It occurred to me some time ago that the placement of your base really dictates your capabilities. For instance I am less likely to attack places halfway around the world because it takes 8 or more hours for my forces to get there. So in essence my only real contention comes from those with home bases that are relatively close or "Super Powers". I woiuld like to propose the abilty to place satellite bases around the globe or at least the ability to move troops into the base of an alliance member to add to their forces.

Also I talked a bit with Luke about increasing the life span of Diamond mines because they are really short lived with comparison to other resources. On more than one occasion I had half of my active mines expire in a 3 hour period not good for trying to maintain an income level.

How does everyone feel about those two suggestions? :nana

Diamond mines longer: good. I suppose this means that their daily output is going to go down though.
But yes, my income has dropped 100+ geos in minutes at times. A little more stability is good.

Other idea: sorry, read to fast and ran out of words simultaneously. Ordering more online now.

agreed ive been involved in a few wars in India and Europe and its just frusterating because even if I have a huge defense I know its going to be a stretch, maybe a solution is allowing armies to leave from any city you own instead of just your home city.

agreed ive been involved in a few wars in India and Europe and its just frusterating because even if I have a huge defense I know its going to be a stretch, maybe a solution is allowing armies to leave from any city you own instead of just your home city.


Ah yes that too I had forgotten about that aspect. Choosing the city you want to act as the "home base" for that army. Thanks for elaborating!!!


Jeremy

Diamond income: I say leave it. On average, your daily income doesn't fluctuate that much. The balance between the three resources is there now and I don't believe needs to be changed. Your bank interest gives you that guaranteed income, your resources give you the stable income, your cities give you unstable income. It all balances well at this point, imho.

Satellite home bases: I see your point, and think there are some things that could/should come into the game to aid the problem, HOWEVER, satellite home bases are not the answer. It should NOT be easy to spread troops all over the world. The very single most difficult part of warfare is your supply chains. Period. End of story. The US of A can't just suddenly plop new satellite countries right next to every big city in the world, and I don't think that would be good to allow in GEWar either. Strategy people!

Yes, it's almost impossible for one person to take over the entire world. AS IT SHOULD BE!!! You NEED allies to spread yourself around the world, that should remain an important part of the strategy.

However, I do agree that it should be possible to have some means to troop up beyond what we have now.

My suggestion: Extend the features available from allies home bases. Basically, you should be able to 'invite' an army (armies) into your home base, at the home base owners SOLE DISCRETION!!!. Then, allow the home base owner to add troops to that army as if it were their own. Do NOT allow the army owner to do so themselves directly. It IS someone elses home base, and it IS their resources. It wouldn't make a lot of sense to move a 100man army across the globe, enter an allies home base, and then throw 50k of your own men into that army. Um, where'd they come from? lol. This makes it quite realistic.

Think an american army landing in London England, being topped up with British troops to be placed under US control, and moving on to their intended target.

Simple, realistic, and gives a very reasonable option in these cases, but not an option that would allow one to easily run away with the world.