We are stuck in a numerical strategic framework of 70% defensive kill rate, 60% attack kill rate, 0% SR, and neutrals of 2 armies.

The war on neutrals is what we anti-SR players dislike about SR 0%. When 3v2s always succeed,this causes increases in the rate of expansion and reconnaissance -- ie, sending armies in search of enemy bonus(es).

Can we slow down SR-inflation in our strategic universe?

Does anyone want to mess around with defensive/attack kill rate settings and neutral armies (2-3 would probably be acceptable to most) to create reasonable strategic settings in which the following attacks always occur (and higher level attacks aren't too unreasonable):

(1) Neutrals of 2: EITHER 3v2s fail OR they succeed but have leftovers/extras of 1 instead of 2.
(2) Neutrals of 3: 4v3s succeed but have leftovers/extras of 1 AND 3v2s succeed.

An example from a while ago. WR 0%, 50% attack/defense kill rate:
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=6409288

------------------

I changed a single-player template I used at that time from WR 0% to SR 0%.
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=9532010

Kill rates are 55% (defense) and 50% (offense). This leads to some interesting situations:

3 always kills 2
5 always kills 3
7 always kills 4
9 always kills 5
11 always kills 6
13 always kills 7
15 always kills 8
17 always kills 9
19 always kills 10

All successful attacks = 2x minus 1.

Basically, 3v2s still work, so expansion/reconnaissance/growth remain fast. But head to head attacks require more juice, which slows down the game. I don't know if it is worth playing.

Edited 9/27/2015 09:36:08

1) It has already been tested on some templates I made like slow earth (60% offensive 75% defensive kill rate). I got some good players to play on it, but it did not catch on, I did not see many players liking it a lot. I strongly encourage you to make specific templates for others to test, I think there is a lot of potential in manipulating kill rates within some rational boundaries.

EDIT:

Actually to my surprise people liked more fast earth (offensive kill rate higher than defensive kill rate) which imo had less strategic value, but was made more "for fun games".

Edited 9/27/2015 11:43:32

It doesn't feel like you're 'stuck' if you're having a swell of a time messing around with the mechanic.

The problem with 50%/50% is that defense is no longer stronger than attack - if you have a larger stack (even by just 1) attacking is now stronger than sitting, takes away risks of attacking when stacking which changes gameplay a bit.
The idea of fast earth though intrigues me, any game links szew?