I think it would be wrong to make what is essentially the whole art of attacking an enemy (i.e. where he is weakest) into something deemed wrong.
In WW2 they tried to attack with suprise and where they werent expected. Even more so because they actually died if they screwed up.
Milkrunning can be annoying but it can also be enjoyable to do if you log on and dont feel like huge battles. I think all players should be allowed to play as they see fit. Remember some players arent as good at the game as others. Why should they be forced to fight and consistantly die to a superior player just because that 'superior player' doesnt want to have to move around defending his bases?
I think you guys are being just a tad selfish but i do understand your feelings about losing bases minutes after you fight hard to take them because some dweeb takes a m3 in before the base respawns. It DOES suck yes! but in the end its up to you to look for the sods
sorry thats just my veiw. I do however see the raising of troops required being a good compromise. This would indeed stop single or pairs of players from milkrunning and I really cant see why you dont like it brady
come now ! arent you also being a tad selfish to ddismiss the idea?
Why not try 15 troops? I realise the first guy drops 10 troops and doesnt get the capture but he doesnt lose much in the way of score. he still gets his troops in and i beleive thats classed as 10 hits for his hit %. He just doesnt get that 10 perks.
People would start to go in pairs more I think and this would be ok by me. Im all for slowing the pace of captures.
After all in the real war often fronts were very static for months until a concerted effort in an attack made a breakthrough. If we had bases needing 20 troops to capture we would only see bases captured by a organised attack. Milk runs would be very much more difficult for the single or paired dweebs ((ive done it too but shhhhh dont tell them!
)
just my veiw