If someone is not good enough to run a country much past 1mill nw (I surely wont name anyone) then they should not be able to take out someone who is able to grow their country with any ease at all. Lemmings should do far less damage than they currently do especially if they are sending the minimum amounts to lemming.

In a real world sense this makes complete sense too. If my country goes and attacks someone and they have an overwhelming army it isnt like my army is going to come out anywhere near equal or better in kills.

To balance that, you should then have a bonus to multiple attackers or allow for coordinated / simultaneous attacks.

If you are running a country with 3M turrets and 10 countries attack you with 500K jets each, they should do some damage.

In several games this is handled by having one party "set up" the hit, and then others "join". Once enough have signed up, the initiator hits "go". The "joiners" forces are fully committed while "waiting" for the attack to start.

locket is only afraid of being lemming'd!

scaredy cat!!

OH HELL NO. A SUGGESTION FOR YOUR OWN GOOD? PUSS Y

fluff, for fluffs sake.

fluffboy.

Lemming style attacks have already been weakened from 2025.

What the guy above me said, they used to be far more effective heh

try watching '300' again.. when i send my country to do 'lemming' on yours, i made them a compulsory war chant.. i made them scream 'THIS IS SPARTA'..

i don't understand why failed attacks do more damage than successful ones. it seems absurd to me?

failed attacks should do minimal damage (read losses)

Very minimal

I send JUST above slaughter? I should destroy next to nothing

You do kill very little at just above the slaughter message. It's only as you get near to the actual break that you get high amounts killed.

ok fair enough I misunderstood- was under the impression t'was all the same

Lets say at a min send fail you kill about 1.5%, an average successful hit kills 5%, and a high send that barely fails might kill 9%.

that said, a successful hit kills much more because it actually does other damage other than military.

larger army gets more friendly kills due to confusion and poor targeting skillz.

Depends... if they have a lot of defense, the increased military losses cost far more than would 40 destroyed buildings or whatever miserable returns you'd get with a success. You're also probably better off intentionally failing the first several hits to lower the defenses faster which will ultimately lead to actually being able to destroy meaningful amounts of buildings more quickly.

Today I decided to test the hypothesis from the above post:

2013-07-03 01:07:06 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 21B 1302 C
2013-07-03 01:07:01 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 21B 1306 C
2013-07-03 01:07:00 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 21B 1311 C
2013-07-03 01:06:59 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 21B 1315 C
2013-07-03 01:06:26 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 22B 1320 C
2013-07-03 01:06:24 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 22B 1324 C
2013-07-03 01:06:22 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 22B 1329 C
2013-07-03 01:06:19 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 22B 1333 C
2013-07-03 01:06:16 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 22B 1338 C
2013-07-03 01:05:54 NM Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) DH
2013-07-03 01:05:46 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 22B 1342 C
2013-07-03 01:05:45 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 22B 1347 C
2013-07-03 01:05:43 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 22B 1351 C
2013-07-03 01:05:40 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 22B 1356 C
2013-07-03 01:05:18 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 24B 1360 C
2013-07-03 01:05:15 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 24B 1365 C
2013-07-03 01:05:11 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) 24B 1370 C
2013-07-03 01:04:05 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) DH
2013-07-03 01:03:40 CM Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) DH
2013-07-03 01:03:29 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) DH
2013-07-03 01:02:58 CM Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) DH
2013-07-03 01:02:49 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) DH
2013-07-03 01:02:22 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) DH
2013-07-03 01:01:38 CM Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) DH
2013-07-03 01:01:22 BR Mdina (#134) Top20 (#268) DH

20 buildings per successful hit, seriously meaningless damage. But the bounced BRs? Oh, those were effective. Here's one:

Your forces invaded Top20 (#268)!
The defender held against your forces, causing them to retreat!

Your military lost:
720,000 Jets
Your enemy lost:
1,108,607 Turrets

400k jets = $64m. 20 buildings = $1.5m.

Result, his networth dropped precipitously:
2013-07-03 01:15:02 Top20 $10,513,688 18,926 acres RG
2013-07-03 01:10:02 Top20 $13,748,700 18,926 acres RG
2013-07-02 21:59:05 Top20 $16,537,161 18,926 acres RG

I probably should have just continued bouncing the entire time.

Wow, someone isn't making top 100 let alone top 20.

Lemming kills typically take 2X more turns in a warchat to be successful. I'd say they are probably at the right levels as it is. If you are on the side being lemminged you should be able to outkill the opponent in an ideal fair number war.

Well blid, bounced attacks kill twice as much army, but you as the attacker lose twice as much readiness.

More turns to use highly more effective spy ops :P

Meh still a bit ridiculous that it even kills more. Even with tech a loser in a battle should lose a lot more than a winner unless he loses by like 1-5% or so. Which server was that Blid?

ffa alpha i guess.

get medical tech?

Primary. You can't really ever "ramp up" people in Primary (not enough turns) so you never destroy any worthwhile buildings. Better off just failing attacks all day and bombing structures.

The simple thing to do is adjust the forces (adjusted for Gov Type and Tech Levels) required to make any type of attack to begin with.

Pick a number. Mine would be that the attacking force must be at least 80% the relative strength of the defending force for any type of attack excluding missiles, of course.

That doesn't eliminate lemming attacks, but it makes the strategy more "realistic", IMO.

Is this a complaint or suggestion>?

suggestion.

sounds like a complaint to me

he wants to weaken lemmings so suggestion.