Mil CAP and CB.

[Fistalis]

Something that always kinda bugged me was that the CB penalty was tied to the number of fabrication buildings rather than the number of active and/or reserve troops. I know there is probably a reason fabs were chosen(ease of implementing?), but it would make a lot more sense to me if it were based on troop count rather than active fabrications.

When I think of an arms build up I don't think "they built more factories". I think "they've built a large military".

It could be troop count.. or unit count.
If it was only active troops/units.. putting units in reserve would be a way around it, and mobilizing a large force is sure to start making counties nervous(and give them CB).

And if reserves did count it actually would give incentive to not build reserves as large as possible.


Any thoughts on this?(ya its a huge change thats probably unrealistic at this point.. but doesn't hurt to discuss it)

[tkobo]

I think basing cb as it does now on the active manufacturing (bc) is the better way to go.There is some reaction based on visible units,but it mostly seems to work against dowing.

For instance,put a huge amount of troops on a regions border,when they are about to have or do have a large cb against you.Often they wont make the jump.BUT either keep those troops back to begin with, or pull those troops back out of site ,or reserve them, and the same region often then does jump.

CB based one manufacturing not only covers possible troop amounts,but sustainability of those amounts, and increase of those amounts.And it also covers intent really well.Where as even were a region to buy a boat load of units,it will have a much harder time replacing and increasing them once the bullets start to fly.

so id rather things stay as they are, but are improved.

For instance, a large border build up by one region, should cause the neighbor to match it as best they can.And missile fab should count in bc,especially during this era.