Important Realistic Features That Needed!

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

    • Important Realistic Features That Needed!

      Which idea do you guys like the most? 15
      1.  
        Encirclements (cause encircled troops to do half as much damage) (4) 27%
      2.  
        Capitulation/Becoming a Puppet State (2) 13%
      3.  
        More Than One Province Selection (for trading) (2) 13%
      4.  
        Private 100 player World At War (for people who have High in Command and ability to create private lobbies) (1) 7%
      5.  
        Focus Trees (alter countries characteristics) (1) 7%
      6.  
        Lend Lease/Donation of Troops to another nation (1) 7%
      7.  
        Seasons (ex. Winter, summer - cause buff/de-buff on troops or slowness) (1) 7%
      8.  
        Ability to Choose New Leaders/Change Country Name (1) 7%
      9.  
        River Line (Natural Defence) (1) 7%
      10.  
        War Declaration - (sound effect/icon to notify all nations in game) (1) 7%
      11.  
        A Speedy Gamemode - 25x Faster (0) 0%
      12.  
        Ability To Control Allied/Coalition Troops (0) 0%
      To the developers of Bytro Labs,

      My friends and I have been playing your game “Call Of War” browser addition. Moreover, in our experience, we enjoy this game as it includes many realistic aspects. Additionally, my brother and I have been sharing this game to people around our school (particularly people who like history) and they have come to like it as well. Not to mention, this game has become so popular that our Socials teacher was interested in using it as an “accurate World War simulation.” In other words, this game has intrigued and interested many.

      Along with this, we are asking for some of these additions to the game that we (and possibly other Call of War players) may enjoy. Keep in mind, these are for you to consider; thus, you do not need to add them if you do not want to, but please do as it will improve the great game!




      1. River Lines


      In the Call Of War browser addition, terrain is a huge realistic aspect to the game. In addition, some terrain that provides realistic fighting is Mountains, Forests, Flatlands, and more. Subsequently, we believe that adding riverlines would enhance the fighting experience in the game. Furthermore, it would allow us to further depend on infantry rather than developing a fully mechanized army (allows the game to become more diverse). Also, the addition of riverlines would allow countries (who are about to collapse) to have a higher chance of survival. For example, this can include countries like France, Poland, or the USSR.


      2. Capitulation or become a Puppet State

      Call of War currently has five diplomatic relations with nations in the game; moreover, Shared Intelligence, Shared Map, Right-of-way, Peace, and Ceasefire are the relations. Consequently, adding the ability to accept capitulation and become a puppet state of another nation (for example France becoming a puppet state of Germany) could allow people to gain more military strength without fighting till the last man. Not to mention, allowing another nation to become a puppet state could allow friends (in the same game) to exist under a new regime/rule. In the end, this could further legitimize historical relations into the game and allow another nation to control another person’s army.


      3. Encirclements

      Encirclements are one of the most important strategies in a real war as they prevent an enemy from receiving supplies. Additionally, my friends were wondering if it would be possible to add a feature where encircled troops were to only do half as much damage as they originally could do. This way, players could strategically encircle troops (or siege troops inside cities) and defeat nations in a more strategic way, rather than simply having more troops than the invaded country. Players can also re-live certain battles like Tobruk, Stalingrad, and more that involve en-circling.


      4. Ability to Choose New Leaders/Change Country Name

      In the game Supremacy 1914, players have the ability to change their leaders picture and name. Additionally, I believe that adding this to Call Of War can allow more historical aspects to the game. Also, I believe that having the ability to change a name of a nation (for example changing Italy to the “Roman Empire”) could allow more variety and fun.


      5. Formal War Declaration - (sound effect/icon)

      Along with this, It would be great if you could add another sound effect to the game. Moreover, when a country formally/surprisingly declares war, a personal message with a bell noise could allow people to become notified with the sound. Additionally, adding this would allow people to experience a surprising, difficult, scary, and dire situation. Also, it could further add more realistic telegram aspects to the game. In other words, adding a pop-up sign stating what country declared war on another nation could notify many other players (not only one).


      6. Seasons

      Adding seasons to this game would further enhance the fighting simulation. In other words, adding seasons like winter, summer, and more could allow bonuses and decreases to player troops. For example, fighting in the winter could cause the troops to do 50% less damage (as it is cold). In the end, this could allow countries that are militarily challenged to have some chance at winning against a coalition; not to mention, it could allow countries to predict when an attack would occur - as attacks in the summer are more common than winter offensives.


      7. More Than One Province Selection

      After a huge war, post-war borders with my friends/coalition members becomes a hassle. Moreover, trading one province per day takes a while for one country to obtain their desired land after a huge war. Furthermore, we ask you to please add an ability to change many borders at once (or to add the ability to trade many provinces in a day). Also, please consider this for private lobbies where players who are playing are trusted/familiar with each other (they won’t abuse this power onto their friends).


      8. Private 100 player World At War

      My friends and I have gotten High in Command in order to make private lobbies for ourselves; however, there seems to be no 100 player World At War - there only is European Theatre types. In addition, even though European Theatre is amusing, we ask of you to add this addition as it has a lot of potential - for example, my social class as a whole could join one big lobby to replay a global world war. In the end, please consider this!


      9. A Game mode that is 25x Faster

      Correspondingly, adding another gamemode that is very quick could allow people to play short games that require awareness, flexibility, and agility. Not to mention, Call of War has had fast game mode in the past; in addition, adding another faster edition would be funner. Likewise, historical fast one-hour games could be fun.


      10. Lend Lease/ Donating Troops

      When a country is in a dire situation, it would be great if other countries could trade/sell tanks to them. Moreover, these actions (of selling vehicles) did happen in WWII - when the U.S lend leased the U.S.S.R. Furthermore, adding the ability to sell tanks could allow countries to boom/become economically stronger. Also, it could allow countries who are outnumbered to have a chance. Most importantly, it could allow a nation to help another nation without directly being involved in the conflict.


      11. Ability To Control Allied/Coalition Troops

      If an ally of one lived in a different time zone or could not coordinate properly, it would be cool if coalition members could control each other's units. However, to control each other's units, the country (who is allowing their troops to be controlled) would have to accept a relation/trade deal signifying that an allied nation could control their troops when they are offline.


      12. Focus Trees

      Adding focus trees to this game could prompt altered futures for each nations. Moreover, focus trees could allow a country to become more prosperous, militarily stronger, or weaker. In other words, focus trees engrave a path for a country to follow; the path the nation leader wants to follow will alter history and allow more variety in a Call of War match/lobby. Possibly, focus trees could allow nations to alter their doctrines or more.
    • 1. River lines would be possible to inplement in game, even tho that would cause disbalans in most of the rounds, myb only to add it in Historical World War round.

      2.Not at all. That will cause alot of complications,after all it is goal to colect as many wictory points as you can, not to share them. Only if you will controle that "puppit state" and not other players buth still it will be hell.

      3. Not needed, this is somewhat simple game and not HOI4

      4.Yes

      5.You have newspaper for that.

      6.Myb

      7.Yes buth only non core.

      8.No. If you have list of players, you can request in suport for any map. To give any more options to HC will have bad effect on public ranking rounds.

      9.It is allways nice to see new and different rounds soo why not.

      10.To complex for this game, you can asist your allies with your army anyways dont know why to complicate things.

      11.Pleas keep in mind that this is CoW and not HOI4...
      Фарис Синановић, Суна
    • Suna232 wrote:

      1. River lines would be possible to inplement in game, even tho that would cause disbalans in most of the rounds, myb only to add it in Historical World War round.

      2.Not at all. That will cause alot of complications,after all it is goal to colect as many wictory points as you can, not to share them. Only if you will controle that "puppit state" and not other players buth still it will be hell.

      3. Not needed, this is somewhat simple game and not HOI4

      4.Yes

      5.You have newspaper for that.

      6.Myb

      7.Yes buth only non core.

      8.No. If you have list of players, you can request in suport for any map. To give any more options to HC will have bad effect on public ranking rounds.

      9.It is allways nice to see new and different rounds soo why not.

      10.To complex for this game, you can asist your allies with your army anyways dont know why to complicate things.

      11.Pleas keep in mind that this is CoW and not HOI4...

      Well Hoi4 or not encirclement was crucial to World War II in many different ways. It allowed the Germans to rapidly defeat enemies even at a disadvantage in numbers and equipment. Encirclements were the centerpiece of blitzkrieg. For example, the battle of France was won because of encirclements. The reason operation Barbarossa was so successful was the fact many Soviet troops were encircled and taken prisoner. Imagine during the the battle of Kiev the 600,000 Soviet soldiers still fought on. Germans would literally have to divert all their forces to subdue the encirclement, which would have taken up a lot of time. Also, it can actually be useful against gold users and give the regular players a fighting chance. Yes it should be a simple game. That is why I am not suggesting the more complex features in Hoi4. This is relatively simple and basic in my opinion.
    • vietcong2005

      I definitely agree with your statement.

      Encirclements are basically sensible man-oeuvres that anyone would take advantage of when commanding an army. In my opinion, they are simple, beneficial, and not to hard to figure out.

      Like what you said, encirclements do not apply to Hoi4 - the concept of cutting of an army from supply and trapping them could be implemented in a historical game like this.

      Adding, making encirclement factors possible (such as malnutrition and less damage) could add more realism to Call of War.

      In other words, I agree with you vietcong2005.
    • TSRTS wrote:

      Also, the addition of riverlines would allow countries (who are about to collapse) to have a higher chance of survival. For example, this can include countries like France, Poland, or the USSR.
      I agree, we could make mechanized units have less health when passing a riverline and if engaging in a fight, close combat units would deal far less damage as they are fighting over one strategic point, unable to distribute weapons in a way every one can impact. This would be a great strategic addition to the game.

      TSRTS wrote:

      Call of War currently has five diplomatic relations with nations in the game; moreover, Shared Intelligence, Shared Map, Right-of-way, Peace, and Ceasefire are the relations. Consequently, adding the ability to accept capitulation and become a puppet state of another nation (for example France becoming a puppet state of Germany) could allow people to gain more military strength without fighting till the last man. Not to mention, allowing another nation to become a puppet state could allow friends (in the same game) to exist under a new regime/rule. In the end, this could further legitimize historical relations into the game and allow another nation to control another person’s army.
      It sounds interesting, but most players play a lot of games and don't like defeat, so they will rather quit the game than admit it and become a puppet state. An even worse problem with this is expansion. If there was no non-core province penalty, expansion penalty, low morale and such things, the first nation to expand the most would inevitably win. Those features stabilize the game and force you into strategic thinking as expansion is a risky investment that only sometimes pays off. For example, if you expand you lose army and then own more territory, so it's tempting for others to attack and gain territory with less fighting. You then have to deal with this diplomatically or by using a good defence strategy.

      The puppet state option would make expansion rather an one-sided advantage and contribute to the elimination of certain strategies in the game.


      TSRTS wrote:

      Encirclements are one of the most important strategies in a real war as they prevent an enemy from receiving supplies. Additionally, my friends were wondering if it would be possible to add a feature where encircled troops were to only do half as much damage as they originally could do.
      There are many ways of fighting effectively and so the battle is definitely not just about who has a stronger army in the start, you can really gain a lot with a good strategy. However, I fully agree that this should be implemented. Encircled armies should not defend against each attacking army individually as that makes the attacker receive X times more damage, where X is the number of sides he's attacking from. I would make an army lose 15% health per hour if all the pathes to it are blocked with enemy units, and would add an opition to air supply at a certain cost, if I wanted it realistic.

      TSRTS wrote:

      In the game Supremacy 1914, players have the ability to change their leaders picture and name. Additionally, I believe that adding this to Call Of War can allow more historical aspects to the game. Also, I believe that having the ability to change a name of a nation (for example changing Italy to the “Roman Empire”) could allow more variety and fun.
      Agreed.


      TSRTS wrote:

      5. Formal War Declaration - (sound effect/icon)

      Along with this, It would be great if you could add another sound effect to the game. Moreover, when a country formally/surprisingly declares war, a personal message with a bell noise could allow people to become notified with the sound.
      It already works a similar way, I don't think a sound would add all that much to it. Interesting idea though.

      TSRTS wrote:

      6. Seasons

      Adding seasons to this game would further enhance the fighting simulation. In other words, adding seasons like winter, summer, and more could allow bonuses and decreases to player troops. For example, fighting in the winter could cause the troops to do 50% less damage (as it is cold). In the end, this could allow countries that are militarily challenged to have some chance at winning against a coalition; not to mention, it could allow countries to predict when an attack would occur - as attacks in the summer are more common than winter offensives.
      Nice one. I think that to make it more realistic, there should be a penalty for attacking in winter. This could be done as that: the further an army is from an own or ally 50+% morale city, the less damage it does. This would reflect the supply problems, which make fast offensives difficult and risky, and support slower advancing in winter.

      TSRTS wrote:

      7. More Than One Province Trade
      This allows players to trade a lot of land to one country, making that country gain an advantage. It supports players in intentionally joining a game just to get a player to solo victory, which is not allowed. Nice suggestion like all of the previous, but would only allow it in unranked games.

      TSRTS wrote:

      8. Private 100 player World At War
      Yes, an unranked one would be very nice, but I would suggest they also require a bit of money from the creator, aside of what they pay for HC. This would help the game evolve and maybe make direct gold purchases a less important source than it is now.

      TSRTS wrote:

      10. Lend Lease/ Donating Troops

      When a country is in a dire situation, it would be great if other countries could trade/sell tanks to them. Moreover, these actions (of selling vehicles) did happen in WWII - when the U.S lend leased the U.S.S.R. Furthermore, adding the ability to sell tanks could allow countries to boom/become economically stronger. Also, it could allow countries who are outnumbered to have a chance. Most importantly, it could allow a nation to help another nation without directly being involved in the conflict.
      The problem with this is the same again. This actually was possible in the past. Imagine how much advantage this would give to well-cooperating teams. They could just trade all important armies to whatever player is currently online and fight 24/7 like that. Even though it would probably be limited, I don't think we need to buff the alliances playing in regular games any more, they win too often already.
      This applies to suggestion 11 as that's the same basically.


      TSRTS wrote:

      12. Focus Trees

      Adding focus trees to this game could prompt altered futures for each nations. Moreover, focus trees could allow a country to become more prosperous, militarily stronger, or weaker. In other words, focus trees engrave a path for a country to follow; the path the nation leader wants to follow will alter history and allow more variety in a Call of War match/lobby. Possibly, focus trees could allow nations to alter their doctrines or more.

      Nice idea, could make the game more complicated and make nerds more overpowered :D

      I would say, to all of your ideas. They are very nice but they make the game more complicated and patience-requiring, most players quit because they can't understand the game or aren't patient enough, this would deepen the problem.

      Your ideas could get an amazing use, though. I think HC players should be able to create rounds with all those enabled, but would have to pay real money. Such games would be really enjoyable, especially with active players (and they would be if they paid so much for it). However, I am not sure if this isn't too complicated and time-consuming to implement, we'd have to ask @freezy on that.

      I know it's annoying to pay, but it helps the game, as it mostly relies on gold purchases those days, making it impossible to "escape" from p2w. Such new features could shift the focus to a healthy and passionate player community which could really improve CoW a lot.
      "In CoW, don't stamp on things before looking. Rakes are everywhere!"

      "Don't underestimate noobs; if they don't know what they're doing, how can you?"

      Hornetkeeper
    • TSRTS wrote:

      Change Country Name
      Hey what about players could have a "respect standing" on the accounts where if they have a high enough ranking they can change names. Points could be gained by going a while without being reported and lost through bad behaviour.
      Forum Rank list here

      Make sure to read and like this thread->The new Roman Empire

      Murica Oh yea!

      Vive le Empire!!!!!

      |RBoi200 likes this
    • WIsh I had a large enough group for friends to play private games lol. We used to before you needed High Command to make games. Anyways, if you ever need an extra player here's my discord Rain#5438. Or just contact me through the CoW message system I guess.
      “A man cries not because he is weak, but because he has been strong for too long.” - Itachi Uchiha
    • Love the seasons idea, had it in mind previously...
      About Encirclements: I love it, and I usually play with that in mind... The problem is that this would require changing the paths of the provinces, allowing to have more than one path to communicate between provinces (as encirclement breakthrough's don't always go straightforward to the enemy forces...). And some maps would be impossible to win such as Antartica, or mid game Historical map (after all, supply lines when conquering the USA would prove impossible to conquer any country bigger than Brazil).
    • Ability to change flag and name: Already exists! Be sure to check out the new beta client.

      Ability to create 100p maps: Not gonna happen, at least for a long time...sorry. You actually were able to do so in the past, but it lead to a bunch of empty 100p maps, putting unneeded strain on the servers.

      Ability to trade multiple provinces: Also not going to happen unfortunately. It would promote multi accounting and account pushing, which is the reason that the restriction is in place.

      Ability to trade troop: Once again, this feature existed in the past, but was removed due to abuse.

      Ability to control other players’ troops: Basically the same as the previous point.

      Those are the ones that most likely are not going to happen. The others might, depending on how feasible they are and how much it would add to the game.
      DoctorDR1

      Game Operator
      EN Community Support | Bytro Labs Gmbh


      Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket


      "Commander Cody, the time has come. Execute Order 66." -Sheev Palpatine
    • DoctorDR1 wrote:

      Ability to change flag and name: Already exists! Be sure to check out the new beta client.

      Ability to create 100p maps: Not gonna happen, at least for a long time...sorry. You actually were able to do so in the past, but it lead to a bunch of empty 100p maps, putting unneeded strain on the servers.

      Ability to trade multiple provinces: Also not going to happen unfortunately. It would promote multi accounting and account pushing, which is the reason that the restriction is in place.

      Ability to trade troop: Once again, this feature existed in the past, but was removed due to abuse.

      Ability to control other players’ troops: Basically the same as the previous point.

      Those are the ones that most likely are not going to happen. The others might, depending on how feasible they are and how much it would add to the game.
      how do i get into the beta client
    • DoctorDR1 wrote:

      Ability to change flag and name: Already exists! Be sure to check out the new beta client.

      Ability to create 100p maps: Not gonna happen, at least for a long time...sorry. You actually were able to do so in the past, but it lead to a bunch of empty 100p maps, putting unneeded strain on the servers.

      Ability to trade multiple provinces: Also not going to happen unfortunately. It would promote multi accounting and account pushing, which is the reason that the restriction is in place.

      Ability to trade troop: Once again, this feature existed in the past, but was removed due to abuse.

      Ability to control other players’ troops: Basically the same as the previous point.

      Those are the ones that most likely are not going to happen. The others might, depending on how feasible they are and how much it would add to the game.
      oh nevermind, i knew you could change it your status, not name though