Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 441.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • Was looking forward to this very much for years. A great step forward, really .

  • CoW balancing changelog - 2020-07-14

    Hans A. Pils - - News

    Post

    Quote from Torpedo28000: “[...] perhaps adding a feature that shows how many map joins and victories. Currently it only goes up to 6 for 'amount of map victories' so realistically for an added incentive for experienced players they get this before it really becomes an incentive to get too. I have that for 100 maps ages ago. I believe i've won about 12 of them but as its higher than 6 for 100 maps so for older players /players who have won more than 6 that is no longer an incentive. ” So true. Al…

  • OK freezy, point taken: Definitely you're right in the scenario of all stacks attacking in a melee battle, the side with bigger number of stacks wins (as long as these have at least ten strong melee units). I indeed hadn't thought of that scenario... possibly because it's rather seldom a player uses different orders for stacks on the same spot to keep them from merging. Anyhow Torpedo is right in CoW it too often makes sense to concentrate your entire army onto very few spots. For example see it…

  • CoW balancing changelog - 2020-07-14

    Hans A. Pils - - News

    Post

    Quote from freezy: “Reasoning for the new damage distribution: It gives more meaning to healing troops and creates more meaningful decisions ” It clearly does. Although it's good in general to have difficult and meaningful decisions: This is a decision I'd rather not have to take. Because in most cases it means deciding either for K/D or for victory. It's highly dissatisfying to have to sacrifice one or the other. And it creates weird, unnatural situations: Because of this, sometimes a better pl…

  • Quote from Torpedo28000: “I don't like mega stacks at all, but a strategy of building big stacks, let them fight and get close to death then retreat can be done for almost any unit no matter the size. ” It can be done with stacks of any size, but small stacks have a way bigger risk of dying. If healing was faster, losing units would become something you want to avoid very much (because damaged units would become more valuable, since they would be back to good health quicker than now). So faster …

  • Sorry guys to be the party pooper, but if we had hospitals, the winning tactic would be: Compose a very big stack (so you'll never have units dying), crush a few enemies with it, then withdraw it from the front to the next hospital and after waiting for a few days, send it back to the front again. So this would not only incentivize big stacks even more than CoW already does. It would also bring along a lot of work moving units to the front and back, again and again, which I can't imagine to beco…

  • Quote from freezy: “If you fight 1x 50 units stack with 2x 25 unit stacks at the same time, you would certainly win the fight. ” That's not true (unless we're talking about bombardment battles with more than 10 range units on each side and no fortress involved - then it's totally clear the one who splits up wins - so this thread definitely is not about such battles, only about all others): Assuming 10 strongest units have the same damage output values in each of the three stacks (which by the wa…

  • Quote from blackdragon77: “you are forced now to pay a research fee then pay again for an upgrade cost which is too costly ” You are not forced to do so. And how do you mean "too costly"? Too costly to be an easy decision? That's right, if it was cheaper, the decision to always upgrade your units would be very clear. With upgrade costs as they are in 1.5, you have to think hard which units you want to upgrade when and whether you want to continue researching higher levels of a unit you already s…

  • Arty 1.5

    Hans A. Pils - - Beta Feedback & Issues

    Post

    Quote from RiverWolf74: “Quote from dw98: “Quote from RiverWolf74: “play cow 1.0 to have different range arty ” Oh wow- thanks - didnt realize there was a Call of War 1.0 ” ....Im guessing your a new player then. New players are sometimes unable to join 1.0 games ” This thread has "1.5" in the title. Before just assuming that the author is a new (and not very bright) player, please read carefully. Secondly, resorting to CoW1.0 really isn't a proper solution, since - as we all know - range upgrad…

  • Arty 1.5

    Hans A. Pils - - Beta Feedback & Issues

    Post

    There were two reasons why improving range with research was removed with CoW1.5 (for both ships and arty): (1): As Vorlon already wrote, units no longer upgrading automatically would create stacks with many different ranges. Which would be too difficult to handle. There are solutions imaginable to solve this, but I so far couldn't think of a nice one (that wouldn't have other, negative effects). (2): In order to reduce complexity, differences from one research level to the next have been equali…

  • Quote from freezy: “What we could do to solve this together with decreasing the "happy" threshold from 80% to 60%, is to also lower the target morale threshold of a province down from 100% to 70%. Meaning that a province without any morale boosts will only raise until 70% morale and not 100% morale, so that you have to achieve the other 30% via morale bonuses, like the then increased neighbour bonuses and Infrastructure. At the same time the starting morale of provinces should also be lowered pr…

  • In real WW2, being flanked or even surrended meant a serious problem: * At any moment, a soldier can only look into one direction and only fire into one direction. More or less the same accounts for ordnance and vehicles. So if coming from several sides, opponents have a better chance to approach closely before opening fire. * Building up entrenchment into several directions is way more difficult. * Most armoured units had less thick armour at the sides and the rear and thus were more vulnerable…

  • Quote from Nn gg: “Quote from Hans A. Pils: “When the last province of a country is taken, you can see that on the map. Because... tadatataaaa [a fanfare]: It's no longer there . ” You’re going to be mad searching in world at war ” It sometimes might become a little bit wearisome on a large map, yes. That's why I wrote a second paragraph: Quote from Hans A. Pils: “If you're not sure whether there might still be an island province of the country somewhere and don't want to search a lot on the map…

  • I now also see the correct victory achievement counters again. Obviously yesterday's release fixed it. So only thing remaining now are the three "games joined" counters showing only games that were joined very recently.

  • Quote from freezy: “Hans reported that the Pacific map achievement reset its progress, but I myself still have my progress of 1 for that achievement, so can't be a general reset. ” Well, it at least applies to most players. Just took as a random example the top one in the ranking (DJF78, playerID 6479530). Is displayed like this (in both desktop and mobile version): forum.callofwar.com/index.php?…9708d789c8b5c053be05be9c9 The badges are still there, but counters are reset to 0. What's displayed …

  • Destroyers being able to reveal submarines nerfs naval bombers and carriers. Because one of their purposes (spotting subs) can now be done more cost-efficiently with destroyers: Adding just one level 1 destroyer to your fleet or convoi already does the job. So I'd say you should think about buffing at least carriers. I know it's not easy to find a buff for them that's not badly unrealistic. Their costs are already low in CoW compared to reality. But carriers were an important unit in WW2 and it'…

  • @eruth, you're right that buildings having only one purpose makes decisions when to raise which building where easier. With these words you nailed it: Quote from eruth: “In 1.0, most buildings have multiple different values (economic, production, transportation) that cannot be easily compared and so trying to figure out what to build is less of a min/max math operation and more of a strategic puzzle. ” After the first CoW1.5 test event, I wrote the same criticism, exactly like you did in this th…

  • I also don't like it that the battle doesn't stop the moment the ground unit has disembarked. Vague memory says it's been like that some time ago, but I'm not sure about this. Anyhow even if it was, this probably cannot be changed back without other negative effects. The issue is that intuitively, before running into this trap the first time, players of course think it's a good idea to attack a ground unit that's currently disembarking with a sub. While in fact, currently it only is beneficial i…

  • Some more words about centralization to cities: You wrote it's supposed to 1.: Make battles evolve around neuralgic spots. Doesn't really work out, in my observation. Even if it did: Why should that be better than battles along a front? I like battles along a front better, because that's more realistic for WW2 times. 2.: Prevent endless scrolling in province list if wanting to give production orders. This was hardly an issue in CoW1.0... partly because I'm sure most players don't give their prod…

  • It's been a while since I made a list comparing CoW1.0 with CoW1.5. Not everything from my list after CoW1.5.2 still is relevant - time for an update: Positive (sorted from really great to rather small details): * Units not upgrading automatically: Absolutely vital breakthrough. That's the best improvement CoW has ever seen. Now every research decision is interesting and researching & producing a broad variety of units is a good option. * The new production buildings - players now have to invest…