Call of War 1.5: Mechanics & New Balancing

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

  • Manpower and troop development is the most critical issue here that needs change.
    The investment in factories to increase manpower is not cost effective.

    The payback on manpower increases should be about 1 day or at the most 2. Currently it is 7 to 9

    Massive troop level disparity is a problem, suggest a more reduced power increase and corresponding reduced cost.

    The diplomatic adjustment do not seem to correspond to what was anticipated or I misread them.

    As Algeria I attacked (with declaration of war) Tunisia and then Libya. My popularity is 6%. I thought there was less penalty for declaring war and being at war.
  • There is also not enough of a disparity between airfield and the airfield plus air production facility.

    One of the tactical aspects of air power is the need to build a chain of airfields around and to the front lines.
    The costs in manpower makes this very very expensive and slows the game down.

    STRONGLY suggest that the airfields be reduced big time in manpower costs if not others as well.
  • Air Force

    Well I've learned not to produce any planes until at least level 3 Interceptor and level 2 TB because the cost of building an AB in every province is too burdensome.

    What a waste of resources to have level 1 planes (Interceptors - 3 and TB's -1 that will never be able to be utilized even in homeland because I simply can't afford to build an AB in every province while attempting to expand.

    Maybe in a European country, but not in the North American continent. Distances are too great.

    Very unequal / unbalanced it appears when comparing to the central European countries.

    North Africa may be similar to what North American continent is having to deal with. Dunno
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Now playing another game in European theater and have confirmed able to utilize level 1 air force while expanding my just building air strip in primary urban areas once conquered. Of course it helped that original air base and planes were in a small enough country to be able to fly between existing urban areas upon completion of additional air strips in urban areas.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    After 6 or 7 days I had enough resources to spend building additional airfields at Moncton and Bathurst in an attempt to reach the urban cities. No such luck. After flying the planes to Bathurst it was discovered that the level one planes (both TB and Intercpetor) will not reach the next province !!!!!!!!

    So not only is the location remote the planes still cannot be utilized until upgraded to level 2 (minimum). And since these planes cannot be upgraded - they were an entire waste of resources at the start of the game.

    Where else should this situation be posted so that the developers can be advised of situation?
    wb

    The post was edited 2 times, last by white bird: To confirm existence of disparity with original air base placed in Halifax Canada 2nd Edit - 11/17/19 - To elaborate on existing situation ().

  • I'd like to give some feedback about the 1,5 version that was launched 3 days ago.

    Buildings:
    - Specializing the building according to each troop type is realistic and it is how it works in the industry.
    - It gives the possibility to specialize per troop type per city.

    Manpower:
    - I'm happy that the use of manpower has been used more realistically. However why manpower for building? Yes you temporarily need labor to produce all the building part and to construct the building. However when the construction is done then that manpower that was used has become available on the job market again. This being said, when a building is finished you should get your manpower back. I'm getting stuck in the game by lack on manpower.

    Research:
    - The already overused manpower for producing units and construction is now also imbedded in research. Therefor one doesn't need to prioritize the research he's doing but also weigh in the production and building as you can't do it all.
    - Only new troops get updated which makes the starting troops in mid game more or less useless. Luckily we are all in the same boat.

    Economy:
    - I've got the impression that the economy is now more balanced where there's no big food shortage in the start and overproduction of oil.
    - I've said it twice and repeat it again, manpower is problematic and should be rethought.

    Battle mechanics:
    - Now that the battles are faster the gameplay will be more fluently
    - On the downside, now that the battles are faster a higher rate of game activity is required. In the basic COW there's a large playerbase that plays but is not highly active. These players won't have as good as a player experience as they once had.

    Units:
    - Infantry: they get overpowered fast and it's just not realistic
    - Airforce: tactical bombers have more or less become useless. They had gotten more balanced with the last updates which was a good thing but with the 1,5 there's no more utility for an airforce.
    - Rockets: good that there's finally friendly fire, makes it more realistic.
    - Nuclear navy: I'm happy it's finally deleted as there was no nuclear navy in WWII


    Overall a good version when some adjustments are made but i would hate to see the original COW go, both should be available in the future.
  • BMfox wrote:

    ...
    Units:
    - ...
    - Airforce: tactical bombers have more or less become useless. They had gotten more balanced with the last updates which was a good thing but with the 1,5 there's no more utility for an airforce.
    ...

    Overall a good version when some adjustments are made but i would hate to see the original COW go, both should be available in the future.
    1 Hr re-fuel time for planes... That's a horrific nerf. Just made air obsolete and rockets into Lazer-Death-Stars for anyone atempting to use Air.

    Air Power was, is and will continue to be KING in warfare... now it's utterly useless.
    General Maximus Decimus Meridius - "Are you not entertained?"

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

  • After trying out a few days, I personally think it is do more good than bad. Some minor tweaks can get this game better.

    I understand the important of fair/balancing, but I think it doesn't have to be each countries start with (2pcs)resources of each type, and (1pcs) resources of each type. To make it more realistic and tactical, middle-east have more oil, can add 1 extra oil provinces, and take out a iron provinces, etc...
    * In the old time, I would strategically to plan which resource i need most, and target the specific country or provinces first. Now, it becomes whoever the closest country to me, BAM i will killed that first. No need to think or plan a strategy!

    2) If infrastruture removes bonus resources, should you guy find something to fill up like 1) oil refinery (oil) 2) farm (food) etc... Other than, just increase the industry to 100%. It is kind of no brainer to just press a button for upgrade.

    3) The good thing is airbase is cost more, so no more spam airbase and air units, but since the map is big. Shouldn't it be the planes run further in distance. Otherwise, planes is not convenience to move from one place to another.

    4) Lastly, why do infantry need oil, as to tanks need food. That i think the old CoW is better. Because it makes more realistic and tactical whether which units to recruit.

    Too bad, my previous post have more cool sugguestions. I don't think you guy have taken any into account.
  • Defensive strength of some units against air force seems a bit unrealistic / disproportionately out of balance?

    All units listed are level 1

    Militia @ 2.0
    Infantry @ 3.0
    Motorized Infantry @ 3.0
    Commandos @ 1.0
    Paratroopers @ 1.0
    Arty @ 0.5
    AT @ 4.0
    AA @ 14.0
    AC @ 6.0
    LT @ 0.5
    MT @ 1.5
    Tank Destroyer @ 1.0
    SP Arty @ 1.0
    SP AA @ 42.0
    Mechanized Infantry @ 9.0
    wb
  • From the Research Tree

    LT Level 1

    Attacking Infantry @ 6.0
    Defending Against Infantry 2.0

    Infantry Level 1

    Attacking Light Armor @ 3.0
    Defending Against Light Armor @ 6.0

    Analysis

    1. When LT attacks Infantry it is a wash 6.0 versus 6.0

    2. When Infantry attacks LT the Infantry will win 3.0 versus 2.0


    On another note:

    Additionally, Infantry receive a 50% increase in strength in an urban setting while light armor receives a 50% decrease.

    That is a 100% swing in and of itself.

    Plus another 15% home field advantage !

    One would like to think this change should convince all players to never send an armored unit into an urban setting ever again - lol


    But I just found a Light Armored AC protecting an IC / urban center all by its lonesome - lol
    wb

    The post was edited 1 time, last by white bird: To take into account that Light Armor now does not receive a penalty for fighting in an urban setting. ().

  • I either have to build up my forces (at low levels)
    OR
    Build up my industry (to maybe have a chance at building higher level forces)
    OR
    Research higher level forces (without an infrastructure to use the research to build the forces)
    BECAUSE
    I neither have enough money, nor enough manpower, to accomplish any two of these things!

    Maybe it's me... but, I am wondering - how is this improving my strategic or tactical options?!?! My game play option?!?!

    (Oh, and side note: fix your map, there is an area in Florida that is land but that you have o embark/disembark to move through!!!)
    Killings my business, and business is good!
  • white bird wrote:

    From the Research Tree

    LT Level 1

    Attacking Infantry @ 6.0
    Defending Against Infantry 2.0

    Infantry Level 1

    Attacking Light Armor @ 3.0
    Defending Against Light Armor @ 6.0

    Analysis

    1. When LT attacks Infantry it is a wash 6.0 versus 6.0

    2. When Infantry attacks LT the Infantry will win 3.0 versus 2.0


    On another note:

    Additionally, Infantry receive a 50% increase in strength in an urban setting while armor receives a 50% decrease.

    That is a 100% swing in and of itself.

    Plus another 15% homefield advantage !

    One would like to think this change should convince all players to never send an armored unit into an urban setting ever again - lol

    But I just found a Light Armored AC protecting an IC / urban center all by its lonesome - lol
    there is no nerf ground but just buff for any troop.. so pls before posting things at least read the info they have us or at least play the cow 1.5
  • Last Warrior wrote:

    white bird wrote:

    Defensive strength of some units against air force seems a bit unrealistic / disproportionately out of balance?
    And? Airforces were too overpowered, now they are nerfed, but still usable. SP AA and Mech. Inf. are day 6 researches, airforces after day 6 research can have 120 HP's. also its not so terrible as you think.
    Air units are nerfed to the ground.. because the patrol still takes 15 mins giving 25% dmg while ground troops gives 100% attack every 30 mins. too many troops have high AA since i just shreed 2 tactics with 10 infranty LOL and i took almost no dmg.. the landing airfield are expensive as fuck and a golder just need 3800 gold ( cheap ) to destroy the airfield and with that nullify all my planes and damage them.. so if you think that air units are balanced right now my friend you understand absolutly nothing about this game or maybe you just have personal hate towards air units cuz he cant handle them but anyway right now they are useless.
  • Last Warrior wrote:

    white bird wrote:

    Defensive strength of some units against air force seems a bit unrealistic / disproportionately out of balance?
    And? Airforces were too overpowered, now they are nerfed, but still usable. SP AA and Mech. Inf. are day 6 researches, airforces after day 6 research can have 120 HP's. also its not so terrible as you think.
    Excellent points !

    I did forget to take into account what the planes could be valued at if each level of air force research had been achieved / performed for each type of plane utilized by Day 6.

    Also I really wasn't attempting to complain about the air force being nerfed.

    My post was attempting to illustrate some (perhaps) some inconsistency in defensive values such as:

    1. An AC @ 6.0 but an LT @ 0.5 and a MT @ 1.5. What sort of weaponry does an AC carry that an LT or MT doesn't have? I'm asking seriously, as I am no weaponry expert whatsoever. It just is a bit confusing when analyzing the stats which show an LT or MT will kill the AC, but the AC can defend against a plane better.

    2. There just seems to be a disparity imho between an SP Arty level 1 @ 42 and a level 1 plane that cannot be upgraded. The Air Force was not only nerfed - it was also practically eliminated for the first six days and beyond considering one has to not only construct level 4 air bases but then produce the level 4 planes after completing the level 4 researches for each type of plane. Castration is the word that comes to mind, but may be politically incorrect (as well my apologies to the women among us).
    wb

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

  • white bird wrote:

    What sort of weaponry does an AC carry that and LT or MT doesn't have?
    Not better weapons at itself, but better taktiks. AC is lighter, swifter, can hit and run. Have commonly more anti soft targets munitions, while MT is more hard kill machine.
    But this huge disballance AC to LT is any way unrealistic. ballance AC to MT is ok. Ballance AC to Infantry is almoast ok.
    AC is definitly TOP 3 buffed units in version 1.5;
    TOP 1 are AA and SPAA, TOP 2 is towed artillery and RR-Gun, TOP 3 is AC. TOP 4 seatransports.

    TOP 1 nerfed are airforces, except naval bomber. TOP 2 LT's; TOP 3 commandos for fight stats, but ok, they get a buff invisibility, wich is almoast obsolet, because of using OP AC by every second player.;

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

  • I like the concept of this update. I have told pretty much everyone that I believe this update could add some really good aspects to the game. Therefore, this is not an attack on the update at all but a way to make it better and CoW in general better, based off what I see has already been introduced. I believe attacking in CoW should be preferred on attacking being stronger than the defence. LT and planes have already begun to show this in 1.5 and as such am guessing this is the direction Bytro is headed? If so GREAT! I believe WW2 was an attackers war. I used to play supremacy1914 (S14) and correct me if im wrong but it is a defenders game with arty ruling the game. I remember HUGE arty slogs with 500+ units fighting in the 500 map. This works for S14 as WW1 was a defensive war. Attacking in S14 should NOT be stronger than defence

    However, CoW and WW2 was an offensive and attack focused war. As such I believe the focus of CoW should be on attacking and not defence. Troops should be stronger when attacking to encourage and simulate what it was in WW2 - ofc inf units should be defensive, but an inf vs tank army should favour the tanks unbelievably. Armour units should be offensive beasts. The "meta" I believe should be mechanised units with air to simulate the "blitzkrieg" as much as possible. Planes and tanks should be strong and should rule CoW much like arty does in S14. However, the current stats of the update and really the current version do not completely simulate this. The "anti-units" (Anti-tanks and Anti-air) are WAY too strong. By having these anti-units very strong it encourages and strengthens defensive game play which is not what CoW should be. If you want to play a defensive game, play S14. For an attack focused game, play CoW. I do not believe the best way to counter tanks should be AT nor do I believe the best way to counter planes should be AA. I believe the best way to counter tanks should be with tanks, and the best way to counter planes should be planes. The battle of Britain was not (im no history expert) But 2000 German planes verses 2000 British AA guns. It was a constant dog-fight between planes vs planes. AA should provide some additional defence and bonus towards defending against planes, but it should NOT be a substitute for an air-force. Armies of WW2 where not defensive artillery, anti-tanks and anti-air forces, they where offensive tanks and plane driven armies with arty in support.

    For this reason, I believe the CoW 1.5 should focus on this for its strategic game play. Those who neglect their air-force should be beaten by those who have one, AA should NOT be a substitute for a strong air-force. Given the 1.5 focus of one key resource per unit type (metal for tanks, goods for arty, rares for planes) to me it suggests having a diverse army, one that has tanks, arty and planes. However, the current stats mean AT beat tanks, AA beats planes so really we are left with defensive arty fights. Which gets me back to those big defensive arty fights of S14. Additionally, given the high cost of planes and tanks compared to the cheap costs of AA and AT, this defensive game play is further strengthened. I think 1.5 has all the makings to simulate this "meta" and be a really good update, but the anti-units should be support units that help a bit, not counters to large swarms of tanks and planes. Therefore I would recommend halving the defensive stats of AT and AA and possible increasing their costs, or deceasing the costs of planes and tanks (I will get into later costs of units which I believe are too high but further testing is required) to encourage the use of interceptors to counter plane forces, tanks to counter tank forces. Currently in Version 1 (V1) melee is not favoured. Tanks are not very strong as melee leads to high losses on both sides. This SHOULD be the cas

    in tank vs tank battles, but tanks vs inf and AT I think should lead to the tanks winning quite decisively.

    I hope this concept is taken into consideration or at least explained to us why if not CoW, is headed to something that is very similar to S14 with anti-units being more powerful than expensive offensive units. I do not think AA should beat planes in a 1v1. Planes should beat planes in a 1v1. AA should provide some additional help, but if a player has absolute air supremacy, they should win. It shouldn’t be a case of if I have 20 tacs, 10 AA units beat or cripple that (given that AA cost about 2.7x less than 1 plane it is much easier to spam AA and counter someones air), interceptors should. It should force me to build a stack of 10-10 ints - tacs, with my enemy building either 20 ints or 2x10-10 stacks. Again, if the enemy has overwhelming tank supremacy, an AT-arty army should not beat that.

    Now while WW2 still did favour the defence, attacking with tanks and planes was quite strong and effective which currently is NOT mirrored or reflected.
    Torpedo28000
    Game Operator
    EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh