Call of War 1.5: Mechanics & New Balancing

Hi,

I feel like the gold costs are out of wack, I think I remember a 10 minute rush costing a lot less like 100 which might be worth it. I feel 400 for a 10 min rush is to high, plus I have seen a lot of gold items to be 60 to 70 percent more than in the old system.

Thanks good luck.

Just another way of earning money...

My airforces now can insta kill 20er stack lvl 1 LT's....

Ok guys after completing 2 cow 1.5 one in coalition on the next reset and another as loner i have to say that im so impatiente to end those maps ( 2 more to go ) because its totaly different from normal cow , the cow i like , because the progression is quite opposite.
In cow the end game is fun and very active with a lot of units meanwhile in Cow 1.5 the time required to make troops is too long and that will result in a slower , not so fun, end game.
I had lot of fun in the first 4 days of cow and after a while the things started to get slower and end up with many inactives and some noobs with lvl 1 trooops at day 20.
I dont really think that right now this cow 1.5 has a future because the end game , which should be the most fun part , is the boring part so the ppl that usualy quit maps in early days they gonna still quit and ppl like me that find some ppl to fight will get bored to hell in order to finish a match.
The resources problem is gone right now im plenty of them and any kind but still there is no fun in using them and anyway the overall resources is too low.. just giving an example my economy was 180.000 with 750 points ( which is the solo victory requisite ) in normal cow i have the same economy in the first 8 days of the game.. so something is wrong with resources and with end game
Sorry for my bad english anyway this was my experience for the first event of cow 1.5

C88 has voiced a general complaint that I've heard from many others ... One seems to be lack of resources (unless you got gold to buy them) and very few units in game (eats up less server memory) ...

This new update is horrible and it is a mistake.

The new units look like plastic kinder egg toys, and they are so small on the map that I have difficulty distinguishing a light tank from a self-propelled artillery.

Why complicate things? In the Second World War, car factories produced airplanes and tanks, pan factories produced artillery and ammunition ... there is no need to implement new factories for everything, it is a totally inefficient mechanics.

The update already brings problems, the games do not load with improved graphics and now I do not know how to enter my game (and I will probably lose a lot of units for this stupidity).

Do all countries have exactly the same production? where is the competitiveness? This is ridiculous, I don't understand why Iraq has to produce the same amount of oil as Cuba ... it's absurd.

This game is already complicated for newbies, imagine how the new update will be where you have to build a different factory for everything, newbies will not even know what to do.

Please, this is very simple, this game works, it is a good game, it is the most successful of Bytro, all players like mechanics ... You are really going to take something that already works and that everyone Do you like to change it completely risking that nobody likes it? It is absurd, it is not a coherent decision.

If the 1.5 finally arrives, this game will lose people, most players do not like these new changes

damn, to much guys dislike the new update, i pray that the sound don't gonna be remove from the games
it's the update the most wanted by the CoW's players, and they aren't satisfied...

The sound is the least of the problems, if I don't like the sound, just disable this ... it's the horrible new mechanics.

Identical production for all countries.
Tanks no longer suffer penalties in cities.
A different factory for each unit.
etc. etc etc.

I hate the new images of units, it is difficult to distinguish at a glance between a self-propelled AA, a self-propelled artillery and a light tank, at least before the difference was quite visible, and the color of the new units also looks very ugly. However, I can get used to the new crap units, but the new game mechanics, absolutely not.

The new unit images are realistic faction specific unit models, they look now actually like they looked in WW2. They make the game more realistic and better looking. Of course after such changes you always have to get used to them.

But please let's not mix up topics, this thread here is about mechanics and new balancing, not about the sound or graphics (please use the different news thread for that feedback).


don't worry, of course we won't. Players who don't like sound can disable it. Although most feedback I have read on sound was positive anyway.

i'm into a new game with the sound ect... but there isn't the new buildings for each units and into the patch 1.5 there isn't too or i'm mb blind

I understand that the images are more realistic (however, the color is horrible), but this is a strategy game, not a first person shooter, I would settle for even the standard regiment cards (the cross for infantry, the point for the artillery, the oval for the armored vehicles, etc.) ... The problem is that visually it is difficult to easily identify one thing with another, the artillery with the antitank for example, at least I would like this to be a little bigger, The size has been reduced!

I want everything to be clear, that everything is easily identifiable, then we can discuss which is prettier

However, we can continue this in another topic.

The new balancing and new features are not released yet, as we are still testing them in the Events (and this will go on for some months). We only released the update to sounds and graphics.
Well you cannot please everyone. Some people here in the forum really like everything being as realistic as possible, others like things to be more abstract. We usually try to find a good compromise. Please try playing with the new graphics for a week because I think you just need to get used to it. If you did and its still hard to use, we can talk about making some adjustments to make it more clear.

Ahem. Cough. Anglais n'est pas une langue très difficile comme le Francais. Elle parle de COW 1.5, donc ca n'a absoluement rien a foutre avec le Update avec le son et nouveau graphs pour COW 1.0.

This thread is still the thread: Call of War 1.5: Mechanics & New Balancing ?

Or are we now discussing the last COW 1.0 update here?

Hello,

I am kinda disappointed the Roleplay community is dying every update CoW seems to make, even though it may not be directed to kill a Community, it has that effect, having Elite Ai free is chill but should be an option, it kills roleplays with it, and the unit trading being canceled kills ls period/historical context, and etc... and then the Rss trading being locked to coalitions just makes it nearly impossible to direct your trade when you owe debts due to a peace treaty, and 1.5, as a leader in the RP community, will completely kill all hope for RPs, many say they simply won't play Call of War. So, I come to ask of you, great Bytro, as a game coder/developer and a RP leader, and a historical nerd, can you add it where these are optional when making games, like Free Selection of Coalition and nations are? (For example, have all of it free sure, or even having certain options cost membership, but like have Unit Trading be optional, Coalitions required for trade <Not really caring too much about this one though>, Elite Ai, and 1.5 Overhaul, all be optional.) This would please both sides, and possibly raise revenue as it'd give incentive to buy membership, it's not impossible either, it's just a bit of work, but would save both the competitive side of games, and having those be the default rules <the updates you create>, and the Rp side of games. If you do not listen to this as a way to mediate/appease both sides, than I'm sorry for wasting your time. At least Call of War was a really great game, and you guys are really great people, you're just losing a whole community, no matter how much we give our feedback, it seems the recent updates quite always are directed into killing our community. Best Regards,

Landferd Binnyworth/Nice Boy

[Apologies for what became a very long text! Just tried to summarize it all once more, but you can skip to my last few phrases, if it is too much to read]

From the point of view of a pretty much fanatic COW player, I understand the pain of the RP community, when features disappear, which kill off a certain way of play.
Not that I do role-play games as such, but I do some role-play for myself in various maps where it suits and where there are enough active players to have fun, absorbing the role of the leader of a country. And guess what? Many players follow suit when you do
Was it is Supremacy 1914 where you could change name and title? I loved that! Playing Morocco as the short-lived Rif Republic etc. Sometimes driving opponents nuts, because I linked everything and all to historical events and no comment or article would be written without that.

Nevertheless, In a broader context, @Landferd Binnyworth expresses the concern of many more 'communities' in the COW 1.0 world; even the worries of the 'community of individual players'.

In COW 1.5 so much is changed that we are indeed talking of a new game and not an update.
COW 1.5 is, however, not a worthy replacement of the great COW 1.0.

Too early to say such an ugly thing about COW 1.5?
Of course balancing can be tweaked, but that is not where the problems of so many long time players are with.

The real problem with COW 1.5 is in the mechanics and many added or removed features and imposed limitations.

> The new game seems (but correct me if I am wrong) mainly aimed at a larger mobile customer base.
From this mobile market, clearly more income is expected than from the current player base (again: correct me if I am wrong); otherwise, why risk it losing players with such a radical change of the game's core?
And maybe the assumption is correct, but maybe it is not or not entirely.
Then why not launch a truly mobile version? Simplified and faster? It might even work to attract new players into the great game that COW 1.0 is.

> Maybe the new game is aimed at increasing player retention, with all the best intentions, but none of the issues that drive new players away, are being addressed successfully.

> Maybe the new game is aimed at monetization to increase income, but without a strong player base it would be hard to make money.

Maybe COW 1.5 is aimed at all of the above and some extra reasons.

But, honestly, COW 1.5 does not really fix nor add anything.
It does remove things: attractions, realism, even strategy; and thus, more importantly, it removes players.

Nevertheless, the real barriers COW 1.0 faces on its way to bigger success, are still the same for COW 1.5.

As there are:

• Who do you lure into your beautiful trap and how?
  

1. The speed of the game will always be slow; also in COW 1.5 => avoid attracting action-seekers.
   
2. The core of the game is strategy in all its aspects => avoid attracting FPS and Tactical gamers.
   
3. The core of the game is strategy in all its aspects => aim for mature (not age, but mind-wise) players, who also are more likely to have some cash to spend.
   

• The tutorial phase is the 1st contact with the game and now basically is worthless.
  

1. Advisers tell you to do things that indeed you can do, but are not helping any newbie to be successful. .
   
2. There are limited incentives, though incentives could very well be coupled to teaching useful things by useful missions.
   
3. The speed is too low to keep newbies interested, so they will leave before learning to appreciate the game.
   
4. The starting map is still too large and taking too long for new players to stay interested.
   
5. The tutorial is 1 game, without really helpful advise, instead of a progressively difficult set of maps, unlocking the many features step by step, which teach units and roles, importance of economy and industry development etc.
   

In short: send the right signals, slowly bait the right target and lure him in, until he is trapped in a game which he understands and likes and which offers a sense of achievement through progress.

And then -- after successfully attracting the right players, while increasing the frequent player pool and in the meanwhile decreasing the number of 1-time players -- only then monetization methods can be successful.

And if the mobile market is simply the goal, do as Wargaming did with WOT Blitz: make a mobile game.

But, to compromise between the 2 won't not yield success for either, IMO.

For now the features of COW 1.5 are minimally interesting compared with COW 1.0.
For now, the balancing of units and of resource production vs requirements are simply far off.
For now, the mechanics are so simple, it is simply no challenge and offers no sense of achievement.

I log into my last test game less than once per 24 hours an have gone inactive multiple times now.
Still being number 1, but having had number 2 creep up to the same level almost, and I do not mind.
I do want to finish that map, but simply do not afford the time I give to other (COW 1.0) maps, because I can't be bothered with the game-play in COW 1.5.

Nice dream, but everyone who knows a bit about software development knows that's impossible.

But @vonlettowvorbeck is right that Bytro shouldn't try to make every of their games a compromise for both major player groups:
A) People for whom action and gameplay are all important, mostly using smartphones.
B) People who favour depth in strategy, player interaction and historical accuracy - mostly using desktop version at least when being at home and mostly favouring slow paced games.

It would be much better to let each game focus on one target group. Suggestion:
* CoN and Supremacy1 for group A
* CoW for group B

In case that path is followed, it would be the logical consequence to stop developing CoW1.5, since a lot of strategic depth is lost in it compared to CoW1.0 and clearly all realism is gone down the sink (hard to fix all of that with balancing improvements) - thus CoW1.5 wont be attractive at all for player group B.

Nice and simple explanation by Hans ...

My vote goes to CoW for group B ...

B) CoW and Supremacy1914 ofcourse

As a game coder, it's not impossible, just very hard to do, and would take a long time, but would be the best in keeping every side happy, which of course is not my moral of the story. My moral of the story, or my biggest concern is that the updates are shredding communities to pieces, and once they get attached to the players in the community they are in, and once it starts to die due to these updates, a vast majority of the community will leave also.

If CoW tried to do one thing, and another game did the other thing to mediate in between, then that's fair, and it wouldn't stress certain communities, but as from what my community sees, it seems Supremacy 1914 and CoW is trying to follow suit of each other, and is starting to seem like just a re-texture of CoN. And, yes, I do agree the customization of s1914 is awesome for rps, it'd be awesome for us if implemented here, but it isn't my main concern, mainly the unit trading and Elite ai is, just having Elite ai be free and optional is do-able, it was optional with a cost, just make it cost nothing now, and the unit trading just simply should come back in at least some form, or allow trading of man power.