Search Results

its too high and yet is still the best option, artillery is fine, maybe if devs add a pack/unpack mechanic for ranged units i would accept buffing the artillery, but right now they are ok

Quote from K.Rokossovski: “I agree that militia was OP and needed to be nerfed... but BOTH removing overall stealth AND mountain stealth seems a bit much?? They always did a great job in the Himalaya's in WaW... do we REALLY need them debuffed twice in the same update?? Commando: Good job, way overdue Airborne: did you know that I didn't even realize that airborne troops HAD any stealth lol? Seems a bit over-the-top cause they fall from the sky carrying big parachute signs saying "here I am"... …

Quote from Lord Crayfish: “I think I agree with most people that the commando buff we've been asking for is a good move. Quote from Geden: “Today’s update includes a nerf to Militia, impacting their ability to operate deep behind enemy lines. When setting up a delayed march on speed maps, inputs are now using real-time values rather than in-game time. ” Well there go my beloved guerilla wars. Nationalist China is even more f*cked in HWW than before now. Actually it might not even be because comp…

Quote from A Eastman: “Cost to much and do so little for what they do. For the same price you can max out artillery or rockets and get better results and faster to boot ” that was always the theory, but more range its simple better

sometimes i open my games with light tanks but after day 4 i stop using them

heavy tank have a niche, they are not the most cost efective unit but it could be used effectively paratroopers could be used for catching up active and faster enemies, take provinces behind and make them move more slowly in order to catch them. the problem is once their are drop their are going to die either by fighters before drop or bombers or artillery after the drop, you could send one and suffer a loss or send a lot and lose a lot of hp. however the scenario when is usefull is so rare and …

Actually i do like tank destroyers for panasia Even with the debuff, tanks only have bonus on flat terrain while tank destroyers have in forest and cities, also since panasia Focus on armored cars the tank destroyer it's a great complemento for AC or defend your artillery. With comintern also do prefer TD as they are great defender of artillery. For axis is more debatible, the medium and heavy tanks are simple busted to not go for it.

Tank destroyer useless? Lmao i do prefer them over tanks

Quote from Vanrendo: “ Last of all,sorry I'm going to be a bit of a dry farts ... @Danieliyoverde123 you are a Call of War forum Moderator don't you come and worm yourself into a thread,drop your opinion and tell us that you will stop explaining because you're afraid your English is not good enough or we don't understand you...If you know your english is not good, don't hang around on an English server, save yourself the trouble and we understand you perfectly clear but please explain what direc…

No, thats not what i want to say but i'll not going to explain any further because maybe i'm not good enought to comunicate in english or You simple don't understand.

The 1.0 version were all country equal and that doesnt stop the Game To make ppl use diferent units, the problem was the artillery+tactical bomber meta, this was more of a balance issue and could be solved just nerfing those units, the Game was still fun so there is no excuses of all countries equal is boring, managing a war is actually boring Now i don't Say we should take away the characteristics of a faction, but less i should kill them before it's too late and more ill should rethink My army…

I don't think the Game should be realistic, yeah it should be inspirated by history but not be as realistic possible. Anyway i ve seen players avoid some doctrines or just keep playing one specific doctrines because how dictate their playstyle rather than try to adapt, for me all factions should keep their identity but should make them more well rounded.

Quote from noblebright: “I agree, we don't want to just dilute the doctoring for no reason. ” I disagree, the period of time when i got the most fun is when the 1.5 arrived and everything was new to try, yeah a lot of players left but new ones come Quote from Carking the 6th: “It makes sense though, IRL Japan and Germany had weaker industries and got absolutely dominated once the Soviets and Americans caught up to them. Still, the Axis managed to pull crazy shit in the early war. It’s realistic …

i like the state of balance right now but i think allies and comintern scalate to much on late game and its only balanced because the other doctrines expand faster than they. i would like to make them more viable early and not soo powerfull late-game.

I actually like the iron order 1919 naval route more than call of war, simple because how its right now requiere much attention. Real life it's doesnt have sense ships moving freely, ships requiere resupply stations, thats why japanese attack on California or German attack on new York couldnt be possible, thats why american marines fight island bye island instead of sneak into japan

There is a concept of how visual design represent something, always though devs choose a biplane for represent the worst interceptors of the Game and something You should avoid

i dont remember how to use the forum, since i can see all the content including the deleted one i ask you if the content of this guy is still visible to you. also keep in mind i probably shouldnt moderate the EN forum but ill do it anyway since i see nobody doing it, so if you need help, dont hesitate to contact me

There was new world empires wich cover from 16th Century to 19 Century, it was active many years but eventually shut down due low playerbase and income. It was boring honestly

how about extra range, same range as attack bomber could work. In combat itself they arent that bad, if they need anti-air or anti-tank support, attack bombers or interceptors would do the job, but they are very costly for just slighty better infantry, it would be more valuable if they were better for their intended role. extra range would be enought, more range than than interceptor/attack bomber range would let them very vulnerable

Quote from z00mz00m: “That would create more problems than it solves. ” what problems exactly? I cant imagine any problem related to hp. Oh sure i suppose airfield protect units from enemy damage and deal damage, except no, it will not affect ground combat at all, distribution of damage will be the exact same, units could take the province without any change, the most important change will be related to rockets and strategic bombers, rocket doesnt matter because they are kinda bad anyway.