The Issue With Unbalanced Games

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

    • The Issue With Unbalanced Games

      As many of you I'm sure are aware this game has a major issue with unbalanced games. You can be playing as a tiny country at the beginning and in the span of a week take over multiple other countries, only to be wiped out by somebody who got lucky with a much bigger country at the beginning. This is a big turn off from the game for many people and discourages people to try their best. Even with more game knowledge and tactics you can easily be wiped out my sheer force from somebody 20x as big as you. I say this from experience as both the agresser and defender. This needs to be fixed so that larger countries can not pick on smaller ones at the beginning.
    • Most games nations start very balanced out, if they do have a size difference it doesn't change much game-play wise, that being said some maps are not meant to be balanced. These maps are the maps with the word "Historical" this means the map makes nations with roughly historical tech, land and challenges they had during WW2.

      For later into games the unbalance has nothing to do with the map or Devs but how fast each players takes land and how well those players managed their units.
      Dante Bugler1
      Game Operator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh
    • My point is that unless you get a big country starting out, there is no point to playing these games as you will almost definitely loose. They need to give the underdogs a chance or put a handicap on big countries. For example in a game I played last week The USA teamed up with Russia, England, and Japan. These were the four biggest countries if you disclude Germany Spain and France. Almost out the gate these guys had enough points to win and nobody could stand up to them.

      Edit: That's not historically acurate if you ask me
    • I think you're talking about last week's event, right? Actually these games are fun to play, I think, especially with a small nation. I played Oman in one, conquering Saudi, Iraq, Egypt, Turkey, before being wiped out by a French-Yugoslavian army I couldn't hope to match; still I had a lot of fun playing! And lets be honest, how much chance does Oman have to rule the world? :)
      When the enemy is driven back, we have failed. When he is cut off, encircled and dispersed, we have succeeded. - Aleksandr Suvorov.

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

    • K.Rokossovski wrote:

      how much chance does Oman have to rule the world?
      These historical maps offer every opportunity to rule the world if your diplomacy skills are up to the task. ;)

      Nova wrote:

      unless you get a big country starting out, there is no point to playing these games
      There are plenty of maps that offer equal opportunities to all players at the start. Those maps marked historical such as the 25 player world and the 73 player all in event are not intended to be fair, balanced, or easy.
      War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill

      Main Administrator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh

      >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
    • Yeah I sure had fun playing, but my point is eventually you may get wiped out completely without a chance, and barely anybody would willingly team with a small country. It would be interesting to see if they could make it so certain countries cannot ally with other certain countries, or always have some countries against eachother no matter what. Although off topic that would be a cool idea for a gamemode