I have three suggestions.
1. Fix the problem with half of the players going inactive on day 3
When I played Supremacy 1914 years ago, I believe you could enter games beyond day 1 in the stead of players that had gone inactive. Whether this is a false memory or not, I think this should be possible.
Also, players should get a score penalty or something (e.g. reduction of 10 levels) if they go inactive in a game without good reason (not losing any war for example).
2. A cool feature would be the ability to make complex trade offers, i.e. trade packages (offer multiple things and/or demand multiple things in one deal), especially when going from War to Ceasefire or Peace. In real life we see that with the capitulation of a nation, territories are returned, reparations are paid, etc.
This also leads us to the nonsense of limiting the number of provinces that can be traded. This is very annoying and unrealistic, for example when a coalition reconquers one member's core provinces, these are now "occupied" and producing at 25%, and redistribution of provinces is difficult (you would have to start a war for it with your team mates).
I gather that this limit is there against cheating. This is not very effective. If I had two accounts and wanted to cheat, I would not be deterred by this limit. It goes without saying that I can invade one country with my two accounts at the same time, or have one invade the other without posing any resistance. The reality is, that if you can't identify two accounts being led by the same player, you can't avoid cheating in this game. And why would you cheat anyways, it ruins all the fun. If really fishy things are going on between one or more nations, they should be reported and some admin or other would have to take a look at what happened and whether there's probably cheating involved.
3. Create games that require a certain number or percentage of solo and/or coalition victories to enter. Call of War is such a well-engineered game, but much of the fun is ruined because you're constantly fighting noobs and players that go inactive without reason.
I repeat, this is such a well thought-out game but the inability to avoid playing among noobs (even in Historic World War, where minimum level is 17 -- that's not that high and easily attained if you play a few games at the same time) or being in a map of all AI's really ruins it.
1. Fix the problem with half of the players going inactive on day 3
When I played Supremacy 1914 years ago, I believe you could enter games beyond day 1 in the stead of players that had gone inactive. Whether this is a false memory or not, I think this should be possible.
Also, players should get a score penalty or something (e.g. reduction of 10 levels) if they go inactive in a game without good reason (not losing any war for example).
2. A cool feature would be the ability to make complex trade offers, i.e. trade packages (offer multiple things and/or demand multiple things in one deal), especially when going from War to Ceasefire or Peace. In real life we see that with the capitulation of a nation, territories are returned, reparations are paid, etc.
This also leads us to the nonsense of limiting the number of provinces that can be traded. This is very annoying and unrealistic, for example when a coalition reconquers one member's core provinces, these are now "occupied" and producing at 25%, and redistribution of provinces is difficult (you would have to start a war for it with your team mates).
I gather that this limit is there against cheating. This is not very effective. If I had two accounts and wanted to cheat, I would not be deterred by this limit. It goes without saying that I can invade one country with my two accounts at the same time, or have one invade the other without posing any resistance. The reality is, that if you can't identify two accounts being led by the same player, you can't avoid cheating in this game. And why would you cheat anyways, it ruins all the fun. If really fishy things are going on between one or more nations, they should be reported and some admin or other would have to take a look at what happened and whether there's probably cheating involved.
3. Create games that require a certain number or percentage of solo and/or coalition victories to enter. Call of War is such a well-engineered game, but much of the fun is ruined because you're constantly fighting noobs and players that go inactive without reason.
I repeat, this is such a well thought-out game but the inability to avoid playing among noobs (even in Historic World War, where minimum level is 17 -- that's not that high and easily attained if you play a few games at the same time) or being in a map of all AI's really ruins it.
