Transport research and boarding speed

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

    • Coastal defenses that are powerful enough to stop capital ships were extremely rare, because they were prohibitively expensive. In game terms, this would be like max level bunkers/fortifications, RRG's, and AA batteries all along the coast, with fully developed infrastructure to mimic good communication channels and resupply/reinforcement corridors. You are free to build that, if you want. It will cost you quite a bit, but it's a bit quicker than building a navy, because there's less research involved.

      But, I really don't want to see more types of structures, especially defensive ones. Noobs and AI countries already waste all their resources building that junk. It doesn't stop anyone because you just go around them, and they don't know how to build stacks effective in attack OR defense. More structures would just make the game slower, and less challenging at the same time. Get rid of propaganda and defensive structures, if you want to help even out the game and make it more fun. Every penny NOT wasted on structures could go into units, produce more action, and make wins more challenging.

    • Coastal artillery defenses were usually effective deterrents against bombarding warships; for example, the Royal Navy didn't even try to bombard cities like Bremen or Hamburg even though naval superiority of the North Sea was quickly established. The one operation where a naval force engaged coastal artillery ended in a stunning defeat of a modern cruiser against a 40-year old Norwegian battery:

      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dr%C3%B8bak_Sound

      Admirals learned their lessons from it and naval bombard support was only used later on in the Italian invasions and in Normandy, where overwhelming force was applied (and the defenders focused their return fire on the landing troops, not on the supporting ships).

      So basically these coastal defenses would certainly not be "extremely rare", but rather a standard defense for port cities, to protect their economical value quite effectively.

      In game terms, I do agree with your opinion that noobs shouldn't be encouraged to build "junk". The amount of cities I have conquered where infrastructure had been built (which is usually useless due to the small size of cities) is countless. I don't agree that coastal defenses could be emulated by forts, RRG's and artillery though; I think a small, specialized unit to protect a city from industry bombardment (as opposed to troop bombarding) could have a place in the game. Sailing capital ships to distant cities just to bombard their industry and buildings into oblivion simply never happened.
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.

    • K.Rokossovski wrote:

      Coastal artillery defenses were usually effective deterrents against bombarding warships; for example, the Royal Navy didn't even try to bombard cities like Bremen or Hamburg even though naval superiority of the North Sea was quickly established.

      This is what I mean by "extremely rare". Defenses were built in strategically important cities. These defenses have in-game equivalents: max bunkers plus a stack of RRG. Also note that these cities could not be invaded by sea because they were too easily reinforced and fortified. The defenses were built to keep away capital ships, not to prevent landings.


      K.Rokossovski wrote:

      Sailing capital ships to distant cities just to bombard their industry and buildings into oblivion simply never happened.

      Correct, but for a different reason. The game doesn't have a resupply component. Navies and armies and air forces can go anywhere in the world, stay there indefinitely, and expend ammunition and fuel and food 24/7 without consequence. In the real world, ships have limited fuel and ammunition. They don't use it all up trying to level a hillside. Using up supplies like that would be too expensive, and it would leave them defenseless. Navies had to worry about going back to base, and they had to worry about defending those bases, and escorting the supply ships delivering supplies to those bases. The game doesn't have any of this. My ships can just go and blow stuff up. To fix that, the game needs the concept of range, and supply, and lines of communication and supply, and a lot of other things. Without that, yes ships and planes will run around blowing stuff up in a completely OP way.

    • z00mz00m wrote:

      Coastal defenses that are powerful enough to stop capital ships were extremely rare, because they were prohibitively expensive. In game terms, this would be like max level bunkers/fortifications, RRG's, and AA batteries all along the coast, with fully developed infrastructure to mimic good communication channels and resupply/reinforcement corridors. You are free to build that, if you want. It will cost you quite a bit, but it's a bit quicker than building a navy, because there's less research involved.

      But, I really don't want to see more types of structures, especially defensive ones. Noobs and AI countries already waste all their resources building that junk. It doesn't stop anyone because you just go around them, and they don't know how to build stacks effective in attack OR defense. More structures would just make the game slower, and less challenging at the same time. Get rid of propaganda and defensive structures, if you want to help even out the game and make it more fun. Every penny NOT wasted on structures could go into units, produce more action, and make wins more challenging.
      I do not agree that bunkers/fortifications are noob structures. for a relatively low cost and quite some time you can make your troops much more effective at a certain location, and you dont need be staying put, it can be a fall back position too. I sometimes use them, more often not because it may indeed take speed out of the game, but if I dont ally with my neighbour and i do not want to expand into his territory it may be an option to construct

    • They're good building when there's a plan behind them; zoom is talking about all those cases where there isn't.
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.

    • Exactly. How often do you take a province from someone with no army, and them building fortifications, or a propaganda center? Or you take a city that has barracks, ordnance, and a tank factory? This is why they have no army. All their resources are wasted on junk structures.

    • 6thDragon wrote:

      I like the idea of having embark/disembark times reduced for higher levels of research. However, my preference would be to introduce Marines as a new unit with one of that unit's unique abilities being reduced embark/disembark times.
      I would like to point out how he predicted this

      ( @Carking the 6th )
      "I have not failed, i have just found 10,000 ways that wont work." - Thomas Edison

      Need Support? Send a Ticket here! - Support Form.
      Forum Rules - Forum Rules.
      Chat Rules - Chat Rules.

    • Fox-Company wrote:

      6thDragon wrote:

      I like the idea of having embark/disembark times reduced for higher levels of research. However, my preference would be to introduce Marines as a new unit with one of that unit's unique abilities being reduced embark/disembark times.
      I would like to point out how he predicted this
      ( @Carking the 6th )
      Hm?

      CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate

    • Carking the 6th wrote:

      Fox-Company wrote:

      6thDragon wrote:

      I like the idea of having embark/disembark times reduced for higher levels of research. However, my preference would be to introduce Marines as a new unit with one of that unit's unique abilities being reduced embark/disembark times.
      I would like to point out how he predicted this( @Carking the 6th )
      Hm?
      Freezy had a remark about Marines and this man predicted it a year ago
      "I have not failed, i have just found 10,000 ways that wont work." - Thomas Edison

      Need Support? Send a Ticket here! - Support Form.
      Forum Rules - Forum Rules.
      Chat Rules - Chat Rules.

    • Well it’s been in other places as well, recent and some older posts I’ve stumbled upon. I remember even seeing this idea mentioned on global. It’s been a pretty popular one, so that’s probably what led to them adding it to the list.

      CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate

    • Fox-Company wrote:

      6thDragon wrote:

      I like the idea of having embark/disembark times reduced for higher levels of research. However, my preference would be to introduce Marines as a new unit with one of that unit's unique abilities being reduced embark/disembark times.
      I would like to point out how he predicted this
      ( @Carking the 6th )
      I wouldn't say I predicted it, but I suggested it about two years ago: New Unit Suggestion - Suggestions / Criticism - Call of War- Forum

      But in fairness, I'm certainly not the first. Here is another one: New Unit: Marines - Suggestions / Criticism - Call of War- Forum

      The post was edited 1 time, last by 6thDragon ().

    • z00mz00m wrote:

      Small feature request to make transport research more interesting and impactful.
      Please cut the time it takes units to embark/disembark for higher transport levels.

      Also please consider the embark/disembark time for provinces that change possession.
      Meaning, if a unit takes 3 hours to board, and the province changes hands, the boarding time should increase.
      Similarly in the other direction, if the disembarking player gains control of the province.
      Right now, the timer only considers ownership at the time the operation starts.
      Great idea!