Problems/critisisms with game

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

    • Problems/critisisms with game

      Hi,

      OK i have been playing this game now for almost a month, and i love it.. however there are a few issues i have, which i believe should be looked into. These have probably been mentioned before, but i will list them again.. my grievences so to speak.

      1. Lock downs.. I find it a bit unrealistic when tanks (weighing 2-5 tonnes each) get blocked by 1 man, i have a group of 20+ tanks heading somewhere to stop an army, and they get stopped because of 1 man, The same at the moment with planes. I have 10 planes flying to a location in order to deal with bombers, when they hit an ally runway, there is an enemy man their, they are now locked in combat.. Their planes, they fly, men don't fly.. This should be looked into.. maybe more damage as they run, whilst in the territory, but they should not be locked by a much smaller unit. you could base this on total unit strength.. my 20 tanks have a unit strength of almost 80 points, one man has 1.5 or so..

      2. i have noticed, that when i have a unit in a fight, against another unit, it runs once per hour.. the units fight.. however, if i now add in a second unit, that's two units against one, the one unit gets 2 lots of attack per hour.. as it fights back. This means that my second units and first units are both suffering losses. at the same level.. rather than only one or both sharing the damage.. For example. unit one fights on the hour, defender defends both units take damage.. Then at 20 past the hour the second unit attacks.. again the one unit returns fire, and both units loose damage, This is an unfair advantage on the aggressor or the one with more unit groups.. meaning that the one unit is getting two attacks per hour.

      Suggestions..

      Surrender, An option should be available to allow a player to surrender to another player.. This would automatically transfer all land, all vehicles and army over to the new player. But can only be accomplished, if said player has been in war, and has lost over 75% of his land to the attacking player. and both players must be on different IP addresses..

      Oil reserves etc.. i don;t know if there are any penalties if you run out of oil.. IE units movement..but i would suggest if you run out of oil (i have in one game) all oil requiring troops stop moving completely. and only move when oil is available.. you can still use items such as men and militia, but vehicles would be stopped. They can still fight if need be but cannot move until they have oil. this would signify the lack of fuel.

      just some comments and ideas..

      cheers
      keith
    • hi,

      yes i am aware that just because their is a pic of one man, it can mean many, but in these two scenarios, it was 1 unit, in the plane one, it was 1 militia.. in the other Tanks one it was 1 of the other type. no tanks, no nothing just 1 unit..
    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      This one man stand up show is actually 1,000 men in a dug in position with AT and artillery support.
      If you click on a single infantry units it clearly states its a regiment. But I do question why a single tank is considered a brigade. A brigade would mean that it has at least 3 regiments, guess it doesn't really matter though.

      I like the surrender option. it would great for those time consuming Pacific ocean campaigns. I don't know about you but having to island hop for a week straight just to finish off the AI once the player went inactive is a pain.

      as far as splitting units goes, that is a actual mechanic within the game. It's meant to work that way.

      Not a big fan of units not working without oil though. near the end of a match you're almost always going to be out of oil unless you went HAM on the infrastructure in the beginning.
    • krappleby wrote:

      hi,

      yes i am aware that just because their is a pic of one man, it can mean many, but in these two scenarios, it was 1 unit, in the plane one, it was 1 militia.. in the other Tanks one it was 1 of the other type. no tanks, no nothing just 1 unit..
      BUT! they can have AT (Bazookas yes I know I said it I do not know much of Anti-Tank launchers in WW2) Or they can have their rifles and Squad Automatic Weapons and many other weapons infantry use.
      "ANU! CHEEKI BREEKI IV DAMKE!"
    • JCS Darragh wrote:

      Or they can have their rifles and Squad Automatic Weapons and many other weapons infantry use.
      You know that small arms only give tankers a headache and annoy them, right?

      MihailMD wrote:

      20 tanks have the same attacking potential as around 8-9 tanks. SBDE.
      Potential? Yes. Strength? No, 20 tanks are way better than 9. Unless, of course, they are Italian.
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: