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.

  • That was a very good post, @Brazen Shield!

    I agree with everything except that you'd make upgrade time of units on the field vary on unit type. Here's how I would like to see it:

    1.: You shouldn't have to move them back to a province with the respective production facility. That would result in too much painfully laborous micromanagement. You should be able to do it in every own or allied province, as long as the unit is not engaged in battle. It then gets a cooldown timer like just landed paratroopers, during which you cannot give orders to the unit.
    2.: Important I think is that costs should vary depending on the tech tree. My suggestion is the table I put in --> this post <--. Mainly: Costs for infantry level-up very low and costs for level-up of machines high. That would be both realistic and also give some distinction to units, which is badly needed. On the other hand time required for level-up should be the same for all units.
    3.: I would make costs also dependant on how many levels are upgraded - skipping a level should make the upgrade twice as costly (while time required should be the same, no matter how many levels you upgrade in one go).
  • Akulla3D wrote:

    Ryan04px2025 wrote:

    Akulla3D wrote:

    Just wondering when we can expect the next level of testing for 1.5 -- despite all the negative reactions from different folks I for one welcome these new changes.
    Others don't that is why they will be "fixing things up" before going forward.
    What does that mean? Is it cancelled?
    It will be delayed. Bytro staff estimates that it should be a couple of months 2020 until they do their next test event.
    Ryan
    EN/ES/FR Forum Member
    Call of War Technician Fourth Grade
    Forum Lieutenant General
    Training Alliance Leader
  • Ryan04px2025 wrote:

    Akulla3D wrote:

    Ryan04px2025 wrote:

    Akulla3D wrote:

    Just wondering when we can expect the next level of testing for 1.5 -- despite all the negative reactions from different folks I for one welcome these new changes.
    Others don't that is why they will be "fixing things up" before going forward.
    What does that mean? Is it cancelled?
    It will be delayed. Bytro staff estimates that it should be a couple of months 2020 until they do their next test event.
    Do Pioneers have access for testing? I would be interested in helping and testing it out.
  • Hans A. Pils wrote:

    That was a very good post, @Brazen Shield!

    I agree with everything except that you'd make upgrade time of units on the field vary on unit type. Here's how I would like to see it:

    1.: You shouldn't have to move them back to a province with the respective production facility. That would result in too much painfully laborous micromanagement. You should be able to do it in every own or allied province, as long as the unit is not engaged in battle. It then gets a cooldown timer like just landed paratroopers, during which you cannot give orders to the unit.
    2.: Important I think is that costs should vary depending on the tech tree. My suggestion is the table I put in --> this post <--. Mainly: Costs for infantry level-up very low and costs for level-up of machines high. That would be both realistic and also give some distinction to units, which is badly needed. On the other hand time required for level-up should be the same for all units.
    3.: I would make costs also dependant on how many levels are upgraded - skipping a level should make the upgrade twice as costly (while time required should be the same, no matter how many levels you upgrade in one go).
    Number one is spot on that would be perfect, plus if they get attacked during upgrade they would be very week I would expect. Also, I would think you would need the resources to cover the difference.
  • Akulla3D wrote:

    Ryan04px2025 wrote:

    Akulla3D wrote:

    Ryan04px2025 wrote:

    Akulla3D wrote:

    Just wondering when we can expect the next level of testing for 1.5 -- despite all the negative reactions from different folks I for one welcome these new changes.
    Others don't that is why they will be "fixing things up" before going forward.
    What does that mean? Is it cancelled?
    It will be delayed. Bytro staff estimates that it should be a couple of months 2020 until they do their next test event.
    Do Pioneers have access for testing? I would be interested in helping and testing it out.
    I expect it to be for all because of all the needed feedback for Bytro as well as many different opinions
    Ryan
    EN/ES/FR Forum Member
    Call of War Technician Fourth Grade
    Forum Lieutenant General
    Training Alliance Leader
  • @Brazen Shield
    Very good post, listing the majoity of issues with COW 1.5, while stating why COW 1.0 rather deserves a good 'tweak', than to be replaced by this new game.

    @Akulla3D
    As Brazen Shield does - stating issues, pro's and con's - none of the players in favor have done.
    It would be interesting to know why players in favor of 1.5 are actually in favor of it. Especially the detailed opinion of a seasoned player, with reasonable stats and spending money, would be appreciated.

    The post was edited 3 times, last by vonlettowvorbeck ().

  • It looks like somebody, with a lot of free time in their hands, was trying to bust our chops! ... This individual posted 90 times in Chinese across various threads a few hrs ago! ... Apparently he was blocked by the forum administrator and all his posts deleted- including the one with a pic of a sensuous woman ...
  • Yes, all the spam was removed. fun fact, non english is fine on forum, as long as it doesnt break any other rules. we do have other language forums available, though, and those folks are directed to that forum. however, not every language is represented, so its okay if someone wants to post in non english on english forum. :)
  • vonlettowvorbeck wrote:

    Ryan04px2025 wrote:

    Can you please speak English?
    It seems highly unlikely that any mature participant, in the discussion above, would have any doubt that the language spoken in this thread is indeed English.But possibly it is not the English you are used to?
    And, if so, which would you prefer? British English, American English, Australian English or maybe Pigeon English? Or one of the many other?

    Or did you mean to say: "Despite the exquisite use of language, I fail to comprehend what is being relayed".
    In case of the latter, it would be most helpful if you could indicate where you lost track and in which post; for now, you are leaving us in the dark.

    Or are you actually trying to make fun of what are, doubtlessly, the best attempts of non-native speakers, to convey a clear message with meaningful content about the current developments in and around COW 1.0 and COW 1.5?
    Hey, there has been a spam in Korean and Chinese. If you are not here, you will not understand. It has been removed and you cannot see it anymore. I am not doing any of the things stated in your post. Merely telling the spammers to stop.
    Ryan
    EN/ES/FR Forum Member
    Call of War Technician Fourth Grade
    Forum Lieutenant General
    Training Alliance Leader
  • I so far haven't said anything about the centralization of resource and unit production into urban provinces. Can somebody from Bytro explain why that was done??
    The only argument I read from you is "realism". Well, it's true that urban centres generated more money, goods and manpower. But about the other resources rather the opposite was the case. CoW1.0 reflects this well, while 1.5 exaggerates the importance of urban centres very much.
    And unit production? OK, production of the most heavy units required heavy steel industry in the vicinity, which weeell, yes, could rather be found in the major urbanized areas. But restricting production of all units to the few major cities? Training infantry only in major cities ?( ? And why shouldn't we be able to raise production centres for light/medium units in one of the medium cities, of which there are enough in the so-called rural provinces in CoW? Why not construct planes in Newcastle? Why not build artillery or light tanks in Hannover, Nürnberg, Liverpool or Florence, which are just very few examples of places that are rural provinces in both CoW1.0 and 1.5.

    So that much about realism. And I also cannot see how that centralization should help in terms of gameplay. I think it only makes maps and the game as a whole more single-sided and boring.
  • What I do understand better now is the progression depending on level that 1.5 introduces to build times. For buildings this is clearly positive, that much is clear, no need to talk about that. For units it's not realistic, but improves gameplay: In CoW1.0 it's striking you cannot produce much at the beginning, while in late game there's so much to do you cannot care about everything unless playing as full-time job. Although I personally never found this disturbing (before the "Market overhaul" update you could fill the void during the first days well by trading, analysing what the others do in order to know how you want to position yourself diplomatically and by messaging others to learn about them and to build up first diplomatic relations), I must understand that for many players that's a major issue. Which for sure is tackled by 1.5 successfully - I have to admit that much.

    So I now agree to production times of high-level units being a bit higher than of level1-units. I now agree in this aspect, realism should step back in order to allow better gameplay - also because industrial capacity / the ability to produce many units in short time should be an important factor also in later game phases.
    But what I still totally cannot content myself with is progression in production & upkeep costs of units. Neither with a progression for their damage output that's higher than in CoW1.0, nor with a high HP increase.
    I understand that all of these pursue the same purpose as described in the first paragraph (above), but are too badly unrealistic.

    I'll soon create a comprehensive proposal of how units and buildings should be balanced in order to have them realistic, offer many challenging strategic decisions to the players and to let the number of possible production orders not to grow so immensely over time as it does in CoW1.0.
    One idea I have for the latter is to:
    * keep the SBDE system as in 1.0 counting per unit type (and not per total number of units in a stack),
    * make it very very strict - only two units of same type (regardless of their level) can go in the same stack with 100% SBDE,
    * introduce a new "Tactics" research tree with the following techs:
    1.: "Army command": 2 levels - each level increases SBDE limit for infantry units except AA/AT/arty by +1.
    2.: "Ordnance command": 3 levels - each level increases SBDE limit for AA/AT/arty by +1.
    3.: "Airforce command": 2 levels - each level increases SBDE limit for air units by +1.
    4.: "Armour command": 2 levels - each level increases SBDE limit for air units by +1.
    5.: "Navy command": 3 levels - each level increases SBDE limit for AA/AT/arty by +1.
    These should be very costly and time-consuming to research, but would enable players who don't want to manage many small stacks give the option to build large stacks in mid or late game.
    Certainly that would require some programming, but would be perfect.
  • Hans A. Pils wrote:

    * introduce a new "Tactics" research tree with the following techs:
    IMO that would be a good idea. It also serves to teach the - not at all difficult, but hard to discover, bc nowhere explained - principles of SBDE.

    However, without knowing which direction the devs want to take this, this all remains what we call 'air biking': peddling the pedals to no avail.

    The cheapest solution for improved new player retention remains, IMO, a good set of progressively difficult tutorial maps.

    The fastest way to retain players now is: to be transparent about whether COW 1.5 is supposed to replace COW 1.0 or whether it it is going to be a separate game.

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

  • Levelize units I feel ok too. I play CoN two days ago. And yesterday almost lose. At the game started, only give you armored cars, 1 arty, 1 fighter and some regular infs. No tanks, it really hard to do defendsive prepare if you dont know who will attack you. Once you any urban falled, you basically lose. Resource produce rate down to negative. And only capture your provinces back way is use defensive infs to capture.(armored car and art cant capture them) I used 2 infs and 1 national guard(militia, and only 1/3 hp left) to attack invader 2 infs and 1 arty. Result is only killed 1 arty and gave 2 infs 1/4 total damage. And invader(ya, Russia) owns more resources and provinces than me at the begining. The invade punishment is morale -2/per nation. That's totally unfair. How can I beat invader if I dont know who will going to attack?

    In this situation, only gold can give you real help......

    Just hope Call of War would not become something like that.

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Tasmine ().

  • vonlettowvorbeck wrote:

    Ryan04px2025 wrote:

    Merely telling the spammers to stop.
    next time write a ticket. you have no influence on spam(mers). mods do.
    Just trying to help in case they don't. Just a reminder. Reminding someone to something they are supposed to does not count as deputy modding, if it does, you are doing so too! lol. It is just trying to see what can help them stop. If you were there, you will think differently. Anyways, that is not related to the topic at all.



    Back to topic: What is the main target we have now? I was thinking of separate 1.5 game. I hope it will work well that way.
    Ryan
    EN/ES/FR Forum Member
    Call of War Technician Fourth Grade
    Forum Lieutenant General
    Training Alliance Leader
  • Ryan04px2025 wrote:

    deputy modding
    Don't care much about 'deputy modding' of whatever. IMO this thread is about the future or demise of COW 1.0 and the (possible, but not yet clarified) replacement with a new game COW 1.5 and thus has no need for unrelated posts and loose remarks.

    As such, the 1st question to be answered is: can and will COW 1.0 and 1.5 coexist or must COW 1.5 replace 1.0 ??

    Only after that, further importance can be attached to commenting on COW 1.0's future (if there is any) and 1.5.
    I will most likely not play 1.5 when it keeps these mechanics and features (1.6 I might though, depending....)

    Edit: a number of questions - including the above - have been at least partially answered by Freezy in >>> Freezy's post <<<

    The post was edited 3 times, last by vonlettowvorbeck ().