Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 1,000. There are more results available, please enhance your search parameters.

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

  • Quote from Ignatio Oddball: “Militia was just nerfed. Otherwise I'd say that is your short term counter. But if this is a game older than 2 days, you could still do it. ” This is thee worst answer possible. What if Venezuela is using upgraded infantry, which mop the floor with militia? What if they are using rocket arty, which beats all unarmored units? You have to understand what you're facing and adapt your response.

  • This is the historical map, correct? On this map, the middle of South America is useless jungle. The screen shot doesn't say anything. The question you should ask is: What is the enemy using, and what can I do to counter his army? It's all about the army. Killing his units at little or no cost to your own units. That's what wins maps. The background color of remote provinces means nothing.

  • I don't know. That map is always an S show. Toxic noob takes Germany, launches a reckless attack in all directions, gets bored and leaves. Until there's a min level requirement to take one of the major powers, the map will remain unplayable.

  • USA is overpowered on the HWW map. The amount of resources and manpower that USA can produce makes it almost unstoppable in the hands of a good player. USSR is almost as strong, but it starts between Germany and Japan, so the USSR player has to fight for survival. USA can just play the long game. Develop the economy, research advanced units, and then just steamroll everyone. The best fix for those double resource cities is not to have them at all.

  • Eeny Meeny...

    z00mz00m - - General Discussions

    Post

    Depends on your research levels and unit counts. If you have enough artillery to knock out stacks of AI units, then Germany should be pretty easy. That's all you really need to fight AI countries: ranged units. It's not hard, just takes a bit of discipline, and you should be able to take Germany without losing a single unit.

  • The funny thing about "range" is that hitting a small target that's zig zagging at speed is pretty hard. Capital ships could, and did, land kill shots on destroyers. But more often than not, they missed, and destroyers fired off their torpedoes before getting destroyed. In essence, the effective range of the combatants was quite similar. The only thing keeping destroyers from getting in range was a sense of self preservation. Of course, large caliber naval guns were better for suppressing army u…

  • Under 15 km for maximum range, not necessarily maximum effective range, but sure. Land based artillery could easily surpass that. And keep in mind, at maximum range, you didn't get pinpoint accuracy, you get something more suitable for saturation fire. What you need to suppress large army formations. In essence, land based artillery had greater effect at longer ranges AND land based artillery had bigger guns than destroyers. Destroyers could move around quickly and get close to shore. This was e…

  • Quote from Carking the 6th: “It would make no sense. Why should destroyers have shorter range than artillery, which have far smaller (and shorter range) guns in real life? That’s unrealistic. Having a decent naval unit (that is easily blown up unless you are active enough anyway) is cool and all, but having their ranges artificially reduced is honestly weird. ” The standard 5 inch gun on a destroyer had a range of less than 10 km. Land artillery came in many different sizes. The smaller calibers…

  • Quote from Carking the 6th: “Destroyers with 30km ranges though? That would get out ranged by mere land artillery. This was not the case in real life.. cruisers are strong because they can still match land units and use their ship armor class to their advantage. This gets pretty muffled with short range destroyers, which apart from perhaps fighting convoys really wouldn’t add ALL that much to them… ” Are you kidding? Let me shoot and scoot transports and subs with destroyers, and I might serious…

  • Quote from Carking the 6th: “If we were to do that, it would be best to re-add the 50 km range that they used to have. Adding something like 30 is equally useless- they’ll just be outranged. At least being able to somewhat damage cruisers would be helpful. ” Are cruisers useless because battleships have longer range guns? No! Cruisers are quire popular with expert players. The speed, AA defense, and better anti-sub attack values make cruisers very dangerous. Giving a small bombardment range to d…

  • Quote from AleksanderZ: “Destroyers the already the fastest naval unit in the game by a significant margin. They don’t need another speed buff. Maybe upping the ATK/DEF stats against subs to reduce the counter-damage the subs will deal? ” This misses the point. Destroyers are already too specialized. They serve as scout units, revealing subs for capital ships to bombard from long range. Most of the time, destroyers never get to fire a shot. Giving them better anti submarine stats doesn't change …

  • Quote from K.Rokossovski: “You know that they DID land DD Shermans at the D-Day beaches, right? It seems way too complicated though. Having complicated facilities at the source side, then restrictions on the target side... it is already pretty cumbersome to cross water, do you really want to make it more so? ” Yes. An amphibious invasion should be difficult. It should require planning. It should feel like a big event. Why did the Allies have to work so hard to capture Antwerp? They had to captur…

  • Or how about you have to embark in a city that has an actual port, and you can embark different units depending on the level of the port. Unarmored, level 1. Light armor, level 2. Heavy armor, you need a level 3 port. This is for transports that are transporting units over water. If you want an amphibious landing, you should only be able to do it with unarmored units. Maybe light armor, if you have higher level transport research. Definitely not heavy armor or artillery, though. The fact that ev…

  • I'm cool with the armed convoy idea. It does simplify the game. But not at zero cost and with zero effort. Oh, you want to drive a heavy tank into the ocean from this random rocky cliff? Sure, let's dig a magical deep water port, and bring magical cranes, and create magical armed transports, and throw in some magical escorts because why not! No, sorry. That's just wrong.

  • Aaaaaaanyway..... We're not going to fix subs. It's too complicated. I'm suggesting a much smaller, isolated change to make destroyers more relevant. They should have more of an impact in surface warfare. Right now they're just glorified sonobuoys. They need to get more respect. youtu.be/_2xxpRVeFLA?si=VX22q7mZMg7GBrjT

  • Haïti playthrough

    z00mz00m - - General Discussions

    Post

    The generated posts look reasonable. They make basic statements, embellished with a bunch of unnecessary, generated language. Then they get posted, nobody complains, no problem. It's also easy to bootstrap the account reputation by "liking" a bunch of posts.

  • Whatever it was, it has been resolved, according to the padlock icon

  • The point of the game is rock paper scissors, with more units. There's a counter for everything, and activity can make up even for bad unit matchups. Anyway, one unit I've been thinking about is the destroyer. Its primary role in CoW is to detect subs from a distance, so ranged units can take it out. It can also engage in close combat, but this is not a tough unit. Unlike the cruiser, which is both tough and can hold its own against ranged attacks as well as doing its main job of providing AA co…

  • Haïti playthrough

    z00mz00m - - General Discussions

    Post

    I'm surprised you didn't say "eff it" and go for a solo. That's what I do when guys camp and make me do all the work

  • For the record, I do think subs are too weak, and transports are overpowered, but I understand why the game works that way. It's to give bad players and the AI a chance, else invasions would be even easier to defeat.