Are Industrial Complexes Level 1 Too Pricey?

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

    • Are Industrial Complexes Level 1 Too Pricey?

      Are Industrial Complexes Level 1 Too Pricey?

      I regularly buy the 29.99 gold package and do well by spending a lot of it in economic development in the first couple of days. However, players with shallower pockets may find this too steep and seem to be at a disadvantage. I suggest the following changes to help those less affluent ...

      7,500 goods ... Change to 5,000?
      10,000 metals ... Change to 7,500?
      5,000 rare metals ... Change to 2,500?
      $20,000 cash ... Actually I find this reasonable

      Do not these changes sound reasonable? ... (-:

      The post was edited 1 time, last by gusv: P.S. Tutorial board only. ().

    • Also later in the game, while you may win over some big cities (12 or 8 victory points), you may not be able to develop them because of the large amounts of resources required and may not be able to promptly get basic units, such as artillery and AA produced in that city ... (-:
    • It is supposed to be this way, as the benefits of having an IC in a province as opposed to not are very significant. Every single unit, except for Militia, which is damn near useless, requires at least an Industrial Complex to be produced. As well as this, the Complex provides a slight boost to resources, and, at level one, a 100% Unit Production Speed Increase. Strategic management of resources will allow you to set up New ICs over time in order to increase Unit Production, but until you have an abundant enough supply to do this, you are better off trying to max the ICs in your Core Province, as from Level 1 to 5, an Industrial Complex will provide another 100% bonus to Unit production. In my opinion, the Pricy state of the Level 1 Industrial Complex is balanced and well deserved.
    • How about doing the suggested changes at the beginning of the game just in the tutorial board? The first game I was perplexed by the complexity of the game, and the pricey IC's surely make it a bit more difficult. Thus a lot of newbies leave by the end of the first week. The change may be just an incentive for them to stay.

      And you are not talking to any sour loser here private. I'm working on my seventh straight win out of the seven games I played (just defeated an experienced CoW player that had 140+ solo wins).
    • Forgive me but I fail to see the point in at least two subjects:

      1. If we examine the cost from the point of view of gold spending, why should Bytro change that to lower their revenue? Also, why do you believe that it is the cost of IC that makes new players quit? One could equally well argue it is connected to the fact of facing gold spending. At least, the high cost of IC helps on that.

      2. From the strategic point of view, a high cost makes the super-valuable IC extremely important strategic goals. You might even delay attacking an AI just to give time for IC Lvl2 to be started. A lower cost would make this consideration pointless.
    • Atreas:

      - On your number 1 point I see that you acknowledged that the high cost of IC's level 1 may contribute to new players quitting (high cost of building new facilities was mentioned by a good friend of mine as his reason to quit). Lowering such cost at IC level 1 the tutorial board may actually result in new players staying and an increase in revenue.

      - On your number 2 point, a lot of newbies are aggressive and may actually stay for the length of the game at the tutorial board if they could get their industrial output going without hurting their pockets. And getting to that IC level 1 may make it easier for them to get such basic units as artillery and AA.

      P.S. I understand capitalism. I spend reasonable amounts of gold. I prefer the $29.99 package. It seems like a good value.
    • This is something I never understood about CoW why do level 1 ICs cost as much as they do? It would make a heck of alot more sense if the cost to ICs got higher as the level of ICs got higher. It would imply that a lvl5 IC is a much more advanced and complex structure than a lvl1 IC also it could be a requirement for unit production. It makes no sense that you can produce bombers in a level 1 IC it should be at least a lvl3 IC requirement. The more complex the unit the higher the IC level should be.

      As for those that claim that the higher cost of a lvl1 IC is to dissuade spammers from constructing lvl1 ICs early game and spamming units this is complete BS and there are much easier ways to control unit production as described above. Make lvl1 ICs affordable and higher lvl ICs less and less affordable as the scale towards lvl5

      After all all who cares if you have lvl1 ICs in every core province if all you can spam is militia, infantry, AA and ATG? Also its not normal that by early mid game all my starting ICs are lvl5, it should be very cost prohibitive for me to level all ICs to 5. Same for capturing ICs that get damaged in a fight and a couple of days later they are back to lvl5 allowing me to replenish troops losses quickly, this makes no sense at all.
    • I agree with Mr. Kanaris. The cost of higher level IC's may be increased to make up for the reduction at level 1.

      Basic conventional weapons industries are growing outside of large arms suppliers such as the US, Russia, China, France, Germany and the UK. A March 2019 article tells us that the Indian Army will receive its first batch of indigenously built Dhanush artillery guns, often referred to as the ‘Desi Bofors’. The Dhanush gun, which has a calibre of 155x45mm, is the first indigenous artillery gun of this calibre. It is also the first long-range artillery gun to be produced in India, having a range of 38 km. In army parlance it is classified as ‘medium artillery’. The Dhanush is equipped with a navigation-based sighting system, on board ballistic computation and an advanced day and night direct-firing system. The self-propulsion unit allows the gun to deploy itself in mountainous terrains with ease.

      Read more at:
      //economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/68531280.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
    • I still disagree. One thing you always need to consider is that this is a game, not a war simulator. As such it's more important to take Balance in to mind than realism, even in the "Historic" Maps, what is changed to be more realistic is simply borders, not the starting economic strength or technological prowess of a country as it would've been in the WW2 Era. As interesting as it was reading about conventional weapons industries in India, I don't find it especially relevant to this discussion.

      I also don't think changing the price of the later levels of the Industrial Complex to compensate for the reduced cost would be a good solution anyways. Each level beyond Level 1 provides only minor benefits in comparison to the first level. I mentioned these stats in my first reply to this post. This is part of why the cost is so small in comparison to the cost to construct the original Industrial Complex, it is like leveling Infrastructure, which, besides unlocking slightly higher class-higher expense units for production (Light Tank to Medium Tank, for example), only provides minor statistical benefits, such as increased resource production, making it an even trade-off for the resource investment. Even not factoring in the importance of the developers being able to monetize the game, it doesn't make sense to change this.

      Also, as Atreas mentioned, it is important to keep strategy in mind. If you wish to expand your weapons production industry not only by increasing the production speed of units with additional Industrial Complex levels, but by adding new facilities to your production scheme, you may consider things such as delaying invasions on Player and A.I. countries alike, to give them time to begin upgrading their Industrial Complexes so you don't need to pay the cost of the Level 1 Industrial Complex at all, or even using intelligence spies to be sure that you don't need to worry about damaging the Industrial Complexes at all.

      Furthermore, I've played among some really good players, in an alliance that I used to be a part of, and I've seen that they're able to expand their industry fairly quickly, while simultaneously keeping Unit production at peak efficiency. Often, this includes not attacking right off the bat and instead conserving resources to create the Infrastructure necessary to sustain high production. At the same time, they are upgrading their original Industrial Complexes, it's important to keep in mind that a Level 5 Industrial Complex is almost just as good as two Level One Industrial Complexes. Eventually, once their core cities are at maximum efficiency, they begin to strategically place new Industrial Complexes in Vital resource provinces, supplied by the aforementioned Infrastructure. If done correctly, this can give you a well-established economy, 4-5 max Industrial Complexes (depending on the Game Mode), and 2 or even 3 newly established complexes, all in the first few days, no gold necessary. This is just a quick explanation of it, but I can say for sure it works extremely well. I've had just 2 allies able to contend with a player on an America - Homefront Map who was easily spending upwards of $300 on that game alone.

      Finally, to include what I would think to be a better change, (though no better than the currently in place system), and which would still fit with what you're trying to promote here, It may work to drastically increase unit production times (2 or even 3 times longer, possibly varying between units), removing the Industrial Complex requirement entirely for these basic units (Infantry, Man-Power operated AT Units, Artillery, and the like), and, to compensate for this increase in production time, increase the Unit Production Speed bonus of the Initial level of the Industrial Complex. With this implementation, you would be able to, like you said, set up production in many provinces early on, but on the flip-side, you could eventually find yourself at the mercy of players who played it slow, opting for a more economic-heavy, long-game optimal play-style, if, of course, you didn't use that early military boost wisely. Still, this would likely require a lot of testing and feedback via the front-line pioneer system, and, in my opinion, is completely unnecessary.
    • It's just been my observation that there is a high dropout rate at the tutorial board by newbies.

      Some of it may be due to game complexity and length. Some of it may be due to lack of stamina. And some of it may be due to pricey level 1 IC's. I just thought that reducing level 1 IC's may be one way to expand the customer base and increase profit margin.

      We'll just have to agree to disagree ... (-: