Injury Suggestion

[alwaysnumb]

How about this partly base the injury rate on the cost of no tech staff that are lost.
Eg
I lose 100b of troops in an attack 10b cost of the loss is hippy,yobs+gardies so therefore i lose 10% of my injuries instead of 35 or 40% i get 31 or 36% respectively. So when I do an attack of just gardners/yobs I pretty much lose any troops that die.

 

[pinpower]

Re: Injury Suggestion

i genuinely have no idea what that meant...and ive only had 2 drinks...someone care to simplify it for me?

x

 

[No-Dachi]

Re: Injury Suggestion

Disregarding his numbers, he want players to get less injury for generic, non tech, units than unit's you have to spend money on developments to get.

 

[Garrett]

Re: Injury Suggestion

basically forcing you to save up and rebuy mass amounts of flak and inn stoppers.

i think i like this idea if not the math.

 

[Jimbo2189]

Re: Injury Suggestion

still not really sure what you mean by this, are you suggesting that for every level of tech that you do you get an increase of injury rates, so for example (with protesters):

gardies get 5 % injury
Gurus get 10 % inury
leaders get 15% injury
etc
etc

or that the level of injury is dependant on the cost of the individual development cost so for example:

a unit that cost 100b to develop gets 20% injury
a unit that costs 200b to develop gets 30% injury

are either of those what you meant :?
BTW the numbers ive used are not a suggestion im just simply trying to understand this

 

[No-Dachi]

Re: Injury Suggestion

basically forcing you to save up and rebuy mass amounts of flak and inn stoppers.

i think i like this idea if not the math.

It would give a major boost to early game units such as shocks and petrols, seeing the damage they cause would be increased by e.g. 25%. Not saying it's definitely a bad thing, but it must be considered.

 

[DR4545]

Re: Injury Suggestion

To make the idea simpler, just make INN only get 20% back in injuries. No need for further complication.

But, I think that should only apply to attackers, and not defenders.

This change would give a bit of help to allys getting bashed repeatedly. And, typically the top players at round start just mass gards and bash away. This change could help make that strategy less advantageous. (The top generally don't have to buy many defensive units because nobody attacks them at round start.)

 

[Enrico]

Re: Injury Suggestion

This suggestion would mess up the whole formula for cost of units vs cost to develop. I don't really see what it would accomplish either?

The bigger the player, the more devs will be done early on, so a big attacker could get higher injuries than the small target, with less devs, he is hitting. I don't see what that would help??

 

[No-Dachi]

Re: Injury Suggestion

This suggestion would mess up the whole formula for cost of units vs cost to develop. I don't really see what it would accomplish either?

The bigger the player, the more devs will be done early on, so a big attacker could get higher injuries than the small target, with less devs, he is hitting. I don't see what that would help??

That's not really the point here. If I tech PAs while you have officers, I'll muller you, and my injury ratio wont mean squat. There are few occasions where a tier 2 or 3 unit can compete against a tier 4 unit, so that is not really relevant. However, giving a lower teched player less injury is not the way to go. It would mess up lethal flakking, and it might result in more people giving up.

As to introducing a lower injury rate for generic units it might be viable. Not sure if I agree, but it's nothing that would kill the game either.