Hello fellow players,

Here is my idea, create the need for officers in CoW

Why?

I think it would make for more realism and more strategy when concerning the entire game. It would also change army builds players would have. Having nothing than a certain unit in a division would no longer be an option. In that sense I think it would also help newer players to not make only huge divisions of a single unit type that far exceed their SBDE.

How?

1) Limit the amount of units that can be in a single group, units could be capped at their SBDE maximum per unit. This would apply to every level of that unit (to prevent tech stacking).

2) To have an army with more than a certain amount of units, you would need an appropriate amount of officers.
It could look something like this. Level 0 officer, 1 per unit. Level 1 officer: 1-6 units. Level 2 officer: 6- 24 units. Level 3 officer: 72+ units.
Also, having a high level officer does not mean you no longer need the lower level ones.

What would this look like?

I think a tab much like the spy tab would suffice for this. That is where the officers of all levels could be overseen and thus a player can immediatly see how many more units can be created. Of course officers would come at a price and I think also a training time, a longer training time for the higher up an officer will be. Maybe each level of officers can have their own training slot, Or two, or one. Whatever makes for a challenge.

So, at the start where you have 26 units, you would also need:

26 x level 0 officer
5 x level 1 officer 26/6 = 4.33 = 5
2 x level 2 officer 26/24 = 1.08 = 2

Meaning that a high level officer does not mean you no longer need lower level officers, you need both.

So for an army of 300 units you would need:

300 level 0 officers
50 level 1 officers
13 level 2 officers
5 level 3 officers


What would the in game effect be?

I was thinking defense and attack bonus. If there are not enough officers, depending how severe the lack of officers would be and how many units would exceed the limit. Different bonusus and penalty's could be inserted in the game. Perhaps + or - 12 % at most. With a difference in penalty for what kind of officer would be lacking, perhaps 3% per level?

Not enough officers. Of any certain type would give a maximum of 3% power output penalty. The 3% can be divided. That would mean 1% for a minor lack and 3% for a severe lack.

The opposite can also be the case. If you have way more officers than you would need, you would get an additional power output bonus. Again, depending on how many more you 'need' the bonus would increase pe organisation level between 1%- 3%.

This means that a player starting out with a big army would perhaps start out with a penalty for having such a big army but not having enough officers. An example I can think of would be the soviet union on the historical map. This is one of the reasons I think it would add more realism. It would also make the historical map more playable for smaller nations. A very well managed small army could have a 24% difference in damage output when compared with a big army that has no where near enough officers to manage the army.

What do you all think?

Kind regards,

Edepedable

I wouldn't know, I do not know that game?

The idea would be not that you assign commanders to groups of units yourself to make one group 'extra' strong.

The idea would be to have the totality of your army affected by having not enough or plenty of officers.

This would prevent players having to hassle around with assigning officers but would still mean you have to make decisions about training officers instead of perhaps doing an upgrade. Something like '' Okay I have 100 units now, if I do not train new officers and 10 units I will have a 10% penalty and 110 units. So training 10 more units is perhaps not as good an idea as doing this upgrade and training additional officers'''. Just more things to worry about. And like I said, players that start out with huge armies on the historical map would have an army that is 'to big' for it to be well organized.

More strategy! yay

Ah okay, yes that is way more micromanaging than I have in mind.

For me I just think that total army count and having a big army should not just be a concern of alone food. Also, it would put smaller countries that don't produce a lot of food in a better position to compete on certain maps.

So a relation between total army count and a staff of military officers with a bonus or penalty added to it would do the trick for CoW.

Also, one thing present in CoW is that things are equal. So having one country having an officer that excels in armor would be hard to balance out if other countries have for example an officer that adds bonus for airplanes and yet another country gets more infantry specific officers. That would be hard to balance. I'm pretty sure players would find a best way to play the game by always taking a specific kind of officer. That seems unwanted to me.

Hmmm not really the way I see it. Being able to focus in a specific area will, I think, always lead to a 'best way to do it'. Just pick the units with the biggest damage output and put your prime officers in this branch. Biggest bonus to biggest damage output will give best results. I would not like that, would make the meta one dimensional.

Just having officers as a part of your army totality giving a penalty or bonus to ALL troops would solve some starting differences. Like soviet union having a bigger army than most on the historical map.