The search of the chosen idea

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • I also like the idea of PT boats. To differentiate them from destroyers, I see them like this:

      PTs would do less damage than subs. or destroyers

      PTs would have limited AA defense

      PTs would have very little hit points

      PTs would not stand long against other naval units or naval bombers

      So, why build them?

      PTs would be fast. Really fast.

      PTs would patrol like planes, and be able to break away from an engagement

      I think that implemented thusly PTs would make sense in gameplay and in historical fact. The only flaw I see is that they would have unlimited ammo and fuel, but every unit in the game has the same flaw.
      “I am the flail of god. Had you not created great sins, god would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.”


      Genghis Khan
    • also, it would be cool if the winner of a map received 1 blueprint of his/her choice. Only first place would get a blueprint. This would offset the disappointment of the low payout of gold for winning a game, and also ENCOURAGE gold use/purchase, as people would be more into winning the game.
      “I am the flail of god. Had you not created great sins, god would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.”


      Genghis Khan
    • Game Creation: An option to allow mulitple controlled nations from one account with a limit of 2 or 3. This would be next to the same IP address setting.
      "Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster." ~ Sun Tzu, The Art of War

      "War does not determine who is right - only who is left."
    • King Draza Mihajlovic wrote:

      Bluephantom956 wrote:

      Again this appears to be overpriced, but given the conditions that are onset late in the game, people have more resources to spend than they know what to do with
      bruh, a nuclear bomb is like 2 times cheaper than your damn airborne troops
      I would like you to take a note lmao...

      Bluephantom956 wrote:

      As I have before mentioned, none of these values are remotely accurate, just numbers thrown out there to show the potential for balancing the addition of such a unit. I didn't use the current plane stats as any reference so it's easy to say those are imba stats. I digress.
      I made a point to say these wouldn't even be close to decent. No need to be salty Draza lol
      PhantomNiqht
      RPU Website Manager
    • Army HQ

      Land unit

      ~Price:
      5,000 food
      5,000 goods
      3,000 oil
      2,000 rare

      Combat:
      30 HP
      armored defense 2
      unarmored defense 2
      air defense 1

      Movement: ~35 km/h on land, regular convoy speed

      When OTHER units are in combat, their combat value is adjusted by distance to nearest army HQ, similar to moral calculation for capitals. As an indication, when fighting one province away, combat value = +50%, 5 provs away = +0%, nowhere near = -50% (max penalty)

      One free available to everyone at game start.

      Game effects:
      - remote regions without much attention from central government (no HQ around) will be easier to clear
      - tactical decisions on where to place HQ's balancing vulnerability vs effectiveness
      - allow players to invest in command structure (for example, several HQ's on the same front)

      Possibly this could be a researchable unit, increasing effectiveness and range by level.
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.
    • As for procedure, I would like to also have a negative vote, i.e., PLEASE NO PARATROOPERS CONQUERING PROVS
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.
    • K.Rokossovski wrote:

      Army HQ

      Land unit

      ~Price:
      5,000 food
      5,000 goods
      3,000 oil
      2,000 rare

      Combat:
      30 HP
      armored defense 2
      unarmored defense 2
      air defense 1

      Movement: ~35 km/h on land, regular convoy speed

      When OTHER units are in combat, their combat value is adjusted by distance to nearest army HQ, similar to moral calculation for capitals. As an indication, when fighting one province away, combat value = +50%, 5 provs away = +0%, nowhere near = -50% (max penalty)

      One free available to everyone at game start.

      Game effects:
      - remote regions without much attention from central government (no HQ around) will be easier to clear
      - tactical decisions on where to place HQ's balancing vulnerability vs effectiveness
      - allow players to invest in command structure (for example, several HQ's on the same front)

      Possibly this could be a researchable unit, increasing effectiveness and range by level.
      honestly, i don't think that COW really needs a HQ, it would do more harm than good
      This player may have been reactivated in October 27th 2017
    • I refer to the blitzkrieg 1939 map. When I first started playing, this map started everyone with a superabundance of all resources. It was a lot of fun, because you got to build really large armies, and play strategies of your own liking. It was also fun because there was always something you could be doing.

      Unfortunately, about a year ago (more or less) they changed the map and cut the resources way, way down. The reason was given that people were getting crazy economic stats and advancing in rank too easily.
      “I am the flail of god. Had you not created great sins, god would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.”


      Genghis Khan
    • Now, the blitz map is just like the 22 player map, just slightly higher starting resources, and you start with some stuff already researched. If I remember correctly, you can't get crates the blitz map. Imo they ruined it.
      “I am the flail of god. Had you not created great sins, god would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.”


      Genghis Khan
    • Bring back high resources on the Blitz map! That map has some of my best game memories on it!
      Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
      -Winston Churchill

      Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
      -George S. Patton
    • MontanaBB wrote:

      K.Rokossovski wrote:

      PLEASE NO PARATROOPERS CONQUERING PROVS
      Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but that would make the new unit virtually worthless -- or is that your point?
      Well, if it's a normal unit, yeah it is. In another thread, I suggested to make them a speed booster when moving in enemy territory for the whole stack they're part of. That would BOTH be a better representation of their historical use (no paratroopers ever conquered anything near as big as a CoW-sized province), and less devestating for game play.
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.
    • @K.Rokossovski, the further we depart from historical reality, the more screwed up the various unit types become. Imposing weird conditions, with no historical precedent, on a new airborne infantry unit would be another odd departure from reality that would accomplish nothing. Of course real world paratroopers could capture provinces, sometimes even in intensely contested battles (e.g., Crete).

      Paratroopers were elite light infantry, but they were not superhuman, and they had weaknesses that were inherent in their airborne nature: they could only bring a limited artillery and anti-tank capacity into battle with them (meaning they were weaker against enemy armor), they had virtually no motorized transport once they were on the ground (meaning they were slower than other modern infantry units until they were relieved), they had a limited airborne re-supply capacity as long as they were behind enemy lines (meaning they had to be re-supplied or relieved in about a week), and as expensive, highly trained elite units, they could not be easily replicated (meaning their numbers were limited), and given the air transport constraints only so many could fight (meaning that no more than 6 to 8 regiments could be delivered at one time).

      That said, they were airborne infantry and their entire strategic value was their ability to be inserted BEHIND enemy lines. As Damian Lewis (portraying the Dick Winters character) says to Jimmy Fallon (portraying a random armor captain) in "Band of Brothers": "We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded."

      All of the objections raised to a possible new in-game airborne infantry unit can be answered by (a) properly designing the unit to include in-game unit characteristics of offensive and defensive strengths against infantry, armor and aircraft, hit points, and ground speed consistent with their real WWII counterparts, and (b) capping their numbers as I have previously described.

      A WWII game without paratroops is like a WWI game without artillery, or a Napoleonic wars game without cavalry. Call of War is effectively incomplete without a properly designed airborne infantry unit. And, yes, that will change the game to some degree, arguably for the better.