... That is a problem that occurs to a larger extent without this idea being implemented...
What is your point?
This idea blunts the effectiveness of enlisting militia, and therefore makes it less hard for the attacker.
This idea still gives an advantage to active one city players, which I believe is right. But blunts the current effectiveness of militia in the early stages of the game.
the main problem is that IF a player is active aka logging in for 16h a day each hour atleast, it is more or less IMPOSSIBLE to fight his army UNLESS he decides so.
So basically since day when BP goes off i cannot have ''any'' battles unless
1. i am lucky and catch him offline (which is mainly possible only if he lives in 3-4h+ timezone +/- from my own.
2. he is a newb and enlists militia while leaving troops in city
The only thing i think it should be fixed is INCENCITIVE for every player to GUARD and PROTECT his city AT ALL COSTS. I mean if enemy attacks city have you ever saw regular army taking a hike to seaside while local militia fighting alone? Its a flawed exploitable concept.
And its 3:1 ratio in favor of the defender while it should be only 3:2 or 2:1....
why 3:1.... explanation follows
Attacker wastes;
1. time of his attack to land and return so a couple of hours usually
2. units he lost for nothing to militia giving ''free'' DBP to enemy
3. all resources and time again to make those units
Defender wastes:
1. 3h 50% less resources
While we definetly cannot take 1 ''penalty'' from attacker away cos all need to be there, it is easy to add 1 more penalty to defender using this exploitation.
easiest implementations:
1. reduce effectivness of the militia
2. increase cooldown on militia and thus reduced resource gains to 9h atleast
3. only allow 50% of troops in city to be militia when enlisted (so if you defend with 50 swords and summon militia you can get max 50)
4.....
