mclure@sri-unix (06/24/82)
>From one of our players:
It looks as though the recent changes to the Attack and Enlist commands will
pretty much put an end to conventional warfare (the poor soldiers will always
be slogging through the mud). Shelling a country with a lower technology
level, or total nuclear destruction seem to be the only reasonable
alternatives. It seems as though empire now needs a way to wage a limited
war by using something like a tank/troop carrier which would be able to
attack across a number of sectors carrying its own mobility with it (you
could defend with anti-tank mines and guns). Anyway, just a suggestion.
Why the sudden change?
In the attack command:
The cost in mobility to the defending sector is the same as
for the attacking sector if the attack is unsuccessful. If
the attack is successful the mobility in the conquered sec-
tor goes to 0, (the populace destroys the goodies before
being captured).
In the enlist command:
Note that there is a cost of 0.2 BTUs per draftee in addi-
tion to the basic cost of the command and enlistees use up
some mobility in the enlistment process.
So, a sudden enlistment will drain mobility from the enlisting (often
attacking) sector; and once a sector is taken it has no immediate mobility.
Thus, you can only whittle away at the edges of a country on successive
nights, and if the country on the receiving end retaliates, you wind up
with a WWI style trench war with neither side making any progress. This
seems to me an unsavory way of doing things, so I would opt for a nuclear
strike and bombardment if I wanted to zap a country.
JRO, Director