Search Results

Quote from Claudio von Panjim: “This would make the game too detailed and complicated, and many new players especially younger ones would not continue ” I know I went into a lot of detail, but I'm just trying to give a comprehensive description of my idea. I feel like it's pretty intuitive that an army takes time to cross a river, and that better bridge == faster crossing.

I want to suggest the addition of rivers to COW. Throughout history, navigable rivers have been a key geographic feature of key importance in times of war. Rivers should be added to Call of War to reflect this. I think this feature would add a nice new wrinkle of strategy to the game. My idea of rivers is this. Large rivers that are traditionally considered navigable waterways, like the Amazon, Mississippi, St. Lawrence, Rhine, Danube, Volga, Yellow, Yangtze, Mekong, Ganges, Indus, Euphrates, Ni…

I think better idea would be to have a separate unit the "escort fighter" that does less damage that the interceptor and can't scout but, does equal in attack and defense damage has range of 600 or greater. This would let someone give strats better defense and letting them use more of their range without being as exposed.

Quote from laaaaaaaaga: “- Long research time for higher tier planes, which are required to play which blocks at least 2 research slots for a long time, since to play you need at least fighters + some kind of bombers ” I thought you considered planes OP, this nerf keeps players from maxing out planes while not neglecting other parts of their armies. Quote from laaaaaaaaga: “- Long research time for atom, which makes it almost not worth it, since it blocks your research slots for a long time, and…

This is lame, at least players out to be able to trade armies between coalition members. With the new faster research, the only way to have a diverse army is to trade units with coalition members who have specialized in different research areas. (That or trick noobs into giving you free rares.) I can see why it the devs might think its lets people multiaccount easier, but just lock it until day 10 like what is done with province trading.

Yea spys can be a pain, but I don't use out-of-game comms because, A. I don't like giving my info to strangers on line. B. I am to lazy to make an account just for COW. C. I think it violates the spirit of the game, akin to playing multi accounts, excessive gold spending, or reporting other players swearing.

Bringing the heat. Pacific map, Day 29

Armored cars: These guys are absolutely useless. Hypothetically, their high SBDE means they could be used as meat shields for mech-infantry, but I can't fathom why you'd want your high-value spearheads to be completely vulnerable to tanks or anti-amor units. Tank Destroyers: They are to expensive to simply be static defenders. They aren't horrible units on paper but they are impractical for executing and defending against the speed-based tactics that dominate the meta. SP anti-air: They just get…

Does anyone actually use tank destroyers? They anti-armor capability seems nice, but they are clearly to vulnerable to infantry to be used for attack right? And other then their armor stats, they just seem like inferior medium tanks. So then why build them? Is there anyone out there who has used tank destroyers in a successful strategy? What do they do that justifies their research cost? (slightly related question, if you you tank destroyers, why do you use them instead of the much cheaper anti-…

My favorite way do dispatch doomstacks is to take a bunch defensive units with high SBDE (Anti-tank and mot. infantry work well for this) and sit them in the path of my enemy's doomstack on terrain where my opponent's units will be disadvantaged (mountains or city) and let my combination of better efficiency and defensive stats take care of them. Even if my force is destroyed, the doomstack will be sufficiently reduced in size so that I may destroy it with my regular forces. This move only needs…

I'd be okay with para's IF they were weaker than infantry when attacking, stronger then infantry when defending, require lvl 3 barracks and lvl 3 airbase in the same province to build, had a range of <250 km, and they act like Nuke bombers as they behave like a plane until they attack then they are infantry for the rest of their life. Basically I want a defensive unit, that punishes opponents for leaving their border undefended. No unit cap necessary as they are such a hassle to build and their …

I do agree that RR guns are to slow to be a real threat. Honestly the units the bug me the most are massed Anti-Air. I deal with a lot of my problems by bombing them. And if I can't do that, it really throws off the way I play. Heavy tanks and RR guns used to scare me, but I have learned from experience that they are basically useless for offensive battle. Nukes are still intimidating, but their strategic affect is limited if the proper grouping tactics are employed (doom-stacking is for noobs, …

Your best defense against nuke rockets is the fact that they are expensive and slow. Your enemy probably can't bring very many of them to bear at once. So I would recommend attacking on a wide front, and knocking out as many air bases as you can, both to prevent missiles from launching from those points, and to try and prevent the enemy from scouting units behind lines. And obviously, don't doom-stack. Another thing to remember is that ships are very vulnerable to nuclear rockets, as they can't …

Armored cars a basically worthless unit. I would never bother researching or building them. The only thing that would get me to consider building them is if you didn't need infrastructure. Militia can be useful if you want a cheap static defense. The one unit I have never understood is tank destroyers. They aren't bad units on paper, but it has never made sense for me to build or use them when anti-tank guns do basically the same thing, are much cheaper, and can be built without infrastructure.

Futz how do you have -3050 points?

I've played quite a bit, but what is the point of joining an alliance?

I would definitely like to see a missile subs. Not nukes though, that would be to OP.

I'll warn you, missiles are very slow to transport, especially at distance. You really want to plan around them if you want to makes use of them offensively, when I build them, I mostly just leave them lying around waiting for an opponent to start doom-stacking.

THANK YOU BRO! THAT CALCULATOR IS GOLD!

Mid game, Day 15.