Comprehensive suggestion list (mostly for units and their research)

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

    • Comprehensive suggestion list (mostly for units and their research)

      Hello all
      Since everybody seems to be making a suggestion list for units, I thought of compiling my own “wish-list”. The main goal I have in mind is to increase the playability of the game – not to increase historical accuracy, despite the fact that in some cases my ideas are indeed influenced by history. I will also in general avoid to consider so much the resource requirements because I think that after a point in the game they become much less relevant and much more map-dependent. Thus, I will focus more on the research tree of the units.

      One of the problems I see in the general research system of the game is that the cost is constant, and doesn’t take into account the number of units that are affected by this upgrade. In other words, it costs the same to upgrade Tacs from Level 3 to Level 4 irrespective of whether I have 1 tac or 15 tacs. This allows the players to profitably spam only their favorite units and then upgrade only them, making the gameplay really boring.
      My suggestion here is radical: each upgrade level to require an EXTRA cost that is dependent on the number of units of that type that you have. The exception is the Infantry tab, where there is no such extra cost (because infantry still remains infantry and the cost is not really significantly bigger). If you want to make it less tedious, we can even say that each upgrade AFTER Day 7 falls into that category. In this way some upgrades will cost MUCH more than others, depending on the troops you have. This solution also scales well independently of the map – if you are strong, you have a better economy and more units, so it is only reasonable to pay more.

      I consider that Militia is a novice-trap, without entering into the discussion of whether they are useless or not. What is useless for me is the SIX upgrade levels they have (I will ignore Elite units throughout). They add nothing serious to their whatever functionality. Keep only three upgrade levels, in Days 1, 4, and 12, where the 3rd level also adds 5HP to them.

      Up to Level 3 it seems OK to me, but after that I think it is almost completely pointless to upgrade. I would like that Level 4 gives them a 20% bonus when fighting in mountains, cities, and forests, while Level 5 gives them a boost on the AA defense they have plus a small increase in speed. Also, Level 5 would allow (somehow, I said it is my wish-list) their conversion into Motorized Infantry and Level 6 into Mechanized infantry, if they move to a province with the necessary buildings and pay a cost.

      Motorized/Mechanized infantry
      The difference with the normal Infantry is that Mechanized Infantry (yes, I know that Mech Inf is not considered Infantry in the game research tabs…) gets no bonus in cities or forests and keeps the -25% in mountains, while Motorized Infantry simply gets no bonus in mountains. Motorized Infantry will also have the ability to “convert” if desired to Mech Inf, as long as it is Level 4.

      AT and AA
      I would like that AT gets a serious increase in AA value after Lvl4 – becoming something like 4 or 5 — and at the same time perhaps gets a small decrease in speed. Yes, I admit that here I have the 88mm AT/AA gun in mind… As for AA, I would like to see it having an increase in AT value after Lvl4, with similar reasoning. An alternative would be to have a completely new unit, in the Secret Branch, that has big AT/AA value and depends on having researched AT and AA up to level 3.

      Here I only want to see dependencies added for the units. It is absurd, for example, to be able to research SP AA without having researched normal AA, or ever AC.

      This is for me perhaps the most problematic category of the game since, the way I see it, it is always profitable to build as many air units as possible (especially tacs). It is very difficult to balance the planes’ unique abilities, but my proposal is to increase the cost of unit CREATION for each level after Level 3 and also add Rares to that cost. In that way, the planes will have to compete with other units (and research). Of course, if the initial suggestion of research cost depending on number of existing units is applied, then the research of each level of planes will become even more costly, preventing perhaps players from spamming planes.
      The purist inside me would also want to have the Tacs upgrade stop at level 4, and a new unit (call it Fighter-Bomber) to appear there. Dive bombers were extinct, for a good reason even. The difference caused by the addition of a completely new unit is that it will discourage over-emphasizing on tacs earlier on.
      Naval bombers should (I believe) have no attack on either infantry or armor. On the other hand, tacs need a serious boost on their attack versus ships. Remember that ships have huge number of HP, so it really takes a lot of planes to fight them.

      Since in this game there is nothing resembling the economic effects of naval blockade, it is extremely difficult to make navy worthwhile. After all, naval units are extremely expensive, have a limited range, and cannot conquer land. As the situation is now (with no need for serious naval battles) one can argue that building a few subs is the only thing you need to do.
      Well, the first condition for the navy to acquire uses is fundamental: make some map that REALLY needs navy. The Pacific 50 map is clearly not the case – it might have been if Canada and USSR territories didn’t exist there. As it is now it is a effectively a land map.
      Apart from that, I would like that BB upgrade levels are less (from 6 to become 4), as BB were one of the “victims” of WWII. On the other hand, I would like that DD Lvl 5 and CC Lvl5 could carry (and launch) rockets (including nuclear ones), two and four respectively. Same applies to nuclear subs.
      Of course, the nuclear ships should have as a requirement the MAXIMUM (not Elite) level of the vessel.

      Disclaimer: I hate even the existence of nuclear weapons in the game. It is not a matter of been a sentimental pacifist – it is the true fact that nuclear weapons were only used twice, to force capitulation of Japan, but most importantly that the existence of ANY WEAPON without anti-measures in a game makes the game hollow and not strategic.
      Given the previous disclaimer, I would love it if ANY nuclear weapon used outside a province you own (i.e. any nuclear weapon that is used offensively, instead of defensively) gives an automatic -5 morale penalty to all your provinces for 5 days. Apart from that, if you use more than 5 nuclear weapons even defensively, then each subsequent one gives a -3 morale penalty in all provinces for 5 days.
      The other units that I want to see nerfed are the rockets. The first change is a fundamental one: I want rockets to cause friendly damage. Even today (despite the military hush-hush) rockets are not as accurate as they claim, and there is no way that you would fire WWII or Cold-War rockets in a battlefield without damaging your fighting troops. Secondly, I want the rockets to have only a small damage against infantry and a negligible damage vs armor – come on, what are the chances of a rocket destroying a division of tanks? Thirdly, I would like rockets above Lvl3 to be able to attack DIRECTLY on flying planes – of course, the rocket would have a blast radius and the planes might manage to escape outside it. Alternatively, there could be a special unit, like “Rocket AA”, with that ability, which would have Rocket Lvl3 as requirement. (Another very interesting proposal is a division of rockets to “strategic” missiles and “artillery” missiles, as suggested by Edependable.)

      Wars are, even today, fought with combinations of land and air troops – back in the WWI times it was more land and less air troops, due to the inability of the planes to operate fully in all weather conditions and at night. Rockets didn’t exist in the battlefield. Half of the war was fought in the sea. I feel that CoW is losing a big part of the “strategy” because some units are so much more efficient than others, that most of the time you focus on them and ignore everything else. I also feel that the neglect of a whole existing branch (the navy) is not to the best interests of the game.
      Those proposals have as target to make it more difficult not only for the planes, but for any one-dimensional strategy. I know that some (especially the ability to “upgrade” a unit and the research cost depending on number of units) require a mechanism that doesn’t exist, but the rest are I think relatively easy to implement (especially the dependencies, the friendly damage of rockets, and the terrain-based bonuses).
      Happy gaming!

      The post was edited 1 time, last by atreas1 ().

    • In regards to your suggestion for additional research cost dependent on how many units you have already in service there is a flaw in this specially since the new research update when you can have a unit fully researched by day 20.

      Simply do all the research first then build the bulk of your force. So if I am the typical tac spammer I will only build one group of tacs before day 20 just so I can have some, then once I have them fully researched start cranking them out by the dozen and thus avoid the extra per unit research costs.

      Also I think that will be a bit hard to program for the devs.
    • Kanaris wrote:

      In regards to your suggestion for additional research cost dependent on how many units you have already in service there is a flaw in this specially since the new research update when you can have a unit fully researched by day 20.

      Simply do all the research first then build the bulk of your force. So if I am the typical tac spammer I will only build one group of tacs before day 20 just so I can have some, then once I have them fully researched start cranking them out by the dozen and thus avoid the extra per unit research costs.

      Also I think that will be a bit hard to program for the devs.
      Well, if this method manages to avoid spamming of any particular unit for 20 days, it has already succeeded. (Notice also that the cost will be higher, which would still make cheaper to upgrade - cheaper is different than free though :)
    • Mr. Bridger wrote:

      In my opinion, it would be enough to return the "old" research tree as a first step. He was better and more logical.
      Today it is possible (for example) to build nuclear BS without knowledge of BS construction lvl1, Railroadgun without knowledge of artillery etc ... Total bullshit.
      Then do the next steps :)
      I don't think that it is very productive to say "return to the previous system". Apart from the nihilistic part of it (it cannot be that everything is wrong with the new system), there is also the fact that several of the anomalies (like planes, rockets, nukes) were very much existing there as well - simply one of them (the nukes) wasn't as apparent because many maps were over much before it came into effect.

      I see the dependencies as a simple omission which can be solved easily. If that was the biggest problem of the new research system, it would be very good indeed...
    • Its not just about the dependencies its everything about the new research update that is broken.

      Call me a nihilist or whatever else you like it does't change facts that the old research system was way more balanced. We have been going back and forth on this for quite some time now and the more I play the more things I find broken when I compare the two research systems.

      Never had I seen such tac spam as I am seeing now pre update and same for nukes its literally raining nukes around day 25 and onwards. This is not fun, there is no strategy to it anymore there is no unit balanced or combined arms approach its pointless.

      So sorry but I am not going to pretend this is a good research update or that we can eventually and potentially turn in into something good. I can see when something is broken and no amount of pretending otherwise can change that.
    • Who asked to pretend anything? Certainly not me - who happens to believe that, apart from the effect on the first 3-4 days, the new research system is really terrible (plus I said I am not going to play any relatively big map with it, for exactly the reason you describe).

      I am trying to be constructive. Your real argument is about the dates for the nukes (I have written that already in the Beta page, so I certainly agree) and about the spamming of planes (even in this proposal I agree with that). To my eyes, it looks like you request to go back to the old system just for the nukes - because for the planes spamming there was no solution there either.

      On the other hand, I propose something that would nerf the nukes in either system, and also stop the spamming of planes AND of rockets. Especially if you look carefully at my proposal for stopping the tac upgrade and having a new fighter-bomber unit there, you will see that in my mind this would stop players from spamming tac/interceptor stacks with EITHER research system.

      We don't disagree that the new system is bad. We only disagree on whether the old system was good - the fact that it really was better than the current one is another subject on which we agree.
    • Oh I do believe we are on the same page, and I do apologize if I sound harsh towards you, I am just very angry at the current situation. All I am trying to point out is that none of the problems we had pre update were addressed and if anything only made worst.

      Its perfectly natural to be seeing more tacs spam if you are going to make grain very scarce early game; people are going to switch to more oil based armies. Specially if you make it that much more potent a weapon that much sooner as in max level tacs by day 20 that can literally melt ground stuff and defend very well vs air.

      If you have the choice between max level infantry or max level tacs by day 20 the choice is pretty clear you go for the faster more versatile unit specially if grain is an issue. There is literally no reason to be building ground armies anymore they are too slow and fragile even by modern standards!

      So lets just change the name from CoW 1942 to CoW mechanized warfare and be done with it. So this is where our disagreement stems from I do not believe you can fix everything that is wrong with the new research update. I am not saying that rolling back is the end all be all solution, honestly at this point things are so messed up I wouldn't know how to start fixing things.
    • Food effect is very strange (and not at all well-balanced). In the game I just finished, I chose a 2-food country just to check on that. The truth is that now expansion GAINS food (previously it was mostly losing). Only in the very early game food was an issue preventing research - rares was much more of an issue I can say.

      Yes, infantry units were extinct soon, but mostly for the other reasons you describe (slow units and inferiority to planes). I believe much more important in that direction is another fact: that Barracks require food to build (and are almost certainly completely destroyed when you capture a province). Then, as you move on, you certainly are NOT going to spend the precious food to build a new Barracks in a captured province, and you are NOT going to build infantry back in the cores where you can build planes.

      So, unless the planes lose something of their superiority there will be no solution for me. Yes, this is not helped at all by the fast access to high level tacs, but even if we removed or delayed one-two levels I dont think the result would matter (the superiority of planes is simply too big).
    • And this is exactly what I am getting at its not just one factor that makes tacs or nukes so attractive its all factors combined you would be crazy not to build them and at a severe disadvantage if you persist to try and build a combined arms balanced army its sheer nonsense at this point.

      Thats why post update its so hard to say how to fix it, you can change one or two things but the problem remains as everything has been geared against ground based armies, the lack of grain, the easy access to tacs sooner then before, the easy access to higher level tacs sooner then before (not just better stats but greater range), the fragility of ground units against high level air, the early access to nukes, etc... The list goes on
    • New research, motivated (allegedly): We want players to experience more units in Call of War, including those that are available in the later stages of the game round. The updated research tree will also give you better options to counter enemy attacks .... blah blah blah It's total crap.

      It's just completely useless - play quickly, finish, and log in to the next game. Best with High Command (money money money) against idiotic wars you don't want. Spend your earned gold on research and best spend the other gold you buy.

      I understand all these changes and reasons, I just don't understand why to keep playing ... :(

      I do not think that your reasonable reasons, which are essentially against Bytro's commercial interests, will be applied.
    • Yes, all is a pretext. Still (just to give a simple example) with the previous research system I encountered, and not only once, players who started with rushing arty and LT (and Infra) in Day 1, and about 3 hours after the start of the game they started invading their neighbor. If you are that unlucky neighbor you are simply toast - at least, the new research tree makes this strategy much less profitable.

      The devs have stated clearly their wish to build on that new system. I (as a player) have a choice to make - either to stop playing, or to try changing some things, or to completely adopt. I choose not to do the last of these.