrison. The fortification doesn't need a nuclear defense battery, because forts cannot be targeted by nukes. However, my city DOES need a nuclear defense battery or else it's vulnerable. Wouldn't it be handy to be able to create two variants of the small garrison, one with a nuclear defense battery, and one without? Same goes for tiny garrisons. So my suggestion is to allow us to do this. Any thoughts?
| Monday, July 16, 2012 - 12:01 am |
Sure you can Marshal.
Just alter the current tiny/small garrison blue print to what you want and save it as any name you want.
You could even make one of just 27 weapons if you wanted.
| Monday, July 16, 2012 - 04:13 pm |
Oh, really? -facepalm- why did I not think of that before? Lol
| Thursday, July 19, 2012 - 12:30 am |
Hm I just tried that but it didn't work. All it did was just rename the current one.
| Thursday, July 19, 2012 - 05:02 pm |
Works for me, just tried it.
Select small or tiny garrison, edit to your needs, change name and click on the save button. Doesn't seem to save the original small/tiny blueprint though
Andy, if you read this, could you look at saving the original tiny and small garrison blueprints when you create new ones from these originals. The new blueprint page only allows larger garrisons, it would be handy to have new small blueprints on top of the original small/tiny ones. Or at least the ability to reset to the default small/tiny ones.
| Thursday, July 19, 2012 - 10:48 pm |
Which was my original suggestion. Come to think of it, why must a garrison have any weapon requirements at all? What if I feel like having a garrison with just one nuclear defense battery? I know that it would leave the target vulnerable to other weapons, and maybe it's a bad idea...but can you give me any good reason why we shouldn't be allowed to have miniscule garrisons like that?
| Friday, July 20, 2012 - 02:07 pm |
To be honest you could just fill the rest of the space with 10 a penny jeeps.
And Marshal, DO NOT assume 1 nuclear defense battery will protect you from nuke attacks. You need 2 to completely defend against strategic bombs. Also, the stealth bombers are or are going to be capable of destroying NDB which nothing else could before.
| Sunday, July 22, 2012 - 11:12 pm |
and it would be easy for an attacker to wipe out just a Nuke defense batt before he nukes you just attack it with some fighter or something you need a balanced defense
| Monday, July 23, 2012 - 04:21 am |
Unless they've changed the game, you can't destroy a nuke defense battery with anything other than a nuke.
| Tuesday, July 24, 2012 - 06:36 pm |
1 NDB...2 NDB...It's still too small to make a garrison...which shouldn't be the case.
| Tuesday, July 24, 2012 - 11:26 pm |
Well if it's worth defending against a nuke in the first place, then it's worth defending against convention weapons.
And once again unless the game has changed (could be I've not gotten to a point where I intend to keep countries I take and need to worry about that yet), there should be no reason for more than 1 NDB at any target. Just better have enough missiles for it to shoot.
| Thursday, July 26, 2012 - 03:15 pm |
all wrong.. but crafty of course ;) Before Stealth Bombers, nothing could destroy an Nuclear Def Battery, which is what made nukes pretty worthless against an well defended country. Now only stealth bombers can destroy the batteries.... which still makes nukes pretty worthless against an well defended, active player.
| Thursday, July 26, 2012 - 03:17 pm |
Yankee too I do kinda agree though I would have more batteries than one, esp with stealth bombers now. I wont say what I use but I'd say 2 minimum, maybe 3 or 4
| Thursday, July 26, 2012 - 03:23 pm |
I'm sure you need 2 for defense against strat bombers yankee.
Also, the new stealth bombers can destroy NDB or if they cant already they will be capable soon.
Frankly I think the whole concept of them needs changing. To defend each major target with anti nuclear missiles? Seems strange. Wouldn't we (and dont we real world) have a defense blanket country wide. (or even world wide in some cases).
So you place these defenses around your territory, utilise radar planes (or even a new kind of early warning) to scramble jets to intercept the incoming. Another form of aircraft could be introduced if you want, that specifically targets incoming nukes. counter missile systems could still play a large role in the system too, just not target specific. It just seems silly that if say NY was targeted by the N.Koreans, then only NY would defend itself.
Also your defense blanket could have federation links too, within a certain range.
A far more advanced 'star wars' system could eventually be developed as the space program evolves.
| Friday, July 27, 2012 - 06:39 pm |
Stealth Bombers seem kind of over-powered to me.
| Friday, July 27, 2012 - 09:56 pm |
You might be right I do not know now. Use to be just one but many people misjudged the number of missiles needed.
Just one more thing to check out before I push out
| Friday, July 27, 2012 - 10:12 pm |
Well one NDB can protect against Strategic bombers however the chances of a hit are only 50%
Two NDB's would give you two missiles to shoot each with only a 50% chance of hitting.
So I guess it depends on just how lucky you think you are as to 1,2,3 or 4.
I don't "think" this has changed since I played and I believe I ran two. Reason I say that is I remember the problem with the missiles now.
If you didn't have enough to load all your NDB's then none would shoot. So whatever number NDB's you choose you better have enough missiles to load them all each attack round you think you'll have to deal with.
| Friday, July 27, 2012 - 10:37 pm |
Stealth bombers can only attack military targets, they don't factor in where nuclear defense is concerned.
Seems to me the only reason for having them is if you plan on being attacked while offline.
I can already think of something I'd try on those puppies
| Friday, July 27, 2012 - 10:48 pm |
Yes they "can" destroy a NDB however does anyone know how many you can use at once?
If only one then they'd be fairly easy to plan for in any garrison with NDB'S. Just remember defense is going to shoot first.
Now if you can load a wing up with 500 ... that might be a small problem.
| Saturday, July 28, 2012 - 12:42 am |
You can put 14 stealth in one wing. And they are 100/100 against all batts, 100/20 against NDB. But with only 8 bombs per plane...prob quite easy to defend against. I can think of ways around defense already. They are damn expensive to throw away on a few NDBs.
| Saturday, July 28, 2012 - 01:27 am |
8 or 7? the game docs say they use 7 per round.
14 in a wing it would take something like 7000 Defensive AA batteries in a garrison to have a 100% chance of stopping them with no damage.
Don't know, they can't be produced on LU and I doubt I'll be around long enough to see them commonly used.
| Saturday, July 28, 2012 - 08:18 am |
Few points on Garrison, please correct me.
In my secured main, i actually don`t have to deploy any Garrison at all. Only need to deploy MIB, DMB as they can help defend slave and even fed mate nearby.
In war slave, deploy all garrison, major installations except Public and Private corp.
NDB only need to deploy in Major Installations. Corp, forts cannot be attack by nuclear.
| Saturday, July 28, 2012 - 10:05 pm |
Unless they changed it all you need in your secured main is interceptors and helicopters. They are the only thing that helps defend your other countries in the fed. You need to have your slave in the fed with you.
I don't use any defense weapons in my secured main other than interceptors and helicopters .. everything else is offensive, or something I have ready to transfer to a slave I decide to keep.
| Saturday, July 28, 2012 - 11:26 pm |
How do you work that out Yankee? Geez, 7000 sounds a lot. I dont know how to do the math to calculate losses, sure would like a brief explanation.
| Sunday, July 29, 2012 - 05:45 pm |
Oic, i mix it up. It is interceptor and heli, not MIB and DMB. And my slave need to be in the same fed too. WHat if i am fedless? Will my int/heli help defend my slave?
| Sunday, July 29, 2012 - 08:45 pm |
Only fedded countries can get help from each other with helli and ints. There is nothing stopping you making your own fed for just your main and your slave.
| Monday, July 30, 2012 - 04:37 pm |
Here's my view on this: if I want to defend a city with nothing but two NDB, then I should be allowed to do so.
My reasoning behind this is simple. They're MY weapons. I should be able to put them wherever the hell I want to in my own country. If I want to defend a city with nothing but two NDB, then why not? They're MY weapons, and it's MY city!
| Monday, July 30, 2012 - 07:57 pm |
There is absolutely nothing wrong with that Marshal Trumm.
I just have to wonder though, if it's your secured country, why bother defending it period.
If it's not your secured country .. why would you bother trying to build it?
| Saturday, August 4, 2012 - 07:21 pm |
This wouldn't necessarily apply to my secured country...it would apply to all countries, leader or slave.
| Wednesday, August 8, 2012 - 04:32 pm |
Question: If your secured main defends your slave from a pvp attack, does it lose it's secured mode?
| Wednesday, August 8, 2012 - 07:30 pm |
It can also attack a C3 remaining secured. Hmm, not sure how that works on the higher war levels when the C3 can fight back, have I just found a loop hole?