Search Results

Some good points Kanaris. But at the end of the day the starter expects to lose and it's only thru experience that u learn. But if u are bored for a week you don't stick around to gain experience.

Quote from NovaTopaz: “The pace of the game at the start is very slow and there is pretty much nothing you can do about it. ” I agree with the first part but I disagree about the second. It seems to be fairly easy to create an option where you have an army at the start. This will at least make people try the game for longer. Some will like the general pace of the game some won't. But at least you will retain those who do not want to spend the best part of the week doing very little but don't min…

part of the issue is game balance. I believe the historic map tries to reflect military strengths of that time. If u get UK or Germany u are strong if you get Morocco you don't have a chance. what we need is a balanced allocation for every nation. By balance I mean equal for everyone. Have just started my first 50 player. For the past two days all I've done is research tanks and build infra(1 day), 2nd day build tanks. hopefully they are ready tomorrow and I will form a stack ( 3rd day). So if I…

true, the pace of the game puts people off that's for sure, it's not for everyone. But at least it would retain some more because they get to taste for a longer period.

always good to hear from Game Designers. One of the things I noticed in the news is there are constant revisions to the game which is promising. Perhaps you might look at this "instant action" option in near future. It would be great to retain more players. Look forward to the achievements update now

am now in 2 x 22 player games with only 1 other player after 1 week. The games both started with 20ish players. So that's like 36 players who have disappeared from the game probably never to play again. It costs advertising money to get them to try the game, it's a shame they can't be retained. Now I am USA in one game and the other player is Russia Empire :(, Spain versus Romania isn't as bad but still a pain.

well Quasi I hear what you say but what are you going to do with slow moving AT and AA or Inf and Militia? They take ages to go to the other side of map. That doesn't address the issue I raise. Mythical - I think most people who try the game are probably inclined to play WW2 strategy. The trick is to retain them. there needs to be an "instant action" option at least.

it's just a suggestion, am not familiar with all units but enough to be useful in a limited sense. not enough to beat a neighbour but enough to make an incursion. planes are an issue cos u'd need airbases to get them around. perhaps there should be a slightly larger starting number of buildings. we have 4 or 5 ICs and 1 airbase. Perhaps an airbase with each IC and infrastructure? what do u suggest QuasiDuck?

Yes Lawrence, I agree that the pace of the game might put off a lot of players but I think the fact that you can do very little for the best part of a week at the start of the game is also an issue and is something that can be easily fixed. 2 separate issues here. One of which I believe is a simple fix. Sixaxa I agree as well. I looked at the blueprints. Nice idea but you cannot use elite units till VERY late in game. Am guessing you might not even use them in some games if they don't last long …

but maybe something that is being overlooked? surely we would want those low rank players to stay and then move to other maps? I havent plauyed all of them yet

OK, i've been in a few 22 player games. All seem to be nearly full but after only 4 or 5 days there are onl 2-4 players active. Why is this? It becomes frustrating because I don't to bash AI. I want to play real players. Why do they leave? Is it because of the slow gameplay or is it perhaps that PLUS the fact that you can do very little for the first few days. Researching and building in order to produce the minimum required to go to war (some tanks, arty and an air force or navy) takes at least…