I am about to break a decade-ish long embargo. I am about to make a suggestion, and not just one...
This relates tangentially to 1.5, as Bytro wants to make a big change to CoW... the change as proposed is, let us say, not generally receiving favorable reviews. SO, why not make the right changes instead?!?!
Let's start with the economy;
Instead of whatever you have you call a "market", which is representing a commodities market - make it a real commodities market;
All resources are listed as a single value, and at a single price which is controlled by supply and demand
x amount available to sell at y price... more x, less y, less x more y
to sell place your order - you get paid current y price (immediately) per unit minus a minimal per unit fee
to buy place your order - receive commodity at current y price per unit
Resources;
Resources have these functions; Civilian upkeep, military upkeep, market sale value, stockpiling
All functionally the same as now (1.4)
Resources are produced by territories, but the territories should reflect their RL capabilities;
This may require more terrain types (which, if they are not tactically significant need not be related to the players),
examples plains would produce food or oil
mountains can produce metals or rares
urban areas produce goods (only)
deserts might produce oil
etc.
there should be no territory that is useless to capture, unless it would be useless in RL and each territory should have a population score that can change over time (a function of morale perhaps) which give you manpower
If you want new building types then make them economic buildings, or better then buildings add an economic research category; things like improved agriculture, improved electronics, etc. that add to your economic production capabilities. These should not be inexpensive researches.
The resources themselves;
Food - all edibles, self-explanatory
Goods - Manufactured goods, not raw materials
Manpower - A percentage of the population able to be recruited for military use. Incremented by population and what has already been recruited, NOT by the system that currently increases it like any other resource (Though a slight increase might result for birth rate, this should be quite low). In fact, it could be taken right out of the resource line up and set someplace more practical.
Metals - all metals, including aluminum (which is a metal and is most definitely not "rare")
Oils - all fuel types, could in fact be called fuels instead
Rares - Minerals (like Uranium), Metals (like Gold or Platinum)
Money - Not in itself a resource, but a prime mover as the only medium in which the "governments" should really function... resources (in RL) are worthless unless someone will pay for them. Money (and the ability to pay for what it buys) should be what concerns players the most (economically).
Money;
Money should be raised through; taxes, market trading, international trading to facilitate these;
Players should be able to set tax rates which effect morale; x tax is standard - plus x tax, lower morale - less x tax, higher morale. Taxes to high = rebellion. Taxes, of course, being based on population. Money, like Manpower, should NOT accumulate from any other method - but only through taxes and effort.
Market trade has already been described
International Trade - Players should be free to make trade deals with other players (yes, I know, but the cheaters) as a form of diplomacy or even extortion. (The cheaters should be handled through back end processes and report forms... not by limiting player interactions(!)) To make international trade a more profitable prospect a messenger trade option - Trade Deal - should be made available, which assigns an exchange of resources at regular intervals (day change?). Trade deals should be unilaterally terminable, and must require an exchange of resources by both parties (with limiters to keep one party from exchanging all daily production for the second parties single unit(!))
(It may even be warranted to consider a "financial market" that provides loans - at cost, but that could be a bridge to far.)
Money is the prime mover from here on out -
Military Build up;
Military unit should have building and upkeep costs, but they should not be resource hogs as much as investments (that is how real governments see and deal with them)
Costs:
Infantry related units; Manpower+Money to recruit - food+money to maintain
Guns, Tanks, Planes; Manpower+Metals+money to build - Fuels+money to maintain
Ships; (more) manpower+metals+money to build - (more) fuels+money to maintain (there are reasons only a handful of nations have large navies, there are reasons why German-British naval competitive building matter before WWI - they require a lot to build and maintain)
Nuclear weapons; Rares+money to build, fuel+money to maintain
Why so cheap? Not really cheap, Above I describe that neither manpower nor money should be auto-generating. They may increase through effort, but if no effort is put forward then they are limited resources. And the reasoning is that governments do not keep large stockpiles of resources laying around to manufacture military needs - they spend large sums of money to get someone else to get the resources to build those needs. The resources for building and upkeep represent the resources the government needs to acquire directly.
Military statistics;
All military types should have base values derived from RL representative examples. Those values should only increase slightly through research (we are dealing with a period of @6 years here, not decades of research and development)
Unit types;
Not much to change here, make them more representative of RL roles (I can play rock-paper-scissors anytime, i don't need to be online to do it(!)). And get rid of the nuclear missiles, no nation was anywhere near the development of them, I know it's cool and all to blow up an enemy that has no defense to your attack, but it is totally out of place.
Building types;
Return all standard CoW (1.4) building to there former status. Give the military production buildings (Industry, Barracks, Airports, Ports) a war-time production option. Wartime production taxes morale and any population increases, but increases available manpower.
Research;
As stated smaller increase for research (a man is just a man, even if you give them a better gun(!))
Add economic research options to improve resource production.
Research should only cost money (the government is not doing the research, they are paying others to do it, cost should REFLECT the money required for the researchers to get he resources - not be the resources themselves.)
Diplomacy;
War - A diplomatic state of being at war, declared wars should not reflect in international morale, undeclared wars should have a price internationally.
Embargo Blockade - Embargoes under the system here described would be useless (because they rely on whatever the market is supposed to be in 1.4) and the last attempt to introduce blockading resulted in no one being able to ship anywhere without getting into war with every AI, so have a specific (player only) diplomatic option to blockade specific countries.
Peace - The default
Right of way - the default
Share map Allied - same benefits as if you were in a coalition (which are the same benefits as share map(!)), without the special message channel.
Conquered Territories;
Resource production controlled by morale (which is controlled by taxation, etc.). Once, and if, they reach (90-100%) morale they become core provinces (with all the same benefits). But, until they reach (50%) morale their population does not count toward manpower.
Allies;
Defending an allies provinces gives you that provinces defense/attack advantages as if your troops were that allies.
Reconquering an allies provinces returns that province to your ally, not to you, so long as that ally is in play (has at least one other province).
Someone is going to hit me with the "these changes will be difficult in the code" myth. Listen, I know why you do it - either you your code is to buggy to remain stable, your trying to impress me with difficulty of your work, or you simply don't want to do it. All that is fine, but experience tells me that none of this is out of reach. You want a game that is profitable and popular, the players want a game that reflects a realistic representation of it's theme... these are win-win changes (IMHO). BUT...
There is one last piece to this puzzle...
IF and WHEN these changes are implemented and perfected... HANDS-OFF. I know, developers hate that more then sand in their boots, but, developers also have this tendency to fiddle with things that are great - until they break (I.E. 1.5(!)). So, you do it, and then back off to see what happens as a result.
(And, as I expect, per usual, I am about to be blasted by the "team" for having the audacity to mention a suggestion - Embargo On (until further notice).)
