What is the better version of game, 1.5 or 1.0?

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

    • What is the better version of game, 1.5 or 1.0?

      I played 1.5 on 4 speed map. I wanted to see how it looks like, and somehow I am not impressed. I do not know nothing about doctrines, to many buildings, different units and different stats and penalties. I did not have enough time to look at it. But I played it and it looks the same. It also have the same bugs :) For example when you send some units in one direction they go to end of province, come back and then go to direction you wanted them to go...
      I am just curious, what version you like more, new or older one and why?
      "Then, when you run out of ammunition and the enemy continues to advance - to the bayonet, when they break your knife - to your hands, when they break both of your hands - to your teeth, when you get the last tooth knocked out, as long as you move, as long you are there - attack! When they mortally wound you, see to it that you fall in their way, so they have to go around you, jump over you or move you - bother them even in death!" speech of lieutenant Tasic before battle of Cer 1914.

    • Takes time to get used to 1.5 as its a faster pace at the beginning but im tending to enjoy this one more over 1.0 ( Ive been playing since 2016). It takes time to get used to the new mechanics an figure out which doctrine fits you. But Ill admit I enjoy 1.5 more as its less complicated for the new people an it makes you not rely on hoping a cities factory isnt destroyed so you can build units.
      The greatest weakness to a leader is his himself

    • I like the older version better because buildings has more than one purpose and are expencive and take a long time to build which ad a level of strategy to the game. Another reason I like version 1.0 better is you can build buildings anywhere that produce units instead of just in the cities in version 1.5.

    • Lukas the great wrote:

      I like the older version better because buildings has more than one purpose and are expencive and take a long time to build which ad a level of strategy to the game. Another reason I like version 1.0 better is you can build buildings anywhere that produce units instead of just in the cities in version 1.5.
      Ditto! ... :thumbup:

    • Lukas the great wrote:

      I like the older version better because buildings has more than one purpose and are expencive and take a long time to build which ad a level of strategy to the game. Another reason I like version 1.0 better is you can build buildings anywhere that produce units instead of just in the cities in version 1.5.
      I agree with luke with the building part especially when it's moving your capital anywhere else. I do miss having other provinces with 1, 2, 5, 7, 10 and 20 points in other provinces other than the well known cities it makes the game more interesting and challenging instead of just having cities with 10 victory points (20 for the capital). Producing troops take goes from taking a lot of time like 19 hours and reducing the time to make troops when you upgrade them in the 1.0 version. In the 1.5 version i'm not a big fan of it because it goes from taking not too long to taking a long time especially with infantry like upgrading barracks (which i don't remeber was necessary in the 1.0 version) i find it confusing more than i find it easy. The 1.0 version is easy, simple and not too complicated imo i just think that 1.5 is confusing and not that simple.

    • 1.0 was slow but that was my only beef with that game. I.5 is faster and that is the only thing besides the carriers being cut down to their proper vulnerable size that I like about it. Every modern city and even small dirt floor huts in small towns being worth the same is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen, and there are a lot more poorly or seemingly unresearched changes that make an old veteran war gamer like me unwillingly and violently clear my stomach of even the most expensive food. The attempt to make the doctrines add color to the game was a good idea, but only if historically accurate. Japan for example had the worst light tanks and crews IF YOU TAKE THE TIME TO RESEARCH their dreadful war record and extremely POOR PERFORMANCE EVEN SLIGHTLY. BUT they are given bonuses that other countries easily deserve and don't get. The doctrines only forced many people to buy what units were faster to produce, thus limiting their choices and denying some countries what they historically built. Countries that can build battleships faster than other countries can build land units is not only impossible and insulting to intelligent players but makes a mockery of calling this game "historical'' or even believable to older players who were educated before the globalist controlled schools and universities were infiltrated by those working for them to keep the masses as ignorant as possible. Except for Italy, no country did or would have invaded Africa south of the Sahara to seize the villages and towns that had NO strategic importance, NO economic value, and would only drain resources slogging through insanely dangerous jungles ripe with disease. BUT now that they are magically worth 10 points it drives another ridiculous nail in the historical 1.0 coffin. I'm surprised they didn't make a penguin colony in Antarctica worth 10 points, but there is a good chance that those responsible for the worst changes to a game that I and others have ever seen, don't even know it exists. Making strong countries weaker and weak countries stronger, and giving little countries huge armies that they never had slows the game down and frustrates some players with major powers into quiting early which throws the entire game off balance. I could go on and on, but it's quitting time at my job and I gotta get to the beer store before it is reduced to 10 points.

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