This chapter takes up the debate within jus ex bello about the morality of continuing a war that has reached the limit of its ante bellum proportionality budget. The concept of proportionality implies some kind of equilibrium point between the value pursued and the disvalue created. Conceptions of proportionality in just war theory differ according to how that equilibrium point is understood and justified. This chapter sets out two different conceptions, the impersonal value conception and the personal value conception. The impersonal value conception expresses the ideal of equilibrium in the weights of commensurable impersonal value and disvalue. The personal value conception defines the equilibrium point by a principle that could be justified to those who might suffer and die in the war. I argue that the personal value conception is more restrictive of the harms that may be imposed both initially and when consider whether to continue fighting.