The Overpowerness of Rockets in Call of War

K.Rokossovski · Mar 1st 2020, 9:53am

Bundy34 wrote:

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Bundy34 wrote:

First of all it's no problem making all of the units sitting duck for Rockets. What you do is send a useless unit to the Rockets just to make it stop then BOOM!. Fire the Rockets at it.

Well there' s many ways to stop that plan as well. The useless unit is prone to attack by air or artillery before it gets there; or it may be defeated in the first combat round, in which case the enemy loses no speed at all. The rockets are very vulnerable when they are waiting to get fired at their airfields, even the slightest nudge from the air will kill them. Moving them into position can be a bitch, because their trucks are extremely slow.Look, no one is arguing that they aren't useful units; I often use them myself. But OP? No.

Ok fine instead of 1 useless unit just put an extra 2-3 useless units that it's goal is to at least survive the First Round. Then Rockets are fired. Their trucks might be extremely slow but you can just keep them 4 provinces behind your front and arrive with Rockets behind your back.

Well, if you think you found the key to success in this game, prove it. Many experienced players have told you that rockets are NOT some kind of magic unit; if you think that they are, have a battle with us and we' ll see how your rockets obliterate us.

gusv · Mar 1st 2020, 11:04am

Bundy34 wrote:

you can just keep them 4 provinces behind your front

True ... High level/long range rockets can cause a lot of damage to cities, airports, naval bases and slow moving targets far from the front lines ... :thumbup:

Bundy34 · Mar 1st 2020, 11:05am

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Bundy34 wrote:

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Bundy34 wrote:

First of all it's no problem making all of the units sitting duck for Rockets. What you do is send a useless unit to the Rockets just to make it stop then BOOM!. Fire the Rockets at it.

Well there' s many ways to stop that plan as well. The useless unit is prone to attack by air or artillery before it gets there; or it may be defeated in the first combat round, in which case the enemy loses no speed at all. The rockets are very vulnerable when they are waiting to get fired at their airfields, even the slightest nudge from the air will kill them. Moving them into position can be a bitch, because their trucks are extremely slow.Look, no one is arguing that they aren't useful units; I often use them myself. But OP? No.

Ok fine instead of 1 useless unit just put an extra 2-3 useless units that it's goal is to at least survive the First Round. Then Rockets are fired. Their trucks might be extremely slow but you can just keep them 4 provinces behind your front and arrive with Rockets behind your back.

Well, if you think you found the key to success in this game, prove it. Many experienced players have told you that rockets are NOT some kind of magic unit; if you think that they are, have a battle with us and we' ll see how your rockets obliterate us.

And what will I achieve when i obliterate you. Your no designer or creater of this game and how do you know the players that have commented on here are experianced!.

Ruy Diaz de Bivar · Mar 1st 2020, 9:19pm

Don't mess with the rockets. It' is the ultimate ranged attack. I learned to use them real fast when a player golded out massive doom stacks filled with leveled up AA, AT, railroad guns and militia. I watched him shred entire countries overnight while I prepared an arsenal of rockets to take him out.

Then I had to be patient and wait until just before his RRGs crept up on my waiting rocket bases. The travel time at those distances was short so the near misses did their job. Had that counter not been available to me I have no idea how I would have stopped them. Maybe go toe toe with a similar stack? I didn't have the time or resources to build one.

And there are plenty of strategies to counter a rocket player. I know because I use rockets and I've had good skilled players negate the strategy, but that's a different subject.

K.Rokossovski · Mar 1st 2020, 9:43pm

Ruy Diaz de Bivar wrote:

And there are plenty of strategies to counter a rocket player. I know because I use rockets and I've had good skilled players negate the strategy, but that's a different subject.

Huh? That seems to be EXACTLY the topic...

VorlonFCW · Mar 2nd 2020, 1:06am

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Huh? That seems to be EXACTLY the topic...

I think Ruy is keeping his secrets close to the vest.

Bundy34 · Mar 2nd 2020, 9:47am

Ruy Diaz de Bivar wrote:

Don't mess with the rockets. It' is the ultimate ranged attack. I learned to use them real fast when a player golded out massive doom stacks filled with leveled up AA, AT, railroad guns and militia. I watched him shred entire countries overnight while I prepared an arsenal of rockets to take him out.

Then I had to be patient and wait until just before his RRGs crept up on my waiting rocket bases. The travel time at those distances was short so the near misses did their job. Had that counter not been available to me I have no idea how I would have stopped them. Maybe go toe toe with a similar stack? I didn't have the time or resources to build one.

And there are plenty of strategies to counter a rocket player. I know because I use rockets and I've had good skilled players negate the strategy, but that's a different subject.

I agree with you that Rockets has become a huge insurance idea against big stacks of army's. You don't need gold or a lot of resources to have a lot of Rockets while your opponent spends time, money and a huge effort getting those big stacks of army's to just get obliterated by Rockets.

freezy · Mar 3rd 2020, 1:00pm

Bundy34 wrote:

freezy wrote:

Chimere wrote:

Rocket can only hit static or very very slow enemies. the problem of balance IMO is that they don't damage units on your own side, so they are very good against units engaged in battles that cannot break.

In the CoW1.5 version we changed that and made rockets damage also friendly units. There rockets also have (relatively) lowered damage vs. units.

First of all the changes are next to nothing. You also want to have Flying Bombs as well in your new update to add a weaker version to a already amazing unit called Rockets LOL!!

The changes in 1.5 to rockets are pretty significant. Calculate how much damage percentage a lvl4 rocket does in 1.0 to a lvl 7 inf and then calculate how much damage a lvl 4 rocket does in 1.5 to a lvl 7 Inf. There is a wide gap in the result.

Bundy34 · Mar 3rd 2020, 2:11pm

freezy wrote:

Bundy34 wrote:

freezy wrote:

Chimere wrote:

Rocket can only hit static or very very slow enemies. the problem of balance IMO is that they don't damage units on your own side, so they are very good against units engaged in battles that cannot break.

In the CoW1.5 version we changed that and made rockets damage also friendly units. There rockets also have (relatively) lowered damage vs. units.

First of all the changes are next to nothing. You also want to have Flying Bombs as well in your new update to add a weaker version to a already amazing unit called Rockets LOL!!

The changes in 1.5 to rockets are pretty significant. Calculate how much damage percentage a lvl4 rocket does in 1.0 to a lvl 7 inf and then calculate how much damage a lvl 4 rocket does in 1.5 to a lvl 7 Inf. There is a wide gap in the result.

And please tell me what it is

Devious Rancor · Mar 3rd 2020, 2:37pm

Bundy34 wrote:

Let me also explain how cheap rockets are to be too good in Call of War. All you need for a rocket is 500 rare, 1,500 metal, 25 men and 2,500 cash. It's a similar value to any unit in Call of War, BUT 1 Rocket can easily kill a few units. Even if you want to have Rockets in this game, just remove the nuclear rocket as you can get 164 Rockets for 1 nuclear rocket. It includes all construction, research, and production costs of rare materials. Even if you build a nuclear reactor, players sabotage the building because you will have Nukes. Rockets can be easily made EVERYWHERE. You'll also have to wait until day 42 (when most games are over) to get a nuclear rocket. So there is no point in getting a nuclear rocket.

There are also several ways to fix this problem (in no particular order).

Have a 50% success rate on Rockets
Triple the production time and the costs on Rockets
Give the Rocket Fighters and Interceptors the ability to fight L2-4 Rockets
Make the Level 1 Rocket available on Day 18
Decrease the Rockets damage by 50%
Have the Rockets only able to produce on a Level 3 Airbase and INC

OK, let's go through this. As one who is very experienced at Call of War (literally, several years of play), I can tell you the Rocket unit type is relatively fair and not overpowered. I've seen it employed wisely, and with fantastic results both by me and against me. I've seen it used foolishly, and with horrible results, and oftentimes even disastrous results (i.e., being a total waste of resources because the builder failed to even use them because they were asleep when the invasion against them began...and the rockets were destroyed on the ground by marauding level 5 Armored Cars, etc....and this has happened to me, as well.)

Rockets are good IF used properly and invested in reasonably. Any player who just spams rockets is going to lose this game. That said, if you have earned a sufficiently-massive empire, such that you can produce rockets at several bases continuously -- and without sacrificing the production of other needed forces -- then it's not spamming, rockets are simply one of many types of units that you are producing in mass quantities.

Anecdotal evidence of how the Rockets can be powerful:

Display Spoiler

I can remember one such instance -- long ago -- where I had a weeks-long stalemate between myself and another player -- both of us top players in the match with vast empires staring down each other. He focused on a buildup of Tactical Bombers and Armored units while I focused on Rockets, Fighters, and mixed ground units. After enough time had passed, we both were titans waiting to pounce. Everyone assumed that whatever would trigger the war would ensure that both sides suffered massive casualties in an uber-bloody battle-royale.

However, through careful observations of his interactions and patterns via heavy amounts of espionage, I was able to determine when he would usually be asleep. And so I launched a massive first strike a couple hours after I knew he would typically be in bed, and that strike with a couple hundred rockets, my own air power, and a broad swath of ground forces....of which decimated half of his armed forces in the first hour of the war.

My rockets came in two waves....the first to cripple his airbases such that most of his in-range, super-massive fleet of bombers were forced to land, and the second wave to wipe out fortresses as well as damaging most of those downed bombers. What I couldn't reach with my rockets, the rest of my forces swiftly rolled over....and most of this done hours before he even woke up. The next day was so sad for him, of course, and I eventually went on to win the war with a great lopsided victory....though I didn't gloat and we had amicable communications in-game.

The key to my victory wasn't the rockets, though they played a huge part in my success. The key to my victory was diligence in all aspects of my strategic planning: from the choices I made in military building and research, to the strategic placement of my own airbases, fortresses, armies, and the like, and to large and careful investments into spies to track what he did, what he used, and when, and with a careful and silver-tongued diplomacy that worked every angle with other players that I could muster.

In short, though, the key was knowledge. I knew what he was building, and I built the correct countering forces to ensure victory. Though he was spying on me, I kept up a daily-updated list of his own spy locations and I'd counter them at every turn. The point is, had he been more diligent on his own espionage efforts, he could have chosen to build up his forces in other ways to try to prevent my eventual victory via negating the usefulness of my rockets.

Now let's go through your list of suggestions line by line:
"Have a 50% success rate on Rockets"
Not a bad idea, but introduction of an 'X' factor to the successful strike of a rocket would make more sense here.

"Triple the production time and the costs on Rockets"
Not feasible, because the actual production time makes sense given that they are single-use units. What you propose here would make more sense if the Rockets were re-usable (i.e., the increased costs and time are in developing a launchpad where new rockets are automatically rebuilt periodically....and that is already done in Conflict of Nations, which this game is not).

"Give the Rocket Fighters and Interceptors the ability to fight L2-4 Rockets"
This makes absolutely no sense given the technology of the era. Rockets existed. They were cumbersome. They were not accurate, and they were expensive. But they were also very fast. Trying to hit a rocket, even today, is like trying to hit a bullet with another bullet, each shot from thousands of yards apart. It's just not feasible. At least the level 1 Rocket can be intercepted, since it's pretty much representative of a kamikaze bomb.

"Make the Level 1 Rocket available on Day 18"
In order for that to make sense, many other unit types would have to also be delayed much further. And some units, would never be reached if they were more-proportionately spaced...units like the nuclear missile would have to wait to day 180, for example. And not too many matches last half a year or more (though I have been in a few

"Decrease the Rockets damage by 50%"
No. Simply put, the developers have spent years adjusting the damage inflicted to make the game decently-accurate and still playable. This also applies to your previous suggestion, in that literally years have passed and changes to development times and start dates have occurred numerous times....again, for balancing and playability.

"Have the Rockets only able to produce on a Level 3 Airbase and INC"
By "INC" I assume you might mean the Infrastructure. Now, the current implementation of CoW 1.5 removes the need for this suggestion altogether. But since I'm no fan to some of the changes in CoW 1.5, I'll say that it would be better to consider this idea in part. Rather than raising the airbase level for all rockets, as with level 2 rockets (and higher) requiring a level 2 airbase, perhaps the higher ones (those which negate fortresses) should require level 3 airbases, so that all three airbase levels play a role in rocket production.

Devious Rancor · Mar 3rd 2020, 2:38pm

freezy wrote:

Chimere wrote:

Rocket can only hit static or very very slow enemies. the problem of balance IMO is that they don't damage units on your own side, so they are very good against units engaged in battles that cannot break.

In the CoW1.5 version we changed that and made rockets damage also friendly units. There rockets also have (relatively) lowered damage vs. units.

This ONLY makes sense if the blast radius of Rockets are widened...and they NEED to be. Whatever the blast radius currently is, it's NOT currently wide enough to justify hitting allied targets. That said, if a random X factor were added to determine the successful hit rate on the battlefield, then it would make more sense that hitting allied and/or self-troops alongside maybe hitting the opponent(s) would make more sense.

Better yet, let the exact targeted location be the desired target, while letting the X factor determine the accuracy of the blast. If the X factor throws off the accuracy enough, then allied troops get hit. If the X factor throws off the accuracy a lot, then nothing gets hit. In this scenario, though, the area of effect -- as it currently stands -- would be reasonable enough. But the always-hit-allied-troops-also rules change for 1.5 is a bad change to the game as a whole.

Bundy34 wrote:

Chimere wrote:

Bundy34 wrote:

Ryan04px2025 wrote:

@Bundy34 My teammate accidentally fired a rocket at a enemy unit a km away from mine and damaged mine

I didn't really know about that. Rockets are just too powerful in this game that no-one can see the problem with it.

How many games have you done ? People with a lot of experiences tells you it is certainly not, and it is the first time I ever hear this comment.Something else I don't like with Rockets is that it is often used by golders to rain on your airports, but well, if the golders did not use rockets they would use bombers instead.

I played many games and I see players use Rockets as a huge insurance or in huge uses many times. I see threads people complain about the Tactical Bomber even tho you can beat the Tactical Bomber with Interceptors or Anti-Air. With Rockets it can't be defeated you just don't look at the facts.

There are many ways to defeat Rockets: use your own to destroy your opponent's on the ground, employ Strategic Bombers to damage/destroy the airbases that the rockets are sitting on, then use Tactical Bombers to destroy the grounded rockets, use nuclear bombers and target the city (or if it's heavily-defended with AA, then hit a nearby small target instead...the blast radius will destroy the rockets, their airbase, most of the AA, and any other units within the very large blast radius of the nuke).

Teburu wrote:

if you think rockets are OP you havent seen artillery yet lol

I laugh at this comment. Artillery are severely underpowered. The key to successful usage of them is to protect them and let them get many volleys in while frontline troops guard against and/or fight the target. But if you are smart, and negate the ranged feature by flanking or with Tactical Bombers, those Artillery are going to fail miserably. Remember, for every unit, there is a counter-unit designed to easily defeat it.

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Well, if you think you found the key to success in this game, prove it. Many experienced players have told you that rockets are NOT some kind of magic unit; if you think that they are, have a battle with us and we' ll see how your rockets obliterate us.

*Nods, "here here". I tip my hat at thee.

FinnDaddy · Mar 3rd 2020, 3:03pm

There are a lot of good uses for rockets and none of them are the only reason for victory. They can only be fired from airports, and are easy to kill while on the ground or in convoy. They also burn oil while stockpiled. Their intended uses are to:

Soften fortifications before frontal assault or artillery barrage.
Soften big stationary stacks that are too dangerous for air assault. Try to catch tanks in cities.
Disable airbases or hit aircraft on the ground, especially with returning or fueling aircraft using the airbase (a fun trap).

They also work against slow moving units marching in enemy territory. Usually even slow moving units can escape if they are marching in their own territory for ~7 mins. They do give advantage to micro managers. While they were not a big factor in WW2, I don't see them as overpowered or over used in COW.

Devious Rancor · Mar 3rd 2020, 3:17pm

FinnDaddy wrote:

They also burn oil while stockpiled

This is an example of a change that was implemented a while back...a change that made the game more balanced. It used to be, that stockpiled rockets had no maintenance. Now, building up vast numbers of Rockets in anticipation of a great war can get cost-prohibitive. At first, I wasn't too fond of this change, but I was able to see the logic of it, and have learned to adapt to it, for my own Rocket-building needs.

gusv · Mar 3rd 2020, 3:48pm

FinnDaddy wrote:

They also burn oil while stockpiled.

This actually makes no sense to me. Rockets don't burn fuel while stockpiled. A useless waste of resources by us customers of CoW ...

Devious Rancor · Mar 3rd 2020, 5:00pm

gusv wrote:

FinnDaddy wrote:

They also burn oil while stockpiled.

This actually makes no sense to me. Rockets don't burn fuel while stockpiled. A useless waste of resources by us customers of CoW ...

Actually, it does make sense. First off, the rocket fuel would need to be maintained as a fresh supply. Different fuels actually lose their efficacy and potency over time. In some circumstances, that means replacing or replenishing the fuel. Liquid fuels evaporate as well as lose their potency. Frozen liquid fuels have to be kept cool. And even solid fuels decay.

Of course, the span of the game represents a somewhat-limited duration of the middle of the 20th. century, so the decay of fuels may not need to be represented. However, the fact that a nation wouldn't just put a rocket in a silo and walk away from it until needed seems to be a point that needs made.

The readiness troops that guard and administrate the rocket require some upkeep. Just as all other units require some kind of maintenance, so too does the rocket need it.

Now, an argument could be made to change and/or lesson the maintenance requirements for rockets. But to eliminate them altogether really doesn't make sense when all other units in-fact do have maintenance requirements. To eliminate them from the Rockets would require eliminating them for all unit types....an action that would off-balance the game.

gusv · Mar 3rd 2020, 8:08pm

Devious Rancor wrote:

The readiness troops that guard and administrate the rocket require some upkeep.

The primary resources for this are a little bit of food and money for the small amount of troops involved in 'up keeping' the rockets ...

Little Racoon · Mar 4th 2020, 8:26am

In my view, rockets can be very good, but I don't use them often. Why?

Rockets are only good in static warfare, and in CoW, nothing is totally static. The pain of transporting them from the production bases to the front is agonizing, and sometimes since you advance too fast, the rockets can't catch up and will basically be useless.

Sure, at the beginning of a war, rockets are in fact OP if you're the one initiating the war. Recently I fired only ten rockets in a certain 22p game, the first one to destroy the airbase of the enemy, the next nine to destroy the armies there, including the grounded airforce. I absolutely love how I obliterated the entire enemy airforce with just a click of a button. However, after the initiation of the war, rockets lose their usefulness as the enemy begins to react and the war becomes mobile. My rockets take a whole two days to travel from my production centers to the front, days that may make or break a war. And probably by the end of those two days, I'd probably either lost or won already.

The point made about rockets consuming lots of oil is quite true. In fact, I would say the sheer amounts of rare ores invested in researching and producing rockets is also quite a lot and fitting for such a weapon. Sure, rockets on paper is actually OP, but on the field it's far from it.

Bundy34 · Mar 4th 2020, 11:41am

Little Racoon wrote:

In my view, rockets can be very good, but I don't use them often. Why?

Rockets are only good in static warfare, and in CoW, nothing is totally static. The pain of transporting them from the production bases to the front is agonizing, and sometimes since you advance too fast, the rockets can't catch up and will basically be useless.

Sure, at the beginning of a war, rockets are in fact OP if you're the one initiating the war. Recently I fired only ten rockets in a certain 22p game, the first one to destroy the airbase of the enemy, the next nine to destroy the armies there, including the grounded airforce. I absolutely love how I obliterated the entire enemy airforce with just a click of a button. However, after the initiation of the war, rockets lose their usefulness as the enemy begins to react and the war becomes mobile. My rockets take a whole two days to travel from my production centers to the front, days that may make or break a war. And probably by the end of those two days, I'd probably either lost or won already.

The point made about rockets consuming lots of oil is quite true. In fact, I would say the sheer amounts of rare ores invested in researching and producing rockets is also quite a lot and fitting for such a weapon. Sure, rockets on paper is actually OP, but on the field it's far from it.

Players that spam Rockets will often bypass the Oil penalty so that update is useless. When they have serious amounts of Rockets they will often store all of their Oil in the market as their personal storage. Then they will have negative oil and it will not effect their army's or Rockets at all. And they can still produce Rockets with zero Oil. Then after they fire all their Rockets then they will start making oil again. Also this thread is made to talk about the serious concern of Rockets in Call of War, not hearing other players opinion if they use the Rockets or not.

Chimere · Mar 4th 2020, 1:27pm

Well, some - if not most - people have no concern with rockets in Call of War. Isn't their opinion valid ?

Bundy34 · Mar 4th 2020, 2:00pm

Chimere wrote:

Well, some - if not most - people have no concern with rockets in Call of War. Isn't their opinion valid ?

Just because people are against the idea of weakening Rockets doesn't mean they have no concern about Rockets. Some of them are Rocket Spammers themselves and talking against an idea that will be better for the game and we are talking about the Serious concern of Rockets not talking about if they use Rockets or not.

Share