CoW 1.5 balancing changelog June 2020

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

  • The manpower requirements being out of proportion to real life are due to game balance. I asked similar in a different thread. if they were IRL proportions some units would likely never be built.
    "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
  • EZ Dolittle wrote:

    BALANCES DESTROYERS VS SUBS

    In the new balances the destroyers equal the subs in their match up so the
    Destroyers are say 5.9 vs subs and the subs are 5.9 vs surfaces/

    This is not a good match up, at the least the Destroyers should be 20% higher against the subs. When you are equal it does nothing to counter the spawning of mass amounts of subs since the sub stealth is so much work more than the destroyers and the costs for the destroyers is more.

    I therefore appeal for a change to increase destroyers vs subs by 20 to 33% over the base of the subs. Subs should not want to think that they are a 50 50 chance vs a destroyer.
    Not needed, with the game update tomorrow, that introduces some stealth/scout changes, we will shift the balance between subs and destroyers anyway. Destroyers will become the go-to weapon to fight subs. See beta forums changelog or the balancing update changelog that will be posted tomorrow.

    EZ Dolittle wrote:

    Economic balance in new players.. change needed

    Comparing the new player economy in the Beta tests what you see is a 50% increase in the month production of the new players. Now while it is a good idea to give new players a boost, you should do so in such a manner that does not make them more of a target for the Veteran players.

    When you boost their provinces base production it makes them a real ripe fruit for picking.

    Instead I would suggest that you either
    a. increase the stockpiles
    or
    b. increase by a lot the rewards for doing things like building troops and facilities.
    Unrelated to CoW1.5, as the same bonus exists in CoW1.0. We know it creates some issues and it was discussed last week with the team (I posted this already somwhere here), but a if we change it, it will be later and not now.


    EZ Dolittle wrote:

    They could then reduce the Destroyer and Sub by 25 % and the cruiser by 10% and achieve a better balance
    I don't think that there is any imbalance between aircraft carriers and subs/destroyers. From a logical viewpoint it makes sense to have a wider cost gap between them, but from a game balance perspective (which takes priority here) it is not needed and would rather be counter productive, since subs/destroyers are already spammed alot on sea while aircraft carriers are built very seldomly.
  • Since you are overhauling I really wish you would consider a game option to pay gold up front to have a no gold game. I ran into a player yesterday who claimed to have 2.5 million in gold. Sorry I can not compete with that. So if on a 100 player map you charged 10,000 gold per player to have a no gold game you would sell 1,000,000 in gold for entry fees. I guess the question is what is your average gold expenditure per 100 player game to determine if 10,000 is the right amount to charge.

    Throw in the number of players who quit when they get fed up with pay to win, I think you would be money ahead in the long run. Better player retention with consistent cash flow per game. I would not think it would be that hard to hide the gold button if that game type were being played.
    "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: typo correction ().

  • Just wanted to say that OMG the new army stat info thingy is amazing. I am a player who normally has to manually calculate this stuff so having it so easy to look at is great. The way it is set out is really easy to use and I really really love how it calculates the damage potential the stack will do not simply if I have 3 lvl 1 AC I will do 9 UA damage even if im at 50% condition.

    The only thing I would want to add is an HP total. Each unit you can select to see how much HP it has. But just a totalled up HP of the army stack would be a nice to have - either just ground HP or even better HP as ground unit, convoy, plane (if applicable), would just really complete it - unless that is there and im blind :/ Currently it is great so if not done its still damn amazing, imo this would just make it even better :D.

    Edit:
    Additionally, yes i'm quite hard to fully please :D . If there was the possibility to make a separation between ranged damage potential and melee potential would be awesome. I would assume that might be more difficult than an HP section, but that isn't really something I need to worry about when I give feedback :P
    Torpedo28000
    Main Administrator
    EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Torpedo28000 ().

  • Torpedo28000 wrote:

    Just wanted to say that OMG the new army stat info thingy is amazing. I am a player who normally has to manually calculate this stuff so having it so easy to look at is great. The way it is set out is really easy to use and I really really love how it calculates the damage potential the stack will do not simply if I have 3 lvl 1 AC I will do 9 UA damage even if im at 50% condition.

    The only thing I would want to add is an HP total. Each unit you can select to see how much HP it has. But just a totalled up HP of the army stack would be a nice to have - either just ground HP or even better HP as ground unit, convoy, plane (if applicable), would just really complete it - unless that is there and im blind :/ Currently it is great so if not done its still damn amazing, imo this would just make it even better :D.

    Edit:
    Additionally, yes i'm quite hard to fully please :D . If there was the possibility to make a separation between ranged damage potential and melee potential would be awesome. I would assume that might be more difficult than an HP section, but that isn't really something I need to worry about when I give feedback :P
    Glad you like it!

    We will rework the army bar in general in one of the next updates, make it a bit nicer looking and adding more infos, and showing the total hitpoint amount for the whole army is a part of that :)

    Showing a separate ranged damage potential is sadly a bit too much for now, would not really fit into the popup anymore as we are using the same popup on mobile where we have limited space, that's also the reason why we round the numbers and not show decimals in the table. Hope you can live with that. Well as a workaround you can get your ranged values though by using the split command to split up all your ranged troops and then clicking on the army info. After you finished checking, merge them back into the stack.
  • Suggestions from a BETA Game

    1. RESEARCH TREE INFO
    The research tree does not show you what the hit points are for the unit you are researching.

    I understand that it varies based on your theme of Axis-Allied etc but it still would be nice to have that info when you are doing something as opposed to having already built it and then click on the icon of the unit (as opposed to the "i" of the stack.

    2. THEMES
    Comicon is too weak compared to the other two. Maybe dropping manpower costs another 20% Would help. Also making infantry faster to make.

    3. SUBS VS GROUND UNITS THAT ARE NOT COVOYS
    Seems odd to have ground units engage subs. Even artillery.

    4. RAILGUNS
    Railguns are still too fast and too powerful. Why not at least restrict them to level 2 infrastructure roads

    5. CAPITAL PLACEMENT
    Capitals should only be built in urban centers. When moved should be declared Capital in Exile and not provide bonus below.

    6. Capital Value
    Capitals provide no real advantage other than morale. Suggest a 20% increase in all $$$ and production .


    7. Morale/Revolts
    Morale is still a huge issue late in the game. For a successful (expanding) player, there are only 2 ways to manage rebellions:
    a) Steadily take capitols, but there are a very limited number on this map.
    b) Post units in all newly captured territories, and keep them there. This has become necessary because the DC morale boost is insufficient to outweigh the expansion and distance penalties. This makes the game very tedious.
  • From another player in a watched beta game.

    The new army bar:
    1) is missing the timestamp for intel ghosts. This is vital to know how fresh/reliable an enemy position is.
    2) is missing the ability to dynamically see what the travel time would be for possible target destinations. We now need to use trial and error. Especially annoying when you want to advance arty just enough to time it with the 30-minute cool down.
  • EZ Dolittle wrote:

    Suggestions from a BETA Game

    1. RESEARCH TREE INFO
    The research tree does not show you what the hit points are for the unit you are researching.

    I understand that it varies based on your theme of Axis-Allied etc but it still would be nice to have that info when you are doing something as opposed to having already built it and then click on the icon of the unit (as opposed to the "i" of the stack.

    2. THEMES
    Comicon is too weak compared to the other two. Maybe dropping manpower costs another 20% Would help. Also making infantry faster to make.

    3. SUBS VS GROUND UNITS THAT ARE NOT COVOYS
    Seems odd to have ground units engage subs. Even artillery.

    4. RAILGUNS
    Railguns are still too fast and too powerful. Why not at least restrict them to level 2 infrastructure roads

    5. CAPITAL PLACEMENT
    Capitals should only be built in urban centers. When moved should be declared Capital in Exile and not provide bonus below.

    6. Capital Value
    Capitals provide no real advantage other than morale. Suggest a 20% increase in all $$$ and production .


    7. Morale/Revolts
    Morale is still a huge issue late in the game. For a successful (expanding) player, there are only 2 ways to manage rebellions:
    a) Steadily take capitols, but there are a very limited number on this map.
    b) Post units in all newly captured territories, and keep them there. This has become necessary because the DC morale boost is insufficient to outweigh the expansion and distance penalties. This makes the game very tedious.
    1. You can see the HP of the unit by clicking on the unit info inside the research tree, same as with all the other unit stats. Would feel weird to make an exception and display HP there but not other unit values.

    2. There are certainly varying opinions on the topic which Doctrine is best and which is worst, usually I read quite opposing opinions on this matter. Since we recently made an adjustment to Doctrine balance already I would refrain from doing more at the moment, unless a majority of players comes forth and says the same thing. In our winning stats for Doctrines it also doesn't look like Comintern being weaker.

    3. That's sadly how the engine works and is a necessity to prevent nearly endless combat. It is also fair since land units can attack sea units. It is also not unrealistic that a naval vessel can be attacked or that a naval vessel can attack land units if it is stationed directly at the coast (basically implying it is in harbor)

    4. We nerfed them a bit in the last update. Not sure if you were playing a game that has this update applied already (only new game rounds after update get such changes). We plan to make some more adjustments to Railroad Guns in the next update, but restricting it to certain Infrastructure levels is not one of them (and we don't plan to do so).

    5. Capitals can already be built only in urban centers. Removing the capital bonus when a capital is moved is too harsh.

    6. True, they don't provide an additional value to the province they are in. We can give them a morale boost to the province, like in the old version.

    7. I would argue that the bonus from building Infrastructure is enough to prevent revolts in provinces without garrisons. You may not reach morale high morale levels, but high enough that it is above the revolt threshold. In the next update we plan to implement an own dedicated building for improving morale, maybe this helps with managing revolts.

    EZ Dolittle wrote:

    From another player in a watched beta game.

    The new army bar:
    1) is missing the timestamp for intel ghosts. This is vital to know how fresh/reliable an enemy position is.
    2) is missing the ability to dynamically see what the travel time would be for possible target destinations. We now need to use trial and error. Especially annoying when you want to advance arty just enough to time it with the 30-minute cool down.
    1) probably an oversight, will at least bring it up internally
    2) is going to be fixed


    Moderation: This thread is about balancing changes made in June. We already had newer balancing changes in July and August. This thread is therefore outdated and could be misleading. I will close it now because of this reason. If you want to comment on the current status quo of 1.5 balancing, please use the most recent news threads. And if you want to comment about beta games in particular, please use the beta sub-forum.