New Features in CoW 1.5

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

    • Peter Mat wrote:

      I have not had an issue with the revolts. A pain, sure, but I garrison only those areas that I want to maintain and keep.

      Unit upgrades: I noticed that when I upgrade a damaged unit, the unit morale is unchanged, but I am being charged 1/2 the manpower of the unit. In my opinion, if you are going to charge me the man poser the health should be bumped back up to 100%. If you are only going to give me upgraded equipment with the same men, only the material resources of Goods/Metal/Oil/Rare and Food should be charged. Even an increase of 50% to the unit morale would be acceptable being as I am incurring the manpower cost.
      on the areas that you lose your at war with that country so you will have to go back and take it yet again.
      All and all I think its exciting but losing troops in a rural province just isn't cool or fun and from my prospective unrealistic.

    • SirWayne wrote:

      from my prospective unrealistic.
      Think about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. They were there for a long time and controlled the cities, but lost a lot of troops in the outer provinces.
      The German occupation of Yugoslavia and Greece. Same thing, the partisans cost them a lot of casualties.
      US forces in Vietnam. The bases were fine, The countryside was a whole different matter.

      I think historically they have the revolt aspect in perspective. If you commit the troops, you can control it. Leave it unoccupied and most anything could happen.
      "A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week." - General George S. Patton, Jr.

      "Do, or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

    • Peter Mat wrote:

      SirWayne wrote:

      from my prospective unrealistic.
      Think about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. They were there for a long time and controlled the cities, but lost a lot of troops in the outer provinces.The German occupation of Yugoslavia and Greece. Same thing, the partisans cost them a lot of casualties.
      US forces in Vietnam. The bases were fine, The countryside was a whole different matter.

      I think historically they have the revolt aspect in perspective. If you commit the troops, you can control it. Leave it unoccupied and most anything could happen.
      I did leave a troop it died

    • SirWayne wrote:

      Peter Mat wrote:

      SirWayne wrote:

      from my prospective unrealistic.
      Think about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. They were there for a long time and controlled the cities, but lost a lot of troops in the outer provinces.The German occupation of Yugoslavia and Greece. Same thing, the partisans cost them a lot of casualties.US forces in Vietnam. The bases were fine, The countryside was a whole different matter.

      I think historically they have the revolt aspect in perspective. If you commit the troops, you can control it. Leave it unoccupied and most anything could happen.
      I did leave a troop it died
      Troops might die if it is too weak.

    • cycle9 wrote:

      Armored division being destroyed by rebels armed with sticks and bricks,
      happens all the time in RL!
      I think the Germans lost a bunch of tanks to Molotov cocktails in some of the city fighting that took place in Russia. Though I tend to agree that the number of factors needed to keep the province quiet seems a bit high. I think they are addressing that in the recent update. I will have to reread the notes on that.
      "A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week." - General George S. Patton, Jr.

      "Do, or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

    • Manpower requirements:
      The manpower requirements for various units seems out of proportion. For example a B-17 had a crew of 11 men, a fighter has 1 man, an attack bomber usually a crew of 2. then there is the ground crew. It seems like all units require 1,000 men +/- several hundred. A battleship had several 1,000 men on board, same with an aircraft carrier, while subs and destroyers had crews of less then 100 men.

      Earlier in this thread I mentioned about the manpower requirement to upgrade a unit but not getting a boost in morale of the unit. If we have to pay 50% of a new unit cost to upgrade, we should get a substantial boost in morale on a unit we are upgrading. Or if no morale improvement is going to occur then substantially reduce the manpower cost.

      I think some further balancing needs to be looked at on this subject, if you are looking to have some historical accuracy.
      "A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week." - General George S. Patton, Jr.

      "Do, or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

    • Aircraft units are squadrons, not single planes. The manning requirements include the ordnance and maintenance crews.
      Same with subs and destroyers, a unit is more than one ship.
      It is true that battleships and carriers require FAR more manpower than COW1.5 uses, but it is just a game.
      The much greater problem is that there is only one method of increasing manpower production, and it is very slow, especially in non-urban, resource producing provinces. Presumably, oil production requires manpower, but non-productive provinces have a small excess of manpower?

    • cycle9 wrote:

      Aircraft units are squadrons, not single planes.
      Yes I understand they are squadrons and not single planes. My point was that if a squadron of fighters has the same number of planes as a squadron of B-17's, the B-17 squadron would require 11 times the manpower to crew the planes as the fighter squadron would require. In addition it would likely require a larger ground crew due to the ordinance the bomber carried, 4 times the number of engines to maintain, etc. Therefore, there should be more distinction in the manpower requirements then currently exist.
      "A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week." - General George S. Patton, Jr.

      "Do, or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

    • Peter Mat wrote:

      cycle9 wrote:

      Aircraft units are squadrons, not single planes.
      Yes I understand they are squadrons and not single planes. My point was that if a squadron of fighters has the same number of planes as a squadron of B-17's, the B-17 squadron would require 11 times the manpower to crew the planes as the fighter squadron would require. In addition it would likely require a larger ground crew due to the ordinance the bomber carried, 4 times the number of engines to maintain, etc. Therefore, there should be more distinction in the manpower requirements then currently exist.
      But who says that a bomber squadron and a fighter squadron have the exact same amount of planes?

      Anyway, the manpower costs are not set to be super realistic, they are set for balancing reasons. In the traditional RTS sense they work more like a "population cap" mechanic, which prevents you to spam alot of strong units. So right now in the balancing stronger or more useful units require more manpower, as well as more of the other resources.
      Otherwise, if everyone was low on manpower/resources, those stronger units would be spammed like hell (and on the contrary weaker units would be rarely used) and we don't want that.

      Example: Who would continue to build Strategic Bombers if their manpower costs were 11 times as high as those of fighters? Players consider strategic bombers usually even as worse units than fighters, and nobody wants to pay more for less.

    • I just realized there is another bug in the programming when I was witnessing and then got involved in a dog fight tonight.

      Currently ground units involved in combat can not have their morale boosted with gold. However, what I witnesses is that planes can. The player put 10 TAC bombers on patrol over a stack of 40+ ground units and after each Tic his stack would drop below 90%. Then he would spend 3,000 gold (from what he told me), to get back above 90, and once even reached 100%. I opted to get my AA involved during the battle as they were going to be toast anyway when the land stack (controlled by another player) reached me. My AA was quickly down to 7% and was not involved in the land mele' nearby so I figured what the heck and decided to spend 175 gold to boost them. I received an in game message that units in a combat zone can not have their morale boosted. Seems like in your programming for gold boosts of unit morale you either need to fix it so if a planes combat circle includes an enemy ground unit it can not boost, or just do away with the restrictions on the ground units. As it is currently programmed the situation that occurred this evening was totally unfair. When I left that stack of 40+ was down to 10 units and the 10 TAC were still at 90% morale. This situation is the equivalent of programming a button - "Pay 25,000 gold and evaporate the enemy stack of your choice" I think the player tonight spent around 15,000 to 18,000 on just the plane repair tics I witnessed, while no one on the ground was allowed to.
      "A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week." - General George S. Patton, Jr.

      "Do, or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Peter Mat: clarification ().

    • Peter Mat wrote:

      I just realized there is another bug in the programming when I was witnessing and then got involved in a dog fight tonight.

      Currently ground units involved in combat can not have their morale boosted with gold. However, what I witnesses is that planes can. The player put 10 TAC bombers on patrol over a stack of 40+ ground units and after each Tic his stack would drop below 90%. Then he would spend 3,000 gold (from what he told me), to get back above 90, and once even reached 100%. I opted to get my AA involved during the battle as they were going to be toast anyway when the land stack (controlled by another player) reached me. My AA was quickly down to 7% and was not involved in the land mele' nearby so I figured what the heck and decided to spend 175 gold to boost them. I received an in game message that units in a combat zone can not have their morale boosted. Seems like in your programming for gold boosts of unit morale you either need to fix it so if a planes combat circle includes an enemy ground unit it can not boost, or just do away with the restrictions on the ground units. As it is currently programmed the situation that occurred this evening was totally unfair. When I left that stack of 40+ was down to 10 units and the 10 TAC were still at 90% morale. This situation is the equivalent of programming a button - "Pay 25,000 gold and evaporate the enemy stack of your choice" I think the player tonight spent around 15,000 to 18,000 on just the plane repair tics I witnessed, while no one on the ground was allowed to.
      Thanks for the report. I tried to reproduce this, but was not able to. I let a tactical bomber patrol over a lone ground unit. Both units damaged eachother, both units could be healed while the patrol was still ongoing.

      Only ground troops which are locked in close bombat can't be healed. I assume that your anti air was somehow locked in battle with another unit nearby. Or there was another reason for such a bug that we don't know about, but in that case I would need more info how to reproduce it. It does not seem to be a general problem at least.

    • freezy wrote:

      Only ground troops which are locked in close bombat can't be healed.
      A very true statement for ground/naval units locked in closed combat ... A practice that I have seen used by many is to send units that need healing to guard a key city or province for 2-3 days- where they can heal if undisturbed ... 8)

    • freezy wrote:

      Only ground troops which are locked in close bombat can't be healed. I assume that your anti air was somehow locked in battle with another unit nearby. Or there was another reason for such a bug that we don't know about, but in that case I would need more info how to reproduce it. It does not seem to be a general problem at least.
      In my instance there was a ground combat going on between two players just off the city center dot. My AA was on hte dot and not involved in that battle. The TAC were overhead doing their combat patrol. The game gave me a message that my unit was to close to a combat zone to be healed.
      "A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week." - General George S. Patton, Jr.

      "Do, or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

    • Vichy wrote:

      what about the AI ?
      They look stupid. Early game, they are building roads in their only city, and industrial complex on random province. It's a little sad i think. Easy early game, why not, but they are defenseless now. I'm currently desesperatly trying to save them.
      Where the elite AI are tough is where a player developed the nation and then leaves. I actually watched a player be eliminated by the AI on the 22 player map in this situation, though he was very likely low level and not versed in the combat system.
      "A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week." - General George S. Patton, Jr.

      "Do, or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

    • Peter Mat wrote:

      Vichy wrote:

      what about the AI ?
      They look stupid. Early game, they are building roads in their only city, and industrial complex on random province. It's a little sad i think. Easy early game, why not, but they are defenseless now. I'm currently desesperatly trying to save them.
      Where the elite AI are tough is where a player developed the nation and then leaves. I actually watched a player be eliminated by the AI on the 22 player map in this situation, though he was very likely low level and not versed in the combat system.
      yes, but it's a pity that the regular ai are so stupid. It's not even easy mode, it's far worse.

    • Vichy wrote:

      Peter Mat wrote:

      Vichy wrote:

      what about the AI ?
      They look stupid. Early game, they are building roads in their only city, and industrial complex on random province. It's a little sad i think. Easy early game, why not, but they are defenseless now. I'm currently desesperatly trying to save them.
      Where the elite AI are tough is where a player developed the nation and then leaves. I actually watched a player be eliminated by the AI on the 22 player map in this situation, though he was very likely low level and not versed in the combat system.
      yes, but it's a pity that the regular ai are so stupid. It's not even easy mode, it's far worse.
      Yeah in 1.5 they don't even do anything.

    • Peter Mat wrote:

      freezy wrote:

      Only ground troops which are locked in close bombat can't be healed. I assume that your anti air was somehow locked in battle with another unit nearby. Or there was another reason for such a bug that we don't know about, but in that case I would need more info how to reproduce it. It does not seem to be a general problem at least.
      In my instance there was a ground combat going on between two players just off the city center dot. My AA was on hte dot and not involved in that battle. The TAC were overhead doing their combat patrol. The game gave me a message that my unit was to close to a combat zone to be healed.
      Then it was due to the combat of the other ground troops near your anti air, and not due to the patroling planes.

      RiverWolf74 wrote:

      Vichy wrote:

      Peter Mat wrote:

      Vichy wrote:

      what about the AI ?
      They look stupid. Early game, they are building roads in their only city, and industrial complex on random province. It's a little sad i think. Easy early game, why not, but they are defenseless now. I'm currently desesperatly trying to save them.
      Where the elite AI are tough is where a player developed the nation and then leaves. I actually watched a player be eliminated by the AI on the 22 player map in this situation, though he was very likely low level and not versed in the combat system.
      yes, but it's a pity that the regular ai are so stupid. It's not even easy mode, it's far worse.
      Yeah in 1.5 they don't even do anything.
      They do stuff but it takes time. AI does not start to do anything until day 3, except when attacked earlier. So yeah they become more dangerous the longer the game goes on or if they take over an inactive player.

    • freezy wrote:

      Peter Mat wrote:

      freezy wrote:

      Only ground troops which are locked in close bombat can't be healed. I assume that your anti air was somehow locked in battle with another unit nearby. Or there was another reason for such a bug that we don't know about, but in that case I would need more info how to reproduce it. It does not seem to be a general problem at least.
      In my instance there was a ground combat going on between two players just off the city center dot. My AA was on hte dot and not involved in that battle. The TAC were overhead doing their combat patrol. The game gave me a message that my unit was to close to a combat zone to be healed.
      Then it was due to the combat of the other ground troops near your anti air, and not due to the patroling planes.

      RiverWolf74 wrote:

      Vichy wrote:

      Peter Mat wrote:

      Vichy wrote:

      what about the AI ?
      They look stupid. Early game, they are building roads in their only city, and industrial complex on random province. It's a little sad i think. Easy early game, why not, but they are defenseless now. I'm currently desesperatly trying to save them.
      Where the elite AI are tough is where a player developed the nation and then leaves. I actually watched a player be eliminated by the AI on the 22 player map in this situation, though he was very likely low level and not versed in the combat system.
      yes, but it's a pity that the regular ai are so stupid. It's not even easy mode, it's far worse.
      Yeah in 1.5 they don't even do anything.
      They do stuff but it takes time. AI does not start to do anything until day 3, except when attacked earlier. So yeah they become more dangerous the longer the game goes on or if they take over an inactive player.
      Yeah but the AI isn't very smart, for instance it builds naval bases but doesn't even produce any navy and builds infastructure and other buildings randomly, and doesn't produce many units.