War Management

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

    • I Patton wrote:

      I reiterated the points of the OP and concluded with "But, let's see how it goes and hope there will be (more limiting) adjustments if they're needed." And you rudely responded with "You don't know what you're talking about."
      (...)"
      I'm guessing you didn't understand what "if they're needed" means. And whether or not they're needed will be indicated by the active participation rates of games made under the new restrictions. That's not something for which you have any data. Therefore, maybe, you should chill-out and see how it goes.
      I didn't mean to be rude. I just concluded obvious thing: no one in this thread counted how many games were created during last days/weeks/months by novice players. So no one had any idea how it will go with new restrictions.
      I DID counted them (earlier) and I knew how the restrictions will go.
      That's why "you don't know what you're talking about". But I feel sorry if that sound rude for you. Accept my apologies then.

      Link below to my earlier post (unfortunately in my native language) :

      Aug 26th 2017
      Better to be servant in heaven than a monarch in hell
      ... besides there is already monarch in hell and he will not tolerate usurpers.
      :saint:
    • I'll give one thumbs up and one thumbs down

      Thumbs up: Limiting the number of games created is an excellent initiative, thank you very much

      Thumbs down: I don't like the new display for games, we can't see as much information as we could see before. For exemple, can't see the number of days for the peace period anymore. It can be 1 or 14, I only know once I joined.
    • MontanaBB wrote:

      Question for @Alkyonor:

      Why are the Pacific maps not automatically enabled for supply drops? Is this intentional or an oversight on the part of management?
      It should be fixed now for all newly created Pacific maps.

      Macalex wrote:

      I don't like the new display for games, we can't see as much information as we could see before. For exemple, can't see the number of days for the peace period anymore. It can be 1 or 14, I only know once I joined.
      Will be fixed soon
    • Khantix wrote:

      This part: "My thesis is that all this mass of maps was created by relatively new (or completely new) players. No need to limit veterans."
      I concur. Veterans normally don't create more maps than are needed....in other words, not more maps than they would play in. Most veterans have no desire to be by themselves in a match, and we want the competition of a more full map.

      Khantix wrote:

      From those 50 games, ONLY 7 (seven) were created by players with level 11 or higher.

      As I said: Level 11 requirements is OK, as it will remove most problems.

      90% of maps were created by novice, new registered players. Yes, MORE THAN 90%.
      So with rule that games can be created only by level 11+ players 90% problems with empty maps ARE SOLVED.
      I would suggest raising the level requirements in stages. Let the number of maps per month be increased by level. For example, perhaps you must be at least the following levels to create the number of maps listed:
      Level 11 - 1 map per month
      Level 31 - 3 maps per month
      Level 51 - 6 maps per month
      Level 81 - 10 maps per month


      WiseOdin wrote:

      On top of this, HC members can create 5 maps per month. I do not see a shortage of games in the future. If you do, by some stroke of luck (good or otherwise) find you have no maps you may join, let us know.
      I anticipate that this will slowly become a problem as less and less new maps are generated and the system will keep pointing users to old maps with room made from kicking inactive player's whose nations have already been eliminated or run into the ground. The need to "request" a map due to unfulfilled needs will sharply rise after a short while.

      And don't forget. If a player is eliminated from a round that they've created, they are only able to join a match that they didn't create. And since most players already join multiple matches, the availability of non-self-started matches will go down as the demand goes up because of player fear of a lack of availability.

      In other words, by logical convention, when you create an artificial shortage of available matches, the natural response will be to have an artificially-increased demand....higher than otherwise would be the case. People will literally try to join more matches than they normally would out of fear of not being able to find available slots later on.

      It is basic human psychology.
      It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.

      The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.

      R.I.P. Snickers <3
    • Diabolical wrote:

      I anticipate that this will slowly become a problem as less and less new maps are generated and the system will keep pointing users to old maps with room made from kicking inactive player's whose nations have already been eliminated or run into the ground.
      We shall see.

      But I have little interest in joining any game that is much past Day 2 or Day 3, when I will already be at a significant disadvantage in the construction of infrastructure and other improvements, and I will have lost 2 or 3 days of vital unit research time. I will either join a new game on Day 0 or Day 1 ---- or not at all. I will not be nudged into joining a game on Day 10 or Day 20. Period.
    • MontanaBB wrote:

      But I have little interest in joining any game that is much past Day 2 or Day 3, when I will already be at a significant disadvantage in the construction of infrastructure and other improvements, and I will have lost 2 or 3 days of vital unit research time. I will either join a new game on Day 0 or Day 1 ---- or not at all. I will not be nudged into joining a game on Day 10 or Day 20. Period.
      I gotta admit, I've been invited to in-progress games that were several weeks old only to take over a nation that had been controlled by the AI from the beginning and found it to have had weird build choices. Yet, I've turned it around and won the match in the top 2 or 3. And on more than one occasion, I've invited others to join later matches when there were not too many players to begin with and they had a blast and it made for a better match that was largely inactive prior to that. Another type of situation for me has been where I was invited to a later game where one player had to quit for various reasons but had a reasonably good nation left behind and, in other instances, I've invited other players to my game for the same reason.

      While starting late can put you in a bad situation -- and I've had that happen also -- it can also give you an interesting opportunity and challenge to play from a different perspective where you inherit someone else's build choices and so the challenge is figuring out how to win with that. Plus, if a friend invites you to help in a later match, you are doing a good deed by joining. And even if that doesn't work out for either of you, the enhanced camaraderie is nice.

      Though it might not be great for your battle stats, you can join later matches and find out that the situation totally sucks. So what? Just close the match and put it into archive status...or gut it out and have fun losing.

      Believe it or not, losing can be quite fun at times....so long as who you lose to is a good sport about it and you go out with a BANG!!! :D
      It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.

      The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.

      R.I.P. Snickers <3
    • The Death of Call

      Alkyonor wrote:



      Dear generals,

      as commanders in chief you need to know at all times where and when to strike in order to dominate your foes and minimize your own casualties. This is why we have put maximum effort into making the game lists more appealing and easy to use, helping you to identify the most exciting game rounds more easily. This includes the following changes:
      • The game list has been completely reworked to better promote the most popular game rounds and hide irrelevant ones.
      • The game details panel has also been reworked to display all the game information in a more clear and appealing manner.
      • Password-protected games and alliance games are not shown in the games list anymore as the majority of players could not join them. They can still be found via the search field by entering the game number.
      • Several popups suggesting new game rounds have been reworked to fit the new style.


      In the last months we also often received feedback that some maps feel too empty or become inactive too quickly. For that reason we are limiting the number of games players can create to reduce the amount of empty maps:
      • From now on players will only be able to create one game per month. We encourage everyone to join existing rounds instead for more exciting challenges. Alliance games are excluded from this limitation.
      • With the next update Members of the High Command will be able to create 5 games per month.
      • Additionally, players now need the rank of Technician Fifth Grade (Lvl. 11) to create games.
      In addition, we made an important change to the way troops of defeated players are treated, together with a few bugfixes:
      • When players lose all of their provinces AND become inactive or AI, their remaining armies are removed from the map and relations are reset to peace.
      • Sometimes, units that entered the vision radius of your units were still shown as "?". This has been fixed.
      • Sometimes, the AI researched Elite units which were then available to players who took their place - regardless of the number of blueprints they possessed. This has been fixed.
      And there’s still more! Our mobile dev team has worked hard to bring two awesome features to all players who love to play Call of War on the go:
      • First, coalitions are now finally mobile-ready! You can access and manage them directly on your portable device.
      • Second, we can now answer the question “Is there a Call of War app?” with “Yes!”. With a so-called ‘progressive web app’ you can now install Call of War on your Android device by clicking on the popup you’ll receive next time you access the game. As non-Android users you can use the “add to home screen” function of your mobile browser to enable instant access to your games.
      We hope you like the changes and encourage you to provide feedback on the forum.

      Your Call of War team
      I have never posted on the forum but I am a light noob but have read the forum. You will likely defeat my argument in a complicated way but I want to say this: This is the best [see red] and worst [see green] update ever. First of all, all experts are noobs at some point. This update will probably start a noob exodus to https://www.supremacy1914.com and https://www.newworldempires.com. Some noobs will stay, but how many? If it gets too bad, the games will not fill up. This is most damaging to 1 on 1 games and non forum roleplays. Who will want to wait a month to make a game. People will forget the game by then. Also, for the staying noobs, they won't change their behavior on the company games. the noob count on the games will triple and they will continue game jumping. One unlikely to work solution is for the complainers to go to new world empires since it is much harder than call [it is easy for noobs to go broke on it] I hope you listen to what I have to say but until then I am leaving call.
    • Really is not complicated to see how limiting maps will fix things. If you are playing in a 22 player map, only one player has to start that map. In other words, the issue is with too many players not joining maps, and instead just making maps. This causes maps to never, or rarely, be filled.

      By joining maps, instead of making maps, more players will be in each map.
      For 1v1 maps: Yes, you can only make one. A friend you are playing against can also make one.
      Because High Command members can make up to five maps, this increases the number of maps that can potentially be created that much more.

      22p maps are also system generated, as are the larger maps. So shortages of these are also fairly unlikely.
      Free Time looks good on me
    • The problem is that this update makes the game nearly worthless to noobs. without noobs the game won't grow.

      This update is way too oppressive and restrictive. you might as well go on conflict. at least the pros to the rocket update are worth it. If noobs were the 13 colonies then the update is the intolerable act. also, the effects of this update will be slow but clear. Half of this update should have never happened.
    • While I do agree with you on that, I think noobs can still benefit from playing against the AI since the AI responds slowly enough for them to figure out what the heck they are doing. Once they've dipped their toes in the pool a little bit, they can jump in and face a real opponent that actually wants to beat them. Having the time to get used to the controls and how things work, in general, is good for them.
      It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.

      The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.

      R.I.P. Snickers <3
    • Diabolical wrote:

      While I do agree with you on that, I think noobs can still benefit from playing against the AI since the AI responds slowly enough for them to figure out what the heck they are doing. Once they've dipped their toes in the pool a little bit, they can jump in and face a real opponent that actually wants to beat them. Having the time to get used to the controls and how things work, in general, is good for them.
      This is to say, that playing solitaire prepares one for a poker match.
      The AI does not react slowly, it mostly fails to react. I see players playing against AI as a waste, in most cases.
      New players are not going to gain strategy, by playing against AI. They'll mostly get a false sense of security in the game.
      Free Time looks good on me
    • WiseOdin wrote:

      They'll mostly get a false sense of security in the game.
      I will agree with that. Dealing with an AI or almost inactive opponent is easy. Dealing with an awake skilled opponent is a whole different ball of wax.
      War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill



      VorlonFCW
      Retired from Bytro staff as of November 30, 2020.

      >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
    • WiseOdin wrote:

      Diabolical wrote:

      While I do agree with you on that, I think noobs can still benefit from playing against the AI since the AI responds slowly enough for them to figure out what the heck they are doing. Once they've dipped their toes in the pool a little bit, they can jump in and face a real opponent that actually wants to beat them. Having the time to get used to the controls and how things work, in general, is good for them.
      This is to say, that playing solitaire prepares one for a poker match. The AI does not react slowly, it mostly fails to react. I see players playing against AI as a waste, in most cases.
      New players are not going to gain strategy, by playing against AI. They'll mostly get a false sense of security in the game.
      Oh, I completely agree with you, there. I simply meant that playing the AI gives them a chance to learn the mechanics of the game. It's not about strategy, it's about learning how to crawl before learning how to walk. I'm talking true noobs...the kind of people who've pretty much just finished the tutorial and thought to themselves, "What the heck was that? How do I....<fill in the blank>".

      Sure, jumping into the pool to learn how to swim works for some players, maybe even most. But some people really need their water wings and a dip in the kiddie pool. And playing against the AI at first might actually keep from scaring them off before they start to learn that this game is actually loads of fun.
      It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.

      The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.

      R.I.P. Snickers <3
    • In which case, they can create a game limited to only a few players, so they can learn the game there :)

      I do see your point, that some players need more time to learn. Hopefully those that need it, will figure out how to get it by making small maps for themselves. They can make one a month, and if crawling, they will probably take a month to play through it.
      Free Time looks good on me
    • WiseOdin wrote:

      They can make one a month, and if crawling, they will probably take a month to play through it.

      That's a good point. You're right.

      (edit)
      Oh, but i just realized. if they are totally beginner noobs, then most of them are probably too low in the player ranking to even make the one map. They'd still be dependent on others. I didn't even think about that when I was arguing in the opposition, before.

      I don't mean to sound sarcastic, but how would it work, then?
      It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.

      The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.

      R.I.P. Snickers <3

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Diabolical ().