Search Results

Cool. Thanks for walking me through it. Cheers.

So, I am in a rough battle right now, and will probably lose. I was trying to use a tactic, but then realized that the way the game is set up it won't work. So, if this sounds like a cheat or dumb then shoot me down. Here is the set up. I had allies early in the game, but for whatever reason they quit. So, i still right of way with them. I have an enemy coming form my north. To my east i have to now AI allies with right of way. So, i travel to my east to hide my troops in their cities with their…

never mind i see it has been discussed at length.

Just curious if this has been discussed before. Much like the Russians did (and many before them) it would be nice if you know an attacking army was about to take a city, but you are regrouping and need a little time, if you could say take out completely one structure in your city before you lose it. With the exception of nuclear plants, it's plausible that you could "blow up" or "destroy" a section of your city as you evacuated it. It leans maybe to much on defense, but it would be nice if you …

it would just be nice if you could create games with a gold cap. not make system wide. that's not sustainable. but, if we can make gold free games, why can't we have gold cap games?

has the idea of cap games been brought up? you know, unlike gold free games you have a game where you have a gold cap spending limit for each in game day. this way, if you want to spend you can spend, but you have to be more strategic about it. this way you can't just endlessly spam. i hate the gold warriors too, but it is a part of the game. it would be nice to have different tiered games though based on different spending habits. just a thought, but probably not an original one.

So what does one game day mean in real time? my first guess would be to call it a month, but I didn't know for sure. I figure if I leave it out someone with more knowledge than me could give a definitive answer. cheersz=!

Quote from WayneBo: “toggle off the "next generation renderer" button. ” thanks, for some reason it wouldn't turn off last night, but now it is working.

how do I turn off the update. it doesn't seem bad in theory, but this beta test of it is real wonky and slow. you said in the update we can change back, so how do I change back?

the big red one platoon full metal jacket sands of iwo jima das boot saving private ryan downfall the dirty dozen bridge over the river kwai apocalypse now

fair enough. the research I did shows they were used later in the war, but mostly as troop transport and supplies which doesn't reflect in the current gamer system. (receiving supplies that is, since the game engine just means everyone just has access to what ever resources you have) advanced airfields does seem weird because the biggest point of airfields is to refuel.

totally agree. I mean I don't think it should be something you would take lightly, but it would still have a purpose at times. chances are a lot of times it wouldn't be very beneficial, but you might be able to save some units.

cool, thanks for the heads up everybody. I was wondering because I kept having ships pop against this one enemy and I was trying to figure out how to keep the coastline protected while I was out on the front.

I saw someone mention that destroyers and subs can kind of patrol. is the idea that you just dump a bunch of subs in a water area you want to protect?

I see I am not the first to bring this up, so yeah sorry for being redundant...... the PT boats idea sounds good too.

Can we get ships (and subs) to patrol like planes do? it would be nice if we could have a fleet just patrol your surrounding waters so you can keep from getting ambushed while on the other side of the map or asleep. this way while you were away from the game you can at least you know you have at least some defense against someone trying to establish a beach head. just a thought.

I like this idea. it goes hand in hand with my idea about having cargo planes to transport troops over great land distances quicker than just marching....which also goes hand in hand with *GASP* paratroopers....

Quote from VorlonFCW: “Being able to retreat would turn the game into "Whack a mole" instead of Call of War. Like I said: If you split your force and some can retreat I should be able to split my force and chase them down. SO the result is we have two battles going on instead of one. Then you will want to split and retreat again, so I will split and chase you again, so we have three battles. Why bother? ” so I guess you don't believe in guerilla warfare? it's called war, and there are no rules. …

Quote from WiseOdin: “Quote from enochen: “well yeah, but in a war you have to have people constantly keeping an eye on everything or you would get screwed. so why should simulated war be any different? I mean if you were at work and I someone snuck in an defeated a bunch of your armies and took your cites before you could react, how would that be any different? ” Difference, is I already have your units trapped in battle. For them to escape from that fight, to attack elsewhere is far different …

well yeah, but in a war you have to have people constantly keeping an eye on everything or you would get screwed. so why should simulated war be any different? I mean if you were at work and I someone snuck in an defeated a bunch of your armies and took your cites before you could react, how would that be any different?