amphibians, copters and mines

    • amphibians, copters and mines

      Hello there!
      I'd like to share a few of my ideas with you, and i am courious what is your opinion about them.

      1. amphibious vehicle: it means only that a certain unit(armored car, or mechanized infantry) can pass to water without the disembarking time.

      2. Helicopters
      A late technology(from day 20-) with short range, fast, and very strong against any land troops, but weak against other airplanes and and anti air. also carrier based

      3. landmines
      The landmines could improove the deffensive tactics of the game. Crossing a province, which were undermined, would cause a certain % of damage

      Other ideas:
      - hospital: the units on the province heals faster (aslo rise province morale)
      - intercontinental rocket
      - radar and stealth planes
      - allow players to destroy buildings
      - lower the distance from the capital morale penalty(its not realistic, fe.: the people in california may be upset because of d.c, but its not because the distance...)
    • Sounds more like a WWIII game to me but i'm in ;)

      I don't like the destroying building part. This means when a player is losing he will destroy all of his building before going AFK. This means a weaker economy and less possibility for troop production. This would drag the game on and wouldn't be cool. Half of the players now don't know how to upgrade an Industrial Complex.

      Embarking and dissembarking makes it fair. Otherwise you could invade the UK, Spain, Morrocco, Turkey in a couple of hours while your opponent is asleep.
      BMfox
      Moderator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh
    • Well yes you made a few good point

      First of all the border between the 2nd world war and the cold war is very slim. The first cold war conflicts, like the 1st berlin crisis and the korean war were the consequences of the WW and the prequels of the cold. In my interpretation this transition belongs to the age of the world war too

      I didnt think about the destroying of the buildings that way. I just used to wish to destroy them when i have to retreat from somewhere and scorch the earth before the enemy.

      The amphibious units werent my best idea, the real armys arent use the apc-s on the sea
    • I like some of your idea's, but not all.
      I have to agree with BMFox, sounds a lot like the Cold War.
      However, I agree with:
      • Land mines and anti-ship units.
      • Hospital Buildings
      • Lower Capital Morale Penalty
      Bombers take the place of helicopters, and the amphibious vehicle would make the game too easy.
      There are ways to scorch the earth before an enemy, but being able to destroy all your buildings would make the game drag on forever. Plus you'd never grow.
      "War is fought in three ways. Helping your enemy to lose, helping your allies to victory or helping yourself to win. Any way you take it, you are always helping someone."
    • I like the idea for the introduction of mines, that is a big part of strategy on the 20th century era.

      I have also amalgamated a number of new ideas for COW, including specialised research doctrines, and infrastructure implementations.

      Here is a copy/paste from an earlier thread..titled; New gaming units (March).


      MARINE:
      Requirements; Barracks lvl. II,
      Naval Yards lvl. I
      Infantry lvl. III
      Strength: 4 on any terrain except mountains (-25%)
      Increased speed on coastal cities and water for embarkation & disembarkation

      PARATROOPER;
      Requirements; Barracks lvl. II
      Airbase lvl. I
      Infantry lvl. III
      Can only land on visible terrain,
      Load time, 30 - 60 minutes,
      On enemy ground landing strength; +25% mountains, +25% City, +50% hills/forest/jungles, +10% grassland
      Cannot land on occupied ground

      GUARD;
      Requirements; Infantry lvl. I & militia lvl. I
      Strength at 2.0 capacity
      Can only be stationed in cities
      Decreased morale loss to the city stationed
      % increase to counter spies/espionage
      Only defends

      RANGER UNIT:
      Requirements; Requires motorized infantry lvl. II
      % strength increase in forests, jungles, hills
      % increase in health healing

      STEALTH BOMBER; (1945 - 1954 era)
      Requirements; tactical bomber lvl. VI
      Ignores radar


      RADAR BASE
      Requirements; Research
      lvl. I Airbase
      Decreases fog of war where built



      CAPITAL WORKS;
      Attributes; lvl. I increase wealth 10%
      lvl. II increase wealth 10%
      lvl. III increase wealth 10%
      Can only be built in capital city


      HOSPITAL;
      Attributes; Increased morale & healing
      Population growth




      GROUP I; ALLIED TYPE

      Infantry; Increased HP, Marine unit
      Increased HP motorized infantry
      Decreased cost artillery
      Faster production time, fighter wing

      Armour; Increased HP, heavy tank
      Increase HP, mobile artillery

      Naval; Increased HP, Destroyer
      Increased HP, Carrier

      Air; Increased HP, strategic bomber

      Special; Faster research time strategic bomber & radar.



      GROUP II; AXIS TYPE

      Infantry; Increased HP, anti air
      Faster production time for infantry
      Increased HP, paratrooper

      Armour; Increased HP, light tank
      Increased HP, armoured car

      Naval; Increased HP, submarine
      Increase HP, cruiser

      Air; Increase HP, tac bombers
      Increase HP, rocket fighter

      Special; Increase HP, rail gun
      Decrease cost, missile



      GROUP III; SOVIET TYPE

      Infantry; Faster time militia production
      Increase HP, artillery
      Decrease cost commando

      Armour; Increase HP, medium tank
      Increase HP. mobile anti air

      Naval; Increase HP, Nuclear submarine

      Air; Reduced research time, fighter wing

      Special; Increased capacity for espionage (upgrade spies)
      Reduced cost, atomic research & nuclear power research




      GROUP IV; EASTERN TYPE

      Infantry; Increased HP, infantry
      Increased HP, anti armour
      Increase HP, guard

      Armour; Increase HP, light tank
      Increase HP, tank destroyer

      Naval; Faster production time, submarine
      Increase HP, Battleship

      Air; Decreased cost, fighter wing
      Increase HP, Naval bomber
      Faster research time, jet fighter

      The post was edited 2 times, last by bigboss_ironfist ().

    • Quite a list Bigboss.

      Paratroopers have been introduced, guards sound like militia, and rangers are redundant. What would be the point of regular infantry?

      Some of the units listed here don't fit in the WW2 Timeline.

      However, I like the idea of a radar base and hospitals. Those would be cool.
      "War is fought in three ways. Helping your enemy to lose, helping your allies to victory or helping yourself to win. Any way you take it, you are always helping someone."
    • I am glad that you like some of my ideas, it means some of them could realy improove the game.
      Also the nazis tested a stealth bomber in 1945 the Horten Ho 229 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229#Specifications_) but the allies had to understand the jet engine first, adn they started to experiment with the radar absorbent materials far later.
      Also in the game i always like to react for my opponents new tools, its the military innovation. If there is a radar, than there should be stealth units too.
      Also the game already has advanced rocket and nucleal technology, a lots of secret weapons which actualy were used far after the world war. If the secret technology tree can go until 1960, than why cant other technologyes?
    • bigboss_ironfist wrote:

      Rangers are redundant??? How does this happen..... Think of the ranger unit, as a steroid boost to the already unpopular motorised infantry.
      If you are talking US Rangers - they are nothing like or even close to motorised infantry.

      As far as the GUARD you should make the US National Guards like this:
      2/3 strength and half the speed of infantry
      double the training time
      and 3x the amount of food :D
      "Es gibt keine verzweifelten Lagen, es gibt nur verzweifelte Menschen" - There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people.
      Heinz Guderian (Schneller Heinz) German WWII general and tank commander, theorist of tank combat and father of the blitzkrieg.
    • hakijaa wrote:

      All i know is that intercontinental rockets would make this game a spamming party. I dont have much opinions on other points tho, if i bring something i will write it
      I do not think that intercontinental ballistic rockets need be introduced to COW 1942, I say it is good if the game can extend past a 1945 cut off time, and this means taking research further toward the late 1950s, ICBM rockets came in the 1970s and this means you should go and play CONFLICT WW3 conflictnations.com/index.php?…16fAuAEAAYASAAEgIzXPD_BwE



      dw98 wrote:

      If you are talking US Rangers - they are nothing like or even close to motorised infantry.


      Yes they are similar, these are light mobile infantry based units, small and light weapon equipped....




      dw98 wrote:

      As far as the GUARD you should make the US National Guards like this:
      2/3 strength and half the speed of infantry
      double the training time
      and 3x the amount of food forum.callofwar.com/index.php?…0c7efde81e1fdaa26da1a8007

      As for the national Gaurd unit...COW 1942 is an international gaming strategy, WW2 was an international war encompassing many nations and many cultures. Simply a Gaurd unit will suffice and I say is the unit that should be introduced most of all...exactly how I have suggested it to be. Small coiners will benefit from this, especially that they might hold a safe nation but be significantly less powerful than another geographical sphere of influence, for example, Australia versus Turkey scenario.
      Images
      • ouplihol8y.jpg

        40.71 kB, 599×433, viewed 5 times

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

    • bigboss_ironfist wrote:

      Every unit provided for is part of the WW2 timeline, either as a concept yet to be industrialised or that it is an actual fighting unit.

      Rangers are redundant??? How does this happen..... Think of the ranger unit, as a steroid boost to the already unpopular motorised infantry.
      Motorized infantry fill their place, which mainly is to escort tanks or prep for mechanized infantry.
      If rangers were added, with all the other units mentioned, the research train would be huge, with nobody able to research units effectively.
      "War is fought in three ways. Helping your enemy to lose, helping your allies to victory or helping yourself to win. Any way you take it, you are always helping someone."
    • General Nightman wrote:

      bigboss_ironfist wrote:

      Every unit provided for is part of the WW2 timeline, either as a concept yet to be industrialised or that it is an actual fighting unit.

      Rangers are redundant??? How does this happen..... Think of the ranger unit, as a steroid boost to the already unpopular motorised infantry.
      Motorized infantry fill their place, which mainly is to escort tanks or prep for mechanized infantry.If rangers were added, with all the other units mentioned, the research train would be huge, with nobody able to research units effectively.


      A variable research tree is what a strategy game is all about, more complexities = more gameplay = more profits...everybody is happy, I didn't choose to play COW because it was a simple game...people want strategy.

      On a world map creators should be able to develop loads of possibilities. Having said that, it may seem unorthodox that a surmountable number of ideas will only redefine any strategy game and be the status quo, as it were, and it might be that it is getting ahead of itself. That is why of course limitations are set, or that prerequisites act as inhibitors to a flush victory.

      A more option able research tree should really be implemented on larger maps...for example...I would see a larger sized world map, about the size of the America Home front map to the full world scale.

      Motorized infantry are opening the research tree enough to allow for COW to realise that this game is certainly strategical and so why not make more options, not necessarily required as a prerequisite to victory, thus, allows for more alternative gaming scenarios.
    • bigboss_ironfist wrote:

      Yes they are similar, these are light mobile infantry based units, small and light weapon equipped....
      Sorry - I served with the US RANGERS - they are NOTHING like the vehicle you show. They are Infantry, dont confuse a US Army Ranger with some vehicle you found on the internet.

      bigboss_ironfist wrote:

      As for the national Gaurd unit...COW 1942 is an international gaming strategy, WW2 was an international war encompassing many nations and many cultures.
      You dont get the joke so I assume youre some where in Europe.
      "Es gibt keine verzweifelten Lagen, es gibt nur verzweifelte Menschen" - There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people.
      Heinz Guderian (Schneller Heinz) German WWII general and tank commander, theorist of tank combat and father of the blitzkrieg.
    • dw98 wrote:

      bigboss_ironfist wrote:

      Rangers are redundant??? How does this happen..... Think of the ranger unit, as a steroid boost to the already unpopular motorised infantry.
      If you are talking US Rangers - they are nothing like or even close to motorised infantry.
      As far as the GUARD you should make the US National Guards like this:
      2/3 strength and half the speed of infantry
      double the training time
      and 3x the amount of food :D


      I get the joke, National guard eat too much McDonalds.

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

    • amphibious vehicle: interesting thought. I don't think there should be a no disembark time but definitely have be significantly lower, like about 30 min.

      copter: this is a WW2 game, not a Vietnam game

      mines: also a good idea. Iand mines would be cool and also mines in the sea that would do a certain amout of damage when passed over by other ships.