Now this doesn't and shouldn't apply to all of us, but a lot of us veteran players have made some major mistakes in games. In a way, we veterans exist to tell new players what we did wrong, and how to overcome those mistakes. I've been playing Call of War for just over 3 years, and in that time, I watched this game change a great deal - and my playstyle with it.
So today, instead of writing a guide for one specific country, here instead is a universal guide for new players, who desperately need at least some semblance of direction. I didn't learn any of this from guides: I learned the old fashioned way, trial and error.
Never, ever underestimate the cost. Especially now, there is no such thing as a "cheap" unit or a throwaway army. Every single unit counts. Every resource is precious. In 1.0, I would struggle to have less than 100k steel on hand in almost any of my games. Now, in 1.5, I can barely keep any of my resources - to include money - above 10k. Your resources will rapidly go down the drain, and you need to understand that early on. Every decision counts. You need to decide right away what kind of strategy you want to take, and build according to that strategy, not somebody else's.
Slow and steady almost always beats blitzkrieg. I say almost, because there's exceptions to every rule. Yes, you may find that sweeping through one's territory and gobbling up resources is satisfying at the very least, but it leaves you very, very exposed. Some units can be conjured up faster than others, but those units may not be enough to curb the oncoming assault of another nation exploiting your vulnerability. If you simply must use lightning warfare, you need to take AND HOLD every single province of that nation in 1 day, 2 at the very most. You can't afford to waste your precious military units. Remember: defending armies always have the advantage.
Diplomacy is crucial. This isn't just a sentiment: it's fact. Like it or not, you are never going to win a game on your own. Yes, you might clutch a "single" victory by dropping out of a coalition, but in larger maps, especially 100 player maps, winning on your own is virtually impossible. Diplomacy, basically, comes in two forms: long term and short term. Short term diplomacy lasts for days, or sometimes even hours. Long term diplomacy lasts the entire game, or rather, as long as you do. Long term diplomacy is debatable, but without short term diplomacy, you are never going to win. Even if you plan to backstab them in the near future, you need allies, especially in the beginning.
Keep tabs on your neighbors. This doesn't even mean setting up a spy network (although you definitely should), it just means watch their movements. If you can, station something to keep an eye on the border. If you see a unit there, you'll be glad you paid attention. Those few extra hours of knowledge can mean the difference between a successful and an unsuccessful invasion.
And finally, if nothing else, please listen to this last tip:
There is no shame in defeat. Yes, I know it sounds like a cat poster, but it's a simple fact too many of us ignore. You are going to lose games. You may even lose a lot of games. Winning isn't important: learning from your defeats very much is. If you can learn something from the defeat, you can improve. Failure is just one step on the path to success. If you start underestimating yourself, you've already lost. It's gimmicky, but "Never give up!"
Thank you for bearing with my ranty nature for a moment. Hopefully at least one of these tips helps you!
Please log in to post a reply.
Blitzkrieg is high risk high reward and only works in two doctrine but rewards are high. if you can pull it of. But high risk Blitzkrieg should probably not be used as your go to strategy. Blitzkrieg should be used against bad players or inactive ones but against a good player it will never work .
Any single unit in the game can be rushed and killed by a stack of 10, defensive bonus or not. But that's besides the point. I can simply counter with the simple question: "Do you know how many players don't leave their enemy on their starting positions?"Hornetkeeper wrote:
Sorry, I will have to say this is nonsense. You're forgetting a factor that every newbie should learn before literally anything else, called numbers advantage (Lanchester's square law for the nerds).As so many people go inactive, even on WaW, I would say your claim here is just completely misleading. You know how many people just leave infantry on their starting positions... That means all the infantry regiments are single.
My claim counts for 99% of the games on COW. Firstly, never underestimate your opponent. Secondly, you are the exception of the exception, a regular COW player can't pull off what you and I can, lets just be honest.Hornetkeeper wrote:
Of course such an example is pretty crazy and we haven't taken RNG into consideration. But it shows how numbers advantage can change the game. We were using an example with twice the defence than attack, which is not even true for infantry.I have conquered a country on day 1 with just 10 units like that. I know those inactive countries are easy and no one finds it fun conquering them, but it's so common to encounter them, so saying that "the attacker will always lose" is almost the opposite of the truth. Sorry, I can't stand random misleading claims
Your example only works when you attack a player that is inactive and hasn't moved his troops, won't come online in the future and who doesn't know how to stack units. There's a lot of unknown quantities just there. It's not that easy for a regular COW player to evaluate if someone is inactive. Hell, even I have been surprised by my wrong judgement.
So maybe let me rephrase: "In a 1 vs 1 with two active players the attacker will ALWAYS lose" Happy now? 
Not only is infantry 50% stronger in defense but the defender also has his core bonus of 15% which means that he takes 15% less damage from the enemy but deals 15% more damage to the enemy. This results in roughly an 80% difference between attacker and defender. I know on which one I'm betting.
My impression is that your experience is rather the exception and it's not able to generalize on the average COW public. 
Exactly what I wanted. Thanks. Happy nowBMfox wrote:
So maybe let me rephrase: "In a 1 vs 1 with two active players the attacker will ALWAYS lose" Happy now?Not only is infantry 50% stronger in defense but the defender also has his core bonus of 15% which means that he takes 15% less damage from the enemy but deals 15% more damage to the enemy. This results in roughly an 80% difference between attacker and defender. I know on which one I'm betting.
My impression is that your experience is rather the exception and it's not able to generalize on the average COW public.
But, I quite often see the day 1 attacker win on WaW maps. I mean less often than not, but still, that they never win would be an exaggeration, is what I meant. Good players often check the stats of their neighbours and scout with planes. That way you can tell pretty accurately. I also sometimes attack on day 1 myself, but yes, I prefer day 2 when I get a few arties... though a day 1 attack has never failed for me. Just know when not to and pick the right target.
There is at least two or even three misunderstood points of view.
There is Strategie of Blitzkrieg, wich mean, depend on playerstyle:
A) Blitzkrieg is same with zerg rush of other rts (real time strategy) games. This point of view of most players, also a wrong one. Because less then 30% players are over average good at CoW.
B) Blitzkrieg mean attack as soon as possible and dont stop warmashine kind of economy. This can be succeful, if your enemies can not use defencive advantages and have less onlinetime. However it end in overmilitarized economy, so you can not research och build something further, so you go to be unfexible against new possible threat. If new threat is experienced prepared player, you gonna be killed, or at least forced to change your warfare style, or forced to go all in and rush core provinces of enemy.
C) Blitzkrieg as simulation of german warfare style of WW2 1939-1941:
victourious one. I dont explain what it mean. Everyone can read how they did, statistical every third player has enough text comprehension skills. (Remember, they was forced to change his warfarestyle too, but elements of this warfare was envolved in modern till novadays warfarestyle.)
D) "locust" warfare: succefull zerg rush taktiks, without losses ressources for economy, but with several diplomatical insurances.
F) Flexible use of all types of this. Use of spoils of war for develope of own economy, not for simple boosting of troops.
If you attacked immedietly, I would simply pull back my troops and form a defensive line. Even worse, I ,might convince your neighbor to attack you at the same .Last Warrior wrote:
There is at least two or even three misunderstood points of view.There is Strategie of Blitzkrieg, wich mean, depend on playerstyle:
A) Blitzkrieg is same with zerg rush of other rts (real time strategy) games. This point of view of most players, also a wrong one. Because less then 30% players are over average good at CoW.
B) Blitzkrieg mean attack as soon as possible and dont stop warmashine kind of economy. This can be succeful, if your enemies can not use defencive advantages and have less onlinetime. However it end in overmilitarized economy, so you can not research och build something further, so you go to be unfexible against new possible threat. If new threat is experienced prepared player, you gonna be killed, or at least forced to change your warfare style, or forced to go all in and rush core provinces of enemy.
C) Blitzkrieg as simulation of german warfare style of WW2 1939-1941:
victourious one. I dont explain what it mean. Everyone can read how they did, statistical every third player has enough text comprehension skills. (Remember, they was forced to change his warfarestyle too, but elements of this warfare was envolved in modern till novadays warfarestyle.)
D) "locust" warfare: succefull zerg rush taktiks, without losses ressources for economy, but with several diplomatical insurances.
F) Flexible use of all types of this. Use of spoils of war for develope of own economy, not for simple boosting of troops.
You can not even use quote right, why do you answer me, i did not asked anything. Learn read and learn use citat if you want comment one of sentence, there is no need quote complete text.vietcong2005 wrote:
If you attacked immedietly, I would simply pull back my troops and form a defensive line. Even worse, I ,might convince your neighbor to attack you at the same .Last Warrior wrote:
And be sure, if I attack you, you get not many chances to pull back and make some firetraps. And those troops wich gonna defend few most important provinces will be not eble defend less important provinces, so you loss several provinces for free. It would be already victory over you in long terms. Why do you think your attacker gonna waste own troops one your strongholds? Grab land for free, pull doubled artillery and destroy strongholds witout single losses.
And who said i use all my troops on same front area?
And most important, who said, iwould prefer rushing over slow domination? But yeah, i know how to use blitz right and victorious.
Sometimes giving up territory is worth it if you win in the end. This player decided to blitz me. I immedietly moved my troops back. I gave up one city to make him feel overconfident. He then ran straight into my 10 unit stack and his army got annihilated. His coalition kicked him and decided to let me join. Your blitz only works on inactive players.Last Warrior wrote:
You can not even use quote right, why do you answer me, i did not asked anything. Learn read and learn use citat if you want comment one of sentence, there is no need quote complete text.vietcong2005 wrote:
If you attacked immedietly, I would simply pull back my troops and form a defensive line. Even worse, I ,might convince your neighbor to attack you at the same .Last Warrior wrote:
And be sure, if I attack you, you get not many chances to pull back and make some firetraps. And those troops wich gonna defend few most important provinces will be not eble defend less important provinces, so you loss several provinces for free. It would be already victory over you in long terms. Why do you think your attacker gonna waste own troops one your strongholds? Grab land for free, pull doubled artillery and destroy strongholds witout single losses.
And who said i use all my troops on same front area?
And most important, who said, iwould prefer rushing over slow domination? But yeah, i know how to use blitz right and victorious.
Again:vietcong2005 wrote:
This player decided to blitz me. I immedietly moved my troops back. I gave up one city to make him feel overconfident. He then ran straight into my 10 unit stack and his army got annihilated. His coalition kicked him and decided to let me join....
read carefull:
Last Warrior wrote:
A) Blitzkrieg is same with zerg rush of other rts (real time strategy) games. This point of view of most players, also a wrong one. Because less then 30% players are over average good at CoW.
And:
It is not MY blitz.vietcong2005 wrote:
Your blitz only works on inactive players.
And no. Right blitz work everytime. Defender must defend more provinces, then atacker can attack with cumulated forces. Active atacker win even active defender. Inaktive un prepared atacker lose even against good prepared inactive defender.
Good defender need to be more active then atacker. Good atacker need to be more prepared then defender. That is all.
I dont write here exact tipps of warfare. But there is more then enough
Reckless attackers are easy to beat. I had 3 active players attacking me. They tried everything and every direction. They even attempted the amphibious operation. They failed when my troops quickly intercepted them. I crushed one nation north of me. Then the after fending off attempts to relive their allies, my troops launched an operation with bombers against them and defeated them easily.
It's simple - like Kenny said - "You've got to know when to hold 'em, Know when to fold 'em, Know when to walk away
And know when to run 
Please log in to post a reply.
