Search Results

It adds to their strength so yes.

I actually hate the concept of alliances. They ruin like half the games on the 100 player map. Irritates the hell out of me. They need to make a cap for it.

It's bad luck, however the frequency of games that get messed up seems to be growing(in my exp the last 3 games that I have played have all been runied from this). I only play on the world at war map and can confirm that's sadly how a lot of matches go(higher amount of players increases the odds of a big spender). Usually the players who have to really on gold on pretty bad. The only way that you can really lose to them is if they spend an out the ass amount of gold.

Quote from Improin: “well, what an imrpovement, thanks freezy, and now for you, I seems that you like lying a lot pls stop commenting my articles, I have had enought of you, you are never constructive, just keep saying that basically all I ever do is a bad article, while others dont think the same Quote from OneNutSquirrel: “When CoW 2.0 Beta came out for testing a year ago, there were plenty of discussions and this is one topic which had some Excellent Suggestions brought up. Everything from Ho…

you guys are all overreacting. Nothing gameplay wise has really changed. It all has to do with UI. In short time you will all get used to it. The better players adapt first. I agree that it's overall a bit worse, but it dosen't really matter or effect the game enough to care. Also all things considered the changes are a good thing. The game, in my opinion is probably dying or growing much slower. Join any lobby and you will notice players in general are higher levels than a year ago. It's just a…

Spoils of war already exists in the game. When you take tiles you gain resources.

Hello, I was wondering if we could get any news on 2.0 or if anyone knows anything about it. Also leave some suggestions of what you want on 2.0 if your bored

I suggest we got matched where the level cap is higher like 80 or 100+. Idk what metric they should use that just one idea. This game has a leaves a gaping hole in my soul that scratches for more competitive lobbies with higher level player.

I second this. Having more players will likely make the matches more competitive. Personally finding the 100 player matches are not enough.

Please add matches that are locked out for higher level players such as like lvl 80 (this means more competitive matches that are more difficult) doing this would give higher level players a better experience playing this game as they are facing people who in theory are closer to their skill level.

Quote from YourGaurdian: “After reading some articles and experience flaws in the current status of the Game, Diplomacy in CoW requires changes- 1) the trade embargos- we see most people don't really use the markets. They only buy some when in need. Their economy is too self dependent even in the starting. A trade embargo does not really effect. Making the economy more market based, like the historic/present day scenario, and making trade embargos more powerful, the game can be fun. 2) treaties-…

I feel like the person who made this post does not understand why this would not be an ideal choice. so many people would exploit this system, inactivity from players would also cause issues, people could just meme the peace treaty to piss people off, the devs would have to make a systems to assign points that each person would get in a treaty, also if your at war with a coalition and you conquer one of them that would mean you would not be able to attack the other coalition members until the pe…

Why are mega coalitions justified when they ruin the whole server/experience for everyone who is not in one of the coalitions that are teaming up. also does anyone know how to get kicked out of a game without going inactive.

I was thinking of potential scenarios that could be fun and this one of them. This scenario would be Similar to endgame, there are fixed factions where nations are already set(the uk,usa and france were in a faction together in endgame) this scenario would take place right when the usa joined the allies/when operation barbarossa ended. This would be a full map of the world during 1941 not just europe. it should be balanced so that the axis have about a 50-50 chance of killing the ussr. It should…

Quote from TheWorldPartite: “Quote from BrutusTrump: “It’s just like Endgame. ” I do wish the endgame map had the panasian side too somehow. ” me to. it would make the mode more fun Idk how they would implement that tho

Quote from SaskeOtaku: “Hi guys,im asking if tank destroyer thanks to their bonus in Allies doctrine ,are Better of medium tank in a stack, maybe they are both good? ” 1.Defensive units are pointless because they can always just bait you into attack them/fallback and arty them instead go with the med tanks

Quote from Blue&Bright: “Why X4 speed!, Please make it random country selection and normal or X1.5/X2 speed. This prevents many rounds coming up and not being filled, and the speed is too fast, you can get annihlated overnight. ” I also think it should not be 4x speed it should be normal. but random country selection sucks.

Quote from BMfox: “1 vs 1 games take up too much server space causing bugs. This would generate too much work for the Game Operators to manage all games. This is the reason why the 2 vs 2 Mediterranean map was deleted. ” Thanks for the feedback. I was always wondering what happened to these smaller matches

Personally I hate the events when you get a random nation.

Quote from Tgufyru: “It sounds good until considering the fact that most players would go inactive and it will put quite a bit of strain on bytro servers ” 100% agree I was thinking more from the "fun" perspective rather than the this would actually be good with other players. and I also agree it would be a waste of a server and there are better potential events that would be much better.