If you could change ONE thing what would it be?

The glow around borders that insinuates you can see what is there, when you cannot. Yeah, that's been like that for a while

Gameplay-influencing "innovations" should be pre-tested and announced ..

Nuclear bombers. Why would you go through the trouble of researching strategic bombers AND nuclear bombers when rockets (nuclear or otherwise) are just as good if not better?

king meatster wrote:

Why would you go through the trouble of researching strategic bombers AND nuclear bombers when rockets (nuclear or otherwise) are just as good if not better?

That said, some players believe that nuclear bombers offer an additional measure of flexibility over rockets. Bombers have the same range as rockets, but they can be re-targeted in flight, and they can take advantage of your string of air bases and those of your allies (and countries with whom you have a right of way) to effectively extend their range.

Since the question isn't qualified, limiting it to the coding of the game, the one thing I would change is the, apparently, default "solo-player mindset" among most players. I know it's not me (I bathe, brush my teeth, use Google Translate when needed, etc.) but players don't seem to have much of a social expectation to their gaming.

I approach CoW under the same assumptions and expectations, of myself, as I would during in-person gaming. Every once in a while I find myself in a CoW game in which there are one or two players with a similar attitude and it really accentuates what CoW can offer.

The best CoW games have enough active, communicative players, that understand and follow a modicum of practical diplomacy and comaraderie, that win or lose one can have a really good time.

Fix Day End

Fix this. click on the sentence about

I'm afraid I have to agree with Clanpred: fix day change. It's really a stupid thing to ask, and I really think this should have been solved long ago; in fact I know there are special-interest games (e.g. German CoW Liga) that have a different day change so it isn't even a technical issue, but an administrative one.

The game is simply giving all Euro players a huge disadvantage to Americans, and even bigger to Far East.

FIX THIS.

limit coalitions. im tired of seeing giant coalitions that dont work together, cant win without breaking the coalition, and have the power to demoralize other players from a distance just by declaring war. my suggestion would be to limit coalitions to 3 on 25 and lower maps, 4 on 50 player, and 5 on 100 player/ then allow a coalition victory, similar to team game victory. one of my 100 games rn has a coalition of over 20 players.

Stormbringer50 wrote:

[M]y suggestion would be to limit coalitions to 3 on 25 and lower maps, 4 on 50 player, and 5 on 100 player/ then allow a coalition victory, similar to team game victory.

This suggested change is RIPE for action.

Stormbringer50 wrote:

limit coalitions. im tired of seeing giant coalitions that dont work together, cant win without breaking the coalition, and have the power to demoralize other players from a distance just by declaring war. my suggestion would be to limit coalitions to 3 on 25 and lower maps, 4 on 50 player, and 5 on 100 player/ then allow a coalition victory, similar to team game victory. one of my 100 games rn has a coalition of over 20 players.

idk the exact right answer, except that an alliance all joining could still not make a coalition within game higher than the total number of members allowed. also, the coalition win wouldnt apply, just like if individual players decide to share map it wouldnt apply