DeletedUser6328
Since the AI system is really not defending against attacks very well. May I suggest a per turn battle system. Where the defending city owner gets a chance to defend their city against the attack in a per turn system.
If you do not answer the attacker with in say 1 hour from the initial attack from the attacking city
Then the AI system battles the attacker.
If you do answer the attack it in say 1 hour from the next initial attack from the attacking city
Then it uses a system of per turn between the attacker and the attacked.
If the attacked or the attacker do not answer their next turn in the battle within 1 hour the AI system takes over either battle to finish.
1. This would initiate live battles and make the game more fun, and add a realism to the game.
2. This would make the battles more fair since the AI is not doing very well, as it is not very good at the proper use of warfare tactics, and proper use of the attacked army's bonuses (use of cover and terrain etc etc).
3. Since most attackers know the AI is not doing very well, as it is not very good at the proper use of warfare tactics, it gives an unfair advantage to the attacker since he will be attacking live and the AI will be used against him/her.
In conclusion in War most smart attackers do not attack "in a haphazard or spontaneous manner" they plan somewhat. This is a game but the system as its is right now favors the live attacker, and not the AI of the attacked.
So either program the AI to be a bit more harder to beat when attackers attack "in a haphazard or spontaneous manner", a way out manned, or out gunned attacked city or at least make it more realistic as for the losses to the attacker.
In real war no matter how out manned or out gunned a country is. Their is still a certain loss in lives of both the attacker and the attacked. The loss should be as such that the attackers have a loss that makes them more cautious before just attacking "in a haphazard or spontaneous manner". As the system is now the attackers knows that his chances of winning with no losses are very high because the AI is very weak against the attackers live use of warfare tactics, and proper use of the attacker army's bonuses (use of cover and terrain etc etc).
If you do not answer the attacker with in say 1 hour from the initial attack from the attacking city
Then the AI system battles the attacker.
If you do answer the attack it in say 1 hour from the next initial attack from the attacking city
Then it uses a system of per turn between the attacker and the attacked.
If the attacked or the attacker do not answer their next turn in the battle within 1 hour the AI system takes over either battle to finish.
1. This would initiate live battles and make the game more fun, and add a realism to the game.
2. This would make the battles more fair since the AI is not doing very well, as it is not very good at the proper use of warfare tactics, and proper use of the attacked army's bonuses (use of cover and terrain etc etc).
3. Since most attackers know the AI is not doing very well, as it is not very good at the proper use of warfare tactics, it gives an unfair advantage to the attacker since he will be attacking live and the AI will be used against him/her.
In conclusion in War most smart attackers do not attack "in a haphazard or spontaneous manner" they plan somewhat. This is a game but the system as its is right now favors the live attacker, and not the AI of the attacked.
So either program the AI to be a bit more harder to beat when attackers attack "in a haphazard or spontaneous manner", a way out manned, or out gunned attacked city or at least make it more realistic as for the losses to the attacker.
In real war no matter how out manned or out gunned a country is. Their is still a certain loss in lives of both the attacker and the attacked. The loss should be as such that the attackers have a loss that makes them more cautious before just attacking "in a haphazard or spontaneous manner". As the system is now the attackers knows that his chances of winning with no losses are very high because the AI is very weak against the attackers live use of warfare tactics, and proper use of the attacker army's bonuses (use of cover and terrain etc etc).