rebellion all over the world

@ freezy and VorlonFCW - "So a player that plans ahead for morale management and expands slower may have an upper hand in the long run compared to a fast expander who doesn’t plan ahead."

So I did both slow and fast approach in my last global game. I was Argentina in a global 1939 game. Had 50 units parked in the Congo, for 30 days(gee that sure is some fun game playing there). I ripped through Japan and its holding all of China. 30+ provinces flipped to AI neighbors in a nonsense random pattern as I wiped out Japan. So exactly how many years do you estimate it would take to play a global game at the slow pace?

Why not try and at least reduce the HUGE negative for distance to the capitol since it really has NO realistic basis in the game. Instead, let players "hire" or "pay" insurgents to disrupt neighbors land. It could even be a simple "invisible" high level of militia that gets sent in that can only be seen by other militia.

BTW, my "fast" play shooter style ended with me winning in 50 days (not exactly a short game), but I asked the others to retire instead of dragging out was had become a boring battle with AI units that kept getting in the way of me invading and wiping out the other 2 remaining players in Europe. This is my main complaint about this poorly designed feature that you appear to love and will speciously defend to the end. Why not make a CoW-39 game where this single factor is lessened or eliminated and then see what the response is from players?

TheMaquis wrote:

freezy wrote:

As stated earlier, when no counter measures are taken it is intended that 24% of newly conquered provinces rebell to other countries. This was intended since the inception of CoW. No issue here and no change needed.

So some questions to you Game Designers-1. Do you think it is fun for your customers that play the game to have to park 50 units on the Congo for 30 days to suppress any revolts? And this is at the same time that Spain is taking provinces in revolts all around the Congo that use to belong to France then taken by Brazil? Point is, chaos reigns all around, and a customer like me had to either park units for 30 days, use steel to build defense buildings (which I did not have), or let any newly captured land flip to Spain. So do you think parking units if fun for your customers?????

2. Do you think it is fun for your customers to fight AI units over living people?

3. Do you think it is fun for your customers to suddenly be at war with yet another AI country they had no intention of fighting because a province recently taken flips while your units are cutting through to get to a new front and causes an unintended war with more AI. Of course the new front in my recent game was me heading to invade a living person, and I was forced to fight more AI units instead.

4. Is it fun for your customers to endlessly fight IA units (most games the majority of players quit)? In these fights it is very boring because the AI really are not that intelligent. When 24% of newly taken land flips on fast players invading the stupid AI units, my units can get surrounded by AI land that I am at peace with, so these units (some of which I used gold and thus paid for) are now useless unless I go to war with yet another AI country. (you should at least allow 24-48 hours to exit units over riot flipped land).

5. When fighting all of these AI controlled countries, neutral AI can often get 20-30 riot flipped provinces on one turn that surround one AI controlled enemy province I am at war with, thus making it impossible for me to eliminate them from the map unless I fight yet another AI country. Do you think it is a good thing that the intended game design forces your paying customers to spend more time fighting AI controlled countries rather than allowing them to go after living players?

6. So much of your other game design is based on making the game realistic. So where do you think this gigantic riot caused random flipping of land fits in to the realism the game designers emphasize in CoW? Can you name 1 or 2 examples that had the riots that flip a division of infantry or tanks? Perhaps the best reference is Haiti's Revolt in 1791, but none in WW2. So what historical reference is the part of the game design made?

7. You can just admit that this is a designer device that tries to extort more gold (money) from your customers. I for one will tell you I will NEVER use gold to increase morale, or to buy materials to allow me to build fortifications to increase morale. I use gold to speed production of buildings, units, and to buy materials at the start of the game to get factories built as soon as possible. Morale is too big and pervasive issue to have any money be spent on it.

8. My last global game I was one of 3 players left, I was the clear winner, and due to the random flips I asked to see if the other 2 players would want to retire - thus no more on gold was spent by anyone. It was your intentional game design for excessive riot caused flips that caused this customer to want to stop playing. Too random, too many, too boring to fight AI constantly when living players are there to attack.

if you are too arrogant to reconsider a major change, at least lower the flip frequency by lowering the -39 for distance to capitol. Increase it for negative food production. And give me an explanation as to why the distance to the capitol should figure so prominently in this game design that otherwise strives for realism and historical accuracy.

Regards!

once I had a rebel in a province which had around 50% morale

GeneralAumSum wrote:

once I had a rebel in a province which had around 50% morale

yep, all global games need to rethink this feature and scale it back - especially the -39 you get for distance to the capitol. The Europe of North American focused Maps are manageable. The nature of the global games makes this poorly thought out purposely designed and maintained flaw no fun to play. Too bad, I loved the scale and complexity of the global maps. You never know who could show up on your shore to invade you. And planning the invasion of others is so much fun. But uncontrolled AI issues are just no fun.

I was USSR in HWW and I was attacking india. Delhi had 56% morale I captured it but then out of nowhere a rebel came

then after even when all the provinces I captured had 50% morale they all rebelled and it took ages to take over india

One thing with morale with regards to 1.5 is the infrastucture.

Because it no longer directly aids in the in resouce production ,players with be less inclined to build it.

Not doing so will reduce your global morale meaning these newly captured provinces will not raise in

morale quickly, giving a longer window for them to revolt.

MadMike69 wrote:

One thing with morale with regards to 1.5 is the infrastucture.

Because it no longer directly aids in the in resouce production ,players with be less inclined to build it.

Not doing so will reduce your global morale meaning these newly captured provinces will not raise in

morale quickly, giving a longer window for them to revolt.

In my game I conquered Borneo and there is constantly rebellions there for a few days now. WHAT SHOULD I DO! I could only spare 10 units and placed the, around Borneo but wherever I don’t place them there is a reblllion...

RiverWolf74 wrote:

In my game I conquered Borneo and there is constantly rebellions there for a few days now. WHAT SHOULD I DO! I could only spare 10 units and placed the, around Borneo but wherever I don’t place them there is a reblllion...

Ok I will just try to spam infrastructure then.

make sure u have 900k cash because that should be enough to spam Infrastructure and still save some money

and now I'm a sergeant major of CoW XD

I mean command sergeant major XD XD XD

GeneralAumSum wrote:

I mean command sergeant major XD XD XD

MadMike69 wrote:

One thing with morale with regards to 1.5 is the infrastucture.

Because it no longer directly aids in the in resouce production ,players with be less inclined to build it.

Not doing so will reduce your global morale meaning these newly captured provinces will not raise in

morale quickly, giving a longer window for them to revolt.

I just noticed that in 1.5, the maximum distance penalty has been increased from -39 to -60.

Please look at the image (I apologize for the fact that it is in Spanish), and see how from Australia to North India, on the map of 100 cow 1.5, the moral penalty reaches the maximum penalty at -60.

Developers, put yourself in the boots of the players for a minute and tell me, with a 42% chance of rebellion, what the hell could I do with this to not lose everything conquered?

Literally they are telling me with this that I can no longer continue playing since everything I conquered will rebel in 1 or 2 days. On a map as big as 100, no matter where I led my troops, I will lose all the far regions anyway.

Would I have to invest stupid amounts of resources to create infrastructure in each of the regions that I take?

Honestly ... unplayable.

YitanTribal wrote:

I'll show u something which might make u want to reconsider getting commandos in 1-5