Scorched Earth (strategy)

Even though Collateral damage has been implemented, I am dissapointed that no real playstyle change has occured as a result. Therefore, I'm suggesting a strategy focused around collateral.

I'm thinking +3 collateral for every unit, plus one attack for bombers, and -3 critical.

The reason I'm not putting much of a nerf on the strategy is that because of the collateral, anybody using this is going to be taking partially destroyed cities. This will slow down their own expansion, and the only benifit other than the collateral is going to be the +1 attack to bombers.

I'm thinking this strategy could be more useful in team games and scenarios, where one player has the opportunity to not be on a front, and can send in units to attack the enemy without any large threat on the home front. The drawback will be if the player's homefront becomes the battlefront, so whenever they recover a taken city, they'll be doing massive damage to their own cities.

Thoughts?

That would actually be pretty cool. I'll think of more possible ways to mess around with it.

Support.

Support this was used by the British and American during World war 2 bombing Germany's cities to reduce moral and halt production. You could use this to end a never ending Europe - Asia war. Flying Stealths deep inside enemy territory for bombing and reducing his production.

I don't like collateral system. For example infantry has low collateral (0 if I don't remember wrong) but sometimes when you're taking city lots of ppl dies but sometimes they don't die. Even with nukes in maps/scenarios, in ezzatam's mega world nukes has 100 collateral but still %5-%10 of population dies.City gives lots of casualties only in extreme battles, like ww1 scenario-paris.

Napisano przez Roncho, 03.02.2013 at 03:16

I don't like collateral system. For example infantry has low collateral (0 if I don't remember wrong) but sometimes when you're taking city lots of ppl dies but sometimes they don't die. Even with nukes in maps/scenarios, in ezzatam's mega world nukes has 100 collateral but still %5-%10 of population dies.City gives lots of casualties only in extreme battles, like ww1 scenario-paris.

Collateral depends on both how many defenders in a city are killed and the collateral damage of your attacking units (and maybe the defending units, I'm not sure). If you take an empty city with a nuke and a militia you won't do any collateral, but if you attack a city that's defended by 100 infantry with 100 marines, you'll deal a lot of collateral, even though both units have 0 collateral. So i'm not exactly sure how that works, collateral may be added onto base collateral that is done by every units or something like that.

Napisano przez zombiekiller, 03.02.2013 at 09:55

Napisano przez Roncho, 03.02.2013 at 03:16

I don't like collateral system. For example infantry has low collateral (0 if I don't remember wrong) but sometimes when you're taking city lots of ppl dies but sometimes they don't die. Even with nukes in maps/scenarios, in ezzatam's mega world nukes has 100 collateral but still %5-%10 of population dies.City gives lots of casualties only in extreme battles, like ww1 scenario-paris.

Collateral depends on both how many defenders in a city are killed and the collateral damage of your attacking units (and maybe the defending units, I'm not sure). If you take an empty city with a nuke and a militia you won't do any collateral, but if you attack a city that's defended by 100 infantry with 100 marines, you'll deal a lot of collateral, even though both units have 0 collateral. So i'm not exactly sure how that works, collateral may be added onto base collateral that is done by every units or something like that.

ww2 scenario.
Bombing London with a stack of bombers = renders the city useless.
support

Support.