update- rocket changes

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

    • update- rocket changes

      I'm not sure if this was a good change, rockets aren't very usable as a single attack (1 rocket), i find they are best used in a mass attack just before a start of a war to disable enemy buildings, however since the update they are now much worse at that, they cost a lot of rare materials and cant be used again (obviously), they seem overpowered but they are 1 use and now have less damage against units as well while still costing lots of rare materials (a much needed resource), any ideas on this?


      edit: they also cant move very fast (20) and need an airbase to be used, so you are unable to use them once a war has been started as the enemy provinces that you haven't taken are out of range and they cant catch up with the fast moving tank warfare.. so once again only usable at start of war.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Lukebnm ().

    • Wilhelm von Roos wrote:

      If they were too powerful research and build atomic bombs would be useless, and every game would end in Mutual Assured Destruction even without nukes.
      yes, but they aren't too powerful, with high rare material cost you cant mass produce them easily at the same time as research and building nukes, they also have much less damage now and are only 1 use so a strategic bomber which can do multiple attacks now has a huge advantage over this, at the moment most research costs rare materials so your not going to be able to build many rockets anyway, they should be good enough so that you will have to decide what to use your resources on.

    • edit: they also cant move very fast (20) and need an airbase to be used, so you are unable to use them once a war has been started as the enemy provinces that you haven't taken are out of range and they cant catch up with the fast moving tank warfare.. so once again only usable at start of war.

      updated original post.

      point is that they can only be used before start of war and are high cost of a rare resource that is needed in many units and research, they also have to be used in mass attacks and now cant do as much damage against buildings.

    • they are supposed to attack static targets - so highest damage is on buildings! But when you get 5-6 rockets this allready took out 14.000 men of your army and this every 14h? Thats too much overpowered. I can live with the changes now and think it was the right option. Now you can use em like they were supposed to.

    • If you have Rockets Lvl 2 and up, one of the strongest points about them is that your opponent cannot defend himself against them.
      In my last game, I build more than 100 Lvl 2 and 3 rockets and I was able to cripple my opponents defenses and e.g. to destroy all US troops before they landed. And since they are a mid to endgame weapon, you are able to produce enough rare materials to build lots of them if you plan ahead a bit.

      So our oppinion was, that, at least in the hands of an experienced player, they would be a win strategy. That is why we made them more expensive (just added manpower costs) and less effective.

    • well considering i haven't got to lvl 2 yet, i think changes to the first lvl would be better, they can be shot down and are also weaker than rockets lvl 2 for the same cost, maybe make them better and then the main point of upgrading to lvl 2 is the 'cant be shot down' bonus.. (they do have same strategic damage) but the speed, range and unit damage is better on lvl 2 so a small bonus to lvl 1 could be considered.

    • rastermannMB wrote:

      when you increase the stats of lvl 1 please also increase building time... 14h for industry complex lvl 1 is okay but on lvl 5 it is 5 hours and again a spam unit.
      i doubt anyone would have another resources to build in multiple cities every 5hrs, rare materials is needed for research in the early game.., although a longer build time would be fine if the stats were upgraded as you said.

    • well what if your not playing against sweden.. not very useful to have rockets if you can just attack with tanks, and even if your sweden/uk and need to transport units to mainland to attack then all you need is an air force.. rockets aren't that useful compared to other units, a few strategic bombers with interceptors will surely do more damage than a few rockets because you can attack multiple times with bombers.

    • it does not depend on the country. for me its important that you can not spam some of the secret weapon´s... They are following moving targets and do save damage to them (both units and buildings). With bombers you may get the same dmg but the building time + cost are higher and the Bombers are such easy to be damaged.

      It´s all about balancing and on rockets the balancing is really bad!

    • when rockets really follow units that are moving that makes them really overpowered.
      i suggest that rockets are limited to targeting cities, not units, to remedy this.


      the problem with rockets in the real world was that they were unreliable. a V1 was cheap but unreliable.
      they should need some time to build(and block the production slot of one place in that time) but be cheap in cost.
      but they should have a low % of hit chance.
      i suggest:
      50% complete miss
      40% only the morale of target is lowered by 10%(but never more that 20% of remaining percentage, never below 30%) and 10% of time the buildings would be hit, or units that are still in the city when the city is hit.

      the damage should be rather limited, as the effect is like a single bomb dropped randomly.
      the minimum production time should be 24h, as they contained some delicate controls.

      the likelyhood of nukes hitting a city should also be rather low as we are talking about early samples of the technology. units should only be hit when they are within a few minutes from city center.
      the number of nukes someone has in stock should be limited to (number of turns)-40.
      the number of non nuke rockets should be limited to 2x((number of turns)-20)

    • +1 for rockets only having an effect on cities, not on units.

      Having rockets destroying units is unrealistic and in the game it is a (relatively) cheap'n'cheerful way of avoiding having to do any serious researching, unit building or fighting. From level 2 they can't be intercepted so they just represent a whack-a-mole that can be taken to enemy units without any thought required.

      Like playing chess with a mallet.

      Edit: just watched a level 2 rocket hit an ally's infantry division: 3,000 casualties, strength reduced from 44 to 34, lot of damage to the city upgrades as well. And to think I've been wasting my time with actual warfare and stuff, tsk.

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

    • I only just started playing this game, but already I am dismayed to see nuclear weapons apparently available so early in the game, they look so powerful that you probably can't afford to do other than prioritize them. I want to play World War II, not World War III, these weapons are not in the spirit of a WWII game and the notion of entire armies that I have painstakingly built up over weeks being wiped out overnight is a MAJOR turnoff to playing this game.

      I see nuclear bombers have already been nerfed by making them one use only, which is just plain absurd, if nuclear bombers are so powerful they have to be nerfed to such an extent, then they simply shouldn't be in the game in the first place. And what's with the lack of a defence factor- does this mean they can't be intercepted by fighters? The picture just looks worse and worse.

      At most, nuclear weapons should only be appearing very late in the piece, say from day 45 onwards, so that only the longer games get them, otherwise they are likely to turn the game into a travesty. Personally though, I think they should probably be dispensed with altogether as they alter the complexion of the game and are just likely to cause players to quit in disgust when they lose entire armies or city infrastructures from a single attack.

    • Update to my previous: my ally has now taken 4 rocket hits total, for 7,300 casualties, several units wiped out entirely and one city minus its upgrades and in revolt status (result of 2 hits on a unit stationed in the city, not an attack on the city itself). That's from 4x level 2 rocket hits!

      This is just silly.

      As Joe Bentleigh says, "these weapons are not in the spirit of a WWII game and the notion of entire armies that I have painstakingly built up over weeks being wiped out overnight is a MAJOR turnoff to playing this game."

      I am majorly turned off.

      I suggest that rockets are changed to have no effect at all on military units and a much lower effect on cities and upgrades, so that it would take an intense bombardment to do serious economic damage. As for nukes... just say no.

      The post was edited 5 times, last by Chertiozhnik ().

    • Chertioznik: That's from 4x level 2 rocket hits!

      Wait, you mean that's the damage just from four conventional rockets??? What kind of damage are nukes going to do?

      I am inclined to agree with you that conventional rockets should be restricted to attacks on infrastructure - that's how they were historically used because they didn't have the accuracy to target troops, and probably wouldn't have done much damage in that role even if they did get a lucky hit.

      It's the nukes I am really concerned about though ...

    • in my german translation on my above post i added that the number of rockets should be limited.
      i also mentioned that the reaction of NPC-states to ownership of nukes should be about 1%- for every nuke OWNED, and a serious risk of trade embargo for every single nuke used, for states that are already in embargo i suggested a chance of immediate declaration of war.