Invasion information is very misleading

So, I spent several days pulling my invasion forces together to assault an inactive homeworld. I have executed several invasions of smaller planets using four fleets of 60k troops each. So, should be enough to handle the 25k ish troops after the nasty t3 pew pew.

Read up to find what I can and see that the post describing the changes, with a timeline before pre-beta and everything else being in line with my experience. Included in the blog is an indication that battles would be longer (even longer now with recent patch) and that both sides would be able to add troops. Well, that’s where the problem is, I can’t.

So I’ve wasted quite a bit of time and effort to simply throw away a fleet of troops because of misleading information. Okay, no big deal, I’m testing mechanics and now I know.

But umm, then I look at how much research and how many resources it would actually take for me (mankind btw) to assault a weak homeworld and it’s pretty absurd. So hey maybe it’s intended that way, which would be fine until you look at how many troops other races can deploy.

So basically, there’s a core game mechanic that I don’t get to use because I didn’t pick the broken race. Some small hope that there’s work towards having invasions work as they were described, because otherwise the invasion system and the balance regarding it is literally the worst I’ve ever seen.

1 Like

Not sure I understand the problem. Throw your troops in there. They’ll still kill a lot of dudes even if you lose. He’s going to slowly regenerate from that one planet. If he was active you might have a problem because he could throw in more troops but you should have plenty cooking up nearby. Go get more. Attack again.

You don’t have to win an invasion in one go. (You didn’t leave your ships in orbit did you? That was one point I thought was awfully subtle. You can just drop the troops and immediately run away. Repair, get more troops, ready to come in with another load as soon as that first invasion is done.)

Well, it takes two days for it to finish so it will just regenerate the troops before the next fight would happen

Reducing the troops will be at the end of invasion, and even if you lose this battle, you will need much less army to start new shorter invasion. Its duration will be based on changed relation between armies powers, and much possible will take less than one day. In oposite, your opponent requires at least one day to recover his army (in a case of using lvl3 barracks)

Yah I see your problem I had the same thoughts when i was invading I was pretty sad knowing that it was the defender that can only add more troops and not the attacker. Right now there’s a lot to consider on how this mechanic works too. (the first blog on invasion reworking should have highlighted it.)

It can be fixed too. because make the every time you add in troops as an attacker the ODS would reduce the amount every time. (just off the top of my head)

Its a mess. But balancing a game critical feature like this is always fraught.

Not my suggestion but I like the idea that invasions be spread into 3 phases. Assault/Beachhead/Consolidation with each taking say 3 hours. Gives both attacker & defender time to DO something (unless the attacker is thrown off right away) without making it a huge all or nothing single throw of the dice…

1 Like

I open Outscape two times per day, and limited time for different stages of invasion will mean automatically game over for me. This last update with 9h at least gives the chance to compite. I think absolutely ok when defense is simpler than attack. I think invasions should be long and permannet process, and do not allow to destroy empires in one night. But it is only my opinion based on my point of view. Different play styles require different approaches.

1 Like

Fair point. Play styles (& desire to play) do vary and the game has to accommodate as many as possible.

OK then raise each stage as I mentioned above to 8 hours so invasions takes a full day (if unopposed and the attacker wins three falls in a row as it were) But if somebody like Sly here gets on line and sees they have at worst taken one loss in a three battle set they can DO something to prevent the other two or even throw the attacker OFF thier toehold!

1 Like

Hey, all. Something I’d appreciate about invasion reports is this–a report. I just invaded a planet with 100k troops and lost (high chance, 1 day 1 hour to invade, non-homeworld), and at the end nothing happened. I clicked around a bit, but still, nothing. I had to message some other players to find out that I lost.

Also, I want to echo NegativeRadical’s point. I was under the impression that you could add more ships to the invasion fleet. I didn’t realize that only one fleet can invade a planet at a time, so based on your fleet max, you might not be able to invade with more than 4 ships, for example. Things could be worded a bit differently to prevent people experimenting like this.

1 Like

I’ve read the thread that Zath is referring to, and as much as a more robust system like that could be interesting I don’t think it needs to be that complicated.
It’s one thing to set up a system where the defender has an advantage, but to make it basically impossible for some to attack and fairly easy for others is terrible design. I want to point out that the timer has little to do with the problem, except that with these extended times using multiple attacks as was suggested is not viable. I have an uneasy feeling that the time extension was a bandaid solution for making Ripchee invasions less oppressive, but the actual effect has only made the power gap between them and others even bigger.
If the intention is to keep invasions to one attack (despite being described otherwise) then I would suggest allowing all fleets in orbit at the time to send troops. If I need 6 fleets to match one Ripchee fleet, at least let me use them.