Artillery ambiguity

bigboss_ironfist · Sep 18th 2019, 5:17pm

Has anyone noticed that the range situation concerned with artillery land forces is in need of further refinement.

For example, I have here in the caption provided a battle involved with my artillery forces (Maranhao) and that these artillery units are bombing enemy forces at Tyler...so this is fine and well, however, there is a section of the enemies land units coming at my position and it is that my artillery does not continue making strike against those that come upon my position held. The artillery only continues fire on the stationary forces at Tyler.

So, basically what I am suggesting is that a further refinement of fire control be adapted to the gameplay type, and that there be an optional command to encounter a split in enemy forces, that is, when one is confronted by usage of artillery types and that the enemy forces coming at yours may then be bombed primarily.

This needs to happen. ok. Thanks.

BMfox · Sep 18th 2019, 5:22pm

The artillery standard stettings are that they will continuing to fire on a target until it is exterminated before moving on to another target.

_Pontus_ · Sep 19th 2019, 3:46am

BMFox wrote:

The artillery standard settings are that they will continuing to fire on a target until it is exterminated before moving on to another target.

Not so...

When you move arty into range and it opens fire on the enemy troops, and then the enemy force splits and a part comes at you, the next shot will be at the nearest force.
It will look like firing onto the stationary force until the next salvo comes around, which will however be targeting the nearest enemy at the time of the shot.
Hence, your arty does change target from the stationary force to the the split-off force coming at you.

However, if you pick the city as a target - and not the forces in it - arty thinks it is ordered to destroy the city and does thus not fire at the troops and thus does not change target when a part of the stationary force comes at you.

So, it is all about how you use the arty.

BMfox · Sep 20th 2019, 7:23pm

Ah there you say it, when it splits up. Meaning it's still the same target but now just half as small so yes it will attack the closest stack. However if a stack is under attack by artillery and another stack comes to attack out of another province, that stack will not be attacked before the other stack is destroyed.

Citizenkane · Sep 21st 2019, 9:20pm

BMfox wrote:

Ah there you say it, when it splits up. Meaning it's still the same target but now just half as small so yes it will attack the closest stack. However if a stack is under attack by artillery and another stack comes to attack out of another province, that stack will not be attacked before the other stack is destroyed.

What if I split my attacking artillery? Also if I change the fire setting then, split and select new stack to attack when the times expires I should attack the new target, correct?

BMfox · Sep 22nd 2019, 8:32am

Yes they should.

bigboss_ironfist · Sep 22nd 2019, 9:07am

So this means doing a split force, more gaming concentration is involved and thus...will mean, less sleeping hours....very concerning. This game is turning to Full time job....next is sponserships......honestly...

BMfox · Sep 22nd 2019, 10:59am

For that exact same reason I'm playing only two games at a time

_Pontus_ · Sep 22nd 2019, 9:26pm

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

So this means doing a split force, more gaming concentration is involved and thus...will mean, less sleeping hours....very concerning. This game is turning to Full time job....next is sponserships......honestly...

Well, if you think you deserve a victory over other players....yes...you should concentrate and give it attention and develop good defensive strategies in case you are off-line etc.

Unless you want a fully automated game?

I made a number of suggestions on that, now that CoW is being ruined anyways with restrictions and BAD CHANGES.

To level the playing field for all and punish the better players that spend time to learn the game:

1. Only one human player per map (so everyone can be a winner)
2. Only allow the human player to choose his country and let AI immediately take over (so no player can ruin his own game. The player now only has to log in to see the game unfold and needs to learn nothing because AI knows, can't ruin his country bc AI runs it for him, etc.)
3. Any country reaching the Top 3 in economy will be restricted from constructing any buildings, until its economy drops to nr. 4 (so no country has an advantage over another from building a better economy)

Implement this and see ow much fun it is when you are no longer the decisive factor....

BMfox · Sep 23rd 2019, 3:19pm

_Pontus_ wrote:

I made a number of suggestions on that, now that CoW is being ruined anyways with restrictions and BAD CHANGES.

Again? You really can't help it, can you? Do you really need to spoil every thread with your opinion on "BAD CHANGES"?

bigboss_ironfist · Sep 23rd 2019, 7:45pm

_Pontus_ wrote:

2. Only allow the human player to choose his country and let AI immediately take over (so no player can ruin his own game. The player now only has to log in to see the game unfold and needs to learn nothing because AI knows, can't ruin his country bc AI runs it for him, etc.)
3. Any country reaching the Top 3 in economy will be restricted from constructing any buildings, until its economy drops to nr. 4 (so no country has an advantage over another from building a better economy)

Implement this and see ow much fun it is when you are no longer the decisive factor....

To have the AI take over your nation and automate is certainly a good strategy option, and can be worked on a defensive gameplay, even if the enemy is a big coiner...If you know how to build a good economy and that the foundations are good, then the AI will consolidate the resource balancing, using themselves...(a computer) to calculate your nations optimal economy. This can also force big coiners to spend more and drive them out of pocket.

On building advantages & disadvantages....I have previously mentioned that capital works be introduced...that these only be built in the capital city, they are in three levels of construction..level 1 through level 3 and the interest on money resource is compounded. This building improvement can be called...capital works. I believe that this option can help small to medium nations in their strategy output.

_Pontus_ · Sep 24th 2019, 2:19am

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

_Pontus_ wrote:

2. Only allow the human player to choose his country and let AI immediately take over (so no player can ruin his own game. The player now only has to log in to see the game unfold and needs to learn nothing because AI knows, can't ruin his country bc AI runs it for him, etc.)
3. Any country reaching the Top 3 in economy will be restricted from constructing any buildings, until its economy drops to nr. 4 (so no country has an advantage over another from building a better economy)

Implement this and see ow much fun it is when you are no longer the decisive factor....

To have the AI take over your nation and automate is certainly a good strategy option, and can be worked on a defensive gameplay, even if the enemy is a big coiner...If you know how to build a good economy and that the foundations are good, then the AI will consolidate the resource balancing, using themselves...(a computer) to calculate your nations optimal economy. This can also force big coiners to spend more and drive them out of pocket.

On building advantages & disadvantages....I have previously mentioned that capital works be introduced...that these only be built in the capital city, they are in three levels of construction..level 1 through level 3 and the interest on money resource is compounded. This building improvement can be called...capital works. I believe that this option can help small to medium nations in their strategy output.

I guess sarcasm isn't your thing...nor strategy games

bigboss_ironfist · Sep 24th 2019, 12:35pm

I understood the sarcasm here, I decided to improve the thread content with advice and good strategy opinion.

BMfox · Sep 24th 2019, 6:04pm

_Pontus_ wrote:

I guess sarcasm isn't your thing...nor strategy games

Please stay civil on the forum.

VorlonFCW · Sep 26th 2019, 5:36pm

As with anything, a human player will make different choices than even the most refined computer program. No matter what the rules that the computer follows are, a highly active player can lay a trap that will take advantage of those automated responses.

One of the joys of this game is in setting up situations where an enemy has no good choices to make, the same as in chess planning moves out 4 or 5 steps ahead. Once you reach a point where you are simply reacting to an enemy you are at his mercy.

Share