Search Results

Must be confused with Blitzkrieg

I use all of them. My usual is diplomatic because all I really care about is friend VS foe. 2nd most often is nation colors, usually only circumstantial like differentiating between allies or if I'm fighting a multi-human coalition and need to know which of them is going where. Morale is least used, only turning it on when I want to see who is expanding quickly or to gauge activity levels, then turning it back off.

I feel like everyone in their first game tries attacking ground units with their starter Int. The test is if they realize it isn't working or if they continue until the Int dies.

Quote from keni010: “Please spare me! The only reason The US got involved in WW2 (it had long declared its neutrality!) was that one of the 3 Axis Powers (Japan) bombed Pearl Harbor! This happened on 7 Dec 1941 ... The US came to Europe (Belfast) Jan 26 1942 and first became involved in the conflict in Africa in 1942. The Battle of Britain had already been fought and won by the British and her many allies ... this battle began in mid 1940. The British and her allies, Canadians, Australians, New …

Reread my post. Naval bombers are the only bombers worth producing. Navy is unnecessary most of the time.

The meta isn't complicated. Range is king. RRG is king of range. Include support units. Include some fast units as runners and ints as cover. Don't waste resources on unnecessary stuff. Bombers (except NBs) and naval stacks are usually unnecessary stuff. It's still the case that good, active players can beat bad players with any combination of units that they want to use.

Meh. Conversations evolve and there isn't enough traffic on the forum to separate topics that cleanly. On the original topic, I don't think the destroyer/sub balance is broken right now. It seems pretty fair from a gameplay perspective.

This is way premature. Give it a chance.

No one is moving goalposts. The reason you need to balance the types of ships you produce is that they have different strengths and weaknesses. One weakness of battleship-heavy builds is that they're easily defeated by naval bombers. I don't understand why this is controversial.

Lol people are already able to do that. Let's calm down a bit. I am also skeptical of the implementation of this--it's actually kinda frustrating because it seems like p2w--but let's see how it goes.

If you want a better naval stack, I actually think a 2/2/2 stack would be better than 6/2/2. It's less imbalanced so you won't lose as much when someone brings naval bombers or subs. An obvious answer is 10/10/10 but that's such a resource sink that I wouldn't actually call it a good stack. A genuinely better stack would be something like 10 cruisers and 1 destroyer. Cheaper research, faster units, still capable of bombardment but not vulnerable to naval bombers and still able to defeat subs (or…

I already did. The best naval stack is 10+ naval bombers. It's a bad stack because it's easily beaten by very cheap strategies. That you haven't figured that out yet just means you've never played someone with a shred of a clue.

Hahaha so you want me to say "10 naval bombers" instead? Is that direct enough? How about "as many naval bombers as I can produce for the same manpower without wasting resources on 3 lines of naval research like you did"

Naval bombers, subs, or I just ignore navy and beat you on land so that you've wasted resources

Quote from Daniel_Phelps: “Very rarely have I ever seen my typical stack of 2 destroyers, 2 cruisers, and 6 battleships struggle against anything. In fact, the only thing it regularly loses to is a group with a higher ratio of battleships. I mean I guess if they run into 10 naval bombers they'll be in trouble. But I've never had it happen that someone just builds a 10 stack of naval bombers unprompted. ” Then you're playing bad players. That's fine, if it works it works. Just don't extrapolate t…

If you're using battleships a lot more than destroyers and cruisers you're probably playing against bad players (or are one yourself). Nothing makes me happier than seeing lopsided navies full of battleships.

On that note, I'm a member of a couple other forums that have been using the Discourse software (not to be confused with Discord) and it is excellent.

Quote from KaiserOfAnonymous: “but what is the last time a suggestion is actually added ” And in this case it's not even a suggestion for bytro, I don't think. Moreso a suggestion for the makers of the forum software.

Quote from Claudio NVKP: “Bird, calm down. You are making a big deal out of such issue. ” What? I didn't make the thread. I'm just supporting the idea. The person making a big deal out of this was the one screaming in all caps about this being a GAME FORUM.

By small subset I meant the small percentage of people that identify as non-binary, not the small subset of weirdos who feel the need to make a big deal out of the existence of non-binary people.