Jul 14th 2010, 4:04:50
Originally posted by rpottage:
Spy ability should be SPAL, but not mine versus yours.
It should be that the only land taken into account are the defending person's.
It should be that the only land taken into account are the defending person's.
Something closer to those lines would seem a bit more logical but even then it's questionable.
Your own SPAL being used as a means of measuring success for offensive ops doesn't make a great deal of sense as the op is being done within the victim's country. When applying this logic to the real world Vatican City would hold the most powerful offensive intelligence network in the world if they employed like 3 spies.
SPAL on defense makes a little more sense, as 1000 spies could more easily monitor 100 acres than 2000 spies could monitor 5000 acres. It's still kind of goofy in situations where someone with 500k spies is failing ops on someone with 15k spies because of SPAL though. Surely the 15k spy guy would be aware of the 500k spies encroaching on his little plot of land, but not one of the 500k spies can successfully gather the desired intelligence?
Short of tweaking to be based more on raw spy count I don't know what can be done about that. Has anyone ever pondered the idea of having some sort of middle ground, where in situations like that the op could still be successful (maybe partially successful for destructive ops?) due to overwhelming spy numbers but the aggressor still have some casualties and the defender be aware of who did the op?