Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 247.

  • 1.5 a step to far!?!?!

    Kanaris - - Beta Feedback & Issues

    Post

    Quote from freezy: “As for the detailed feedback on the 1.5 version: It seems you spin every design choice in a way that our only reasoning was to get more money? ” Well there isn't a billion explanations available either we are posting in bad faith wanting to make the devs look bad for some mysterious and nefarious reason. This reason no matter what you chose to imagine it to be, I think we can all agree cannot possibly benefit users in any way shape or form as other than gaming experience we h…

  • 1.5 a step to far!?!?!

    Kanaris - - Beta Feedback & Issues

    Post

    @Alphared Overall nice summary but you forgot a big new cashcow created with the new update the new revolutionary combat resolution system: 1. The way the new combat system works ground units now take damage every 30m not every 60m thats huge for combat resolution and having to produce by any means necessary more units to ship to the front to replace the ones dying twice as fast now! 2. Units under 50% morale move slower and deal less damage also receive more damage making them more susceptible …

  • In my humble opinion player retention is not the really issue its just a symptom of the real issue just like maps half empty, people abandoning mid game, etc... I believe CoW is having an identity crisis. It needs to decide what kind of audience it wants to cater to. Originally CoW catered to a small audience of strategy war gamers with a very niche product that lets face it is not appealing, interesting, or easy to learn and master for your average Joe. Recent changes lead me to believe that th…

  • naval battles

    Kanaris - - Suggestions / Criticism

    Post

    I was avoiding this thread on purpose as in my humble opinion everything that had to be said did. Although I understand that you would like for things to be different as far as naval battles go I do not understand why, neither from a historical perspective nor from a gaming perspective what you ask it just doesn't track Historically speaking what you refer as proof that DDs did take part in battles (battle of Java sea) proves the exact opposite. American DDs where NOT able to pierce the Jap DD s…

  • Cannot talk about it as its against the rules but like I said previously if the devs want to know they can PM me.

  • Sure that can be a reason, but it doesn't explain the recent increase in players not issuing any orders nor building any infrastructure or barracks on their ICs, when they enter a new game. Thats a new reality ever since game creation was removed as an option to players and there is another more logical reason that explains it much better...

  • And yet removing the ability of players to create games has fixed none of the existing issues. We still have accounts going inactive in the first few days leaving maps with more than half the playable nations being AI. There is even a marked increase in accounts that do not even issue any commands when they enter the game, no build orders, no move orders, and I suspect no research orders. That suggests that people that want to be first in a map and have the choice of their nation as well as a ru…

  • naval battles

    Kanaris - - Suggestions / Criticism

    Post

    Quote from atreas1: “Since the capital ships have a massive number of hitpoints, it is obvious that the odds are much against the planes and in favor of the ships. In practical terms, if one makes an "SBDE-perfect" combined fleet he is invulnerable to air attacks, even without having a single carrier (this is illogical imho). ” There in lies the key as very few people build SBDE perfect fleets and let me tell you with naval bombers lvl5 or better I butcher 90% of anything that floats and has the…

  • Read my stats

    Kanaris - - General Discussions

    Post

    well again that is a dubious assumption I have taken out my fair share of heavy gold users without taking massive casualties. Just because your opponents use lots gold doesn't necessarily mean they have a good understanding of game mechanics nor the most potent ways of actually using vast amounts of gold. There are several threads talking about smart gold spending and dumb gold spending... One thing is certain spending gold is not by any means a guarantee of how good your opponent's actually are…

  • naval battles

    Kanaris - - Suggestions / Criticism

    Post

    In my humble opinion Naval armed forces is the only part of the game that CoW represents adequately as is. I don't see any reason to change it, current stats are by no means perfect but adequately represent the strength and weakness of the current units. Only two notable exceptions Cruisers being one as in real life you had light and heavy cruisers that served two entirely different roles but the game in general does ok by them representing it as a hybrid. Subs are misrepresented they are WAY to…

  • And this is exactly what I am getting at its not just one factor that makes tacs or nukes so attractive its all factors combined you would be crazy not to build them and at a severe disadvantage if you persist to try and build a combined arms balanced army its sheer nonsense at this point. Thats why post update its so hard to say how to fix it, you can change one or two things but the problem remains as everything has been geared against ground based armies, the lack of grain, the easy access to…

  • Oh I do believe we are on the same page, and I do apologize if I sound harsh towards you, I am just very angry at the current situation. All I am trying to point out is that none of the problems we had pre update were addressed and if anything only made worst. Its perfectly natural to be seeing more tacs spam if you are going to make grain very scarce early game; people are going to switch to more oil based armies. Specially if you make it that much more potent a weapon that much sooner as in ma…

  • Its not just about the dependencies its everything about the new research update that is broken. Call me a nihilist or whatever else you like it does't change facts that the old research system was way more balanced. We have been going back and forth on this for quite some time now and the more I play the more things I find broken when I compare the two research systems. Never had I seen such tac spam as I am seeing now pre update and same for nukes its literally raining nukes around day 25 and …

  • just be patient it takes time to load specially on big maps like 100p Also try using the filters to minimize the amount of data it needs to display

  • In regards to your suggestion for additional research cost dependent on how many units you have already in service there is a flaw in this specially since the new research update when you can have a unit fully researched by day 20. Simply do all the research first then build the bulk of your force. So if I am the typical tac spammer I will only build one group of tacs before day 20 just so I can have some, then once I have them fully researched start cranking them out by the dozen and thus avoid…

  • Read my stats

    Kanaris - - General Discussions

    Post

    All I am saying is don't put too much stock in stats, they are not a very accurate way to predict how good or how bad someone is... Also I have seen people deliberately buff their stars by multi accounting to the point where its glaringly obvious so again take it with a grain of salt

  • it is very hard to catch intel spies the probability is very low as it is the least risky op they can run, much easier to catch economical and military sabotage spies in that order. Also your opponent can move his intel spies around after day change or double up on them meaning have 2 or more intel spies in the same province which contrary to the other 2 types doesn't increase the chance of getting caught on the contrary mitigates the counter espionage chances at least according to my testing do…

  • Research Balancing Update

    Kanaris - - News

    Post

    To the stubborn ones that will reply but the new research trees make more units available earlier on! Let me preempt you, had the primary objective of this research update been to make more units available sooner there was a much simpler way that was proposed by many, make more research slots available instead of only 2 I do not pretend to know what the ultimate goal of the redesign was, but lets not kid ourselves making more units available sooner was not it.

  • Research Balancing Update

    Kanaris - - News

    Post

    Quote from atreas1: “Perhaps, if instead of 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 it was 1, 2, 4, 8, 14, 22, 30 It would make much more sense. I like the way at the start the game escalates faster now. I hate the fact that already by Day 8 there are maximum 4 types of units around. ” Why should level 4 units be available at day 8? If the average 22p game lasts 30-40 days and the average 100p game last 40-60 days how does it make since to have better then half way to max research for units by day 8 meaning by ~…

  • Research Balancing Update

    Kanaris - - News

    Post

    Quote from atreas1: “What exactly is the argument? That the previous research system was perfect? Obviously it was not. The point is that the new one has some huge loopholes. Of which, the extremely early availability of nuclear weapons so early is the most noticeable. ” dont forget max level tacs by day 20! I can go on but you get the idea...