Rocket expense

Uh. What

I do agree that’s it’s absurd for rockets to eat up ur rare materials

But I don’t understand ur guard unit

godofthegame2 wrote:

Uh. What

I do agree that’s it’s absurd for rockets to eat up ur rare materials

But I don’t understand ur guard unit

Here is a way to understand the guard unit.

Please refer to upload JPEG image, regards.

Facilities of importance did have guards.. lots of them... So instead of costly rockets.. Make guards for cities and they can cover the civilian grounds and their buildings.

Not too sure on that

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Current settings for rocket production and upkeep DO SEEM costly and I might like to add, that these changes are not only imbalanced, it is that they are borderline useless in strategy, particularly early - mid game.

The cost of the rocket can seem satisfactory at first, this option can be a real food saver.

The upkeep is not according to game consumption. During WW2 a rocket will not need the amount of manpower to build, especially at later stages.

The rare materials upkeep is not right.. once a rocket is built its ready to go... why on earth upkeep to the rare...for testing? How... A rocket explodes!!

BTW: For those curious gamers.. rare metals/materials WILL BE.. Chromium, Uranium, and Gold

Fuel consumption is also noted... However it is understood that guards will burn this resource. I just think its a little high.. Such facilities are not exactly built on unsafe grounds, and also that the construction of the facility must surely account that there is security procedure for that construction.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

GUARD;

Requirements; Infantry lvl. I & militia lvl. I, must have 2 spies on counter espionage

Strength at 2.0 capacity (fixed)

Can only be stationed in cities

Decreased morale loss to the city stationed

% increase to counter spies/espionage

Only defends

The reason I empasize such a unit is that this can make the rocket production more likely to WW2 era strategy, with the need to guard such facility and such the game will have more adequate costing to rocket output..

The cons of this may be that rockets will be flying off everywhere... but fun too.

To counter this I will mention the potential of espionage gaming in COW and how much this needs work here is a much under estimated gameplay and players mostly ignore its full potential, regardless of coining superiority.

For example... more spies should be applicable as strategy options, especially at mid to late game... and less nuclear capacity...because this is WW2 era and there needs to be a more spies options...TOO MUCH NUCLEAR!!....

The guard unit can make a more practicable account here and balance the espionage content.

Rockets are used for strategic warfare - destroying fortifications defended by AA, disabling airports, destroying important factories or the industry and morale in core cities. That's pretty much the same effect they had in real war and there is enough strategy in this. Rockets make airforce more viable as they can be easily sniped by it, so you need to gain control of the air. Then, you can use relatively cheap rockets to destroy factories easily and lower morale, making it very difficult for the enemy to rebuild. As buildings to be affected by incoming damage are selected randomly, this makes a building less likely to be hit if there are more buildings in the province. This then reflects the smart strategies to protect important facilities from destruction, though at a cost, which is the extra buildings you have to build.

Rockets aren't very expensive (1620 resources per lv1 rocket, not counting money). Compare that to the 2820 for a lv2 armoured car, which has 29 hp. The rocket will deal 14 damage to it on average, so two rockets almost destroy it, costing you 3240 resources. That doesn't sound very cost-effective, but if you're hitting a unit stationed in a province centre, you can also cause serious damage to the buildings and morale. If it's 7 rockets attacking 7 armoured cars in a city they'll deal about 12 * 7 = 84 damage to morale, likely getting it to around 0%. And 0% morale provinces always revolt and the revolts are very strong, so the province will likely revolt to someone with the whole army in it. Even worse, if your enemy is in a province newly captured from you it only takes 2 rockets to get it to almost 0%. This way, with good planning and execution, you can give your enemy a very hard time if he isn't prepared.

This then rewards players for being active, planning ahead and gaining intelligence to reveal a possible threat, like the rockets. They can really mess things up if used the right way, but they can get destroyed easily if your enemy is advancing slowly, and so has time to rebuild airports, operate planes and find the armies ahead of him. This can allow you to punish quick and not well-planned expansion, where there is no time for airports, the enemy doesn't see and gets his whole stack revolted to a random country or you, even worse for him.

Armies that move 5 units away after the rocket's been launched won't be hit, which is a great disadvantage, though as we learned, rockets aren't good at just hitting armies anyway, they are strategic. I think they really can be fun to play with and surprise your opponent. Your suggestions would make it even more fun but would require great balancing changes and paperwork, just like the first one. There are other proposals that would make the game so much more strategic, so it's difficult to choose the right one and please all of us

Hornetkeeper wrote:

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Current settings for rocket production and upkeep DO SEEM costly and I might like to add, that these changes are not only imbalanced, it is that they are borderline useless in strategy, particularly early - mid game.

The cost of the rocket can seem satisfactory at first, this option can be a real food saver.

The upkeep is not according to game consumption. During WW2 a rocket will not need the amount of manpower to build, especially at later stages.

The rare materials upkeep is not right.. once a rocket is built its ready to go... why on earth upkeep to the rare...for testing? How... A rocket explodes!!

BTW: For those curious gamers.. rare metals/materials WILL BE.. Chromium, Uranium, and Gold

Fuel consumption is also noted... However it is understood that guards will burn this resource. I just think its a little high.. Such facilities are not exactly built on unsafe grounds, and also that the construction of the facility must surely account that there is security procedure for that construction.

I don't know much about rocket logistics. But, the upkeeps are 5% of the unit cost with no doctrine bonuses in Call of War. This makes it simple and doesn't add tons of paperwork the devs would have to do. To me, it just makes no sense to implement this as then you could also change upkeeps of every unit for historical accuracy, which would considerably change the balancing of the game and then force you into doing equations to tell how much to buff/nerf units to return the game to its previous good balance. Follow the good saying - Keep it Simple Stupid.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

GUARD;

Requirements; Infantry lvl. I & militia lvl. I, must have 2 spies on counter espionage

Strength at 2.0 capacity (fixed)

Can only be stationed in cities

Decreased morale loss to the city stationed

% increase to counter spies/espionage

Only defends

The reason I empasize such a unit is that this can make the rocket production more likely to WW2 era strategy, with the need to guard such facility and such the game will have more adequate costing to rocket output..

The cons of this may be that rockets will be flying off everywhere... but fun too.

To counter this I will mention the potential of espionage gaming in COW and how much this needs work here is a much under estimated gameplay and players mostly ignore its full potential, regardless of coining superiority.

For example... more spies should be applicable as strategy options, especially at mid to late game... and less nuclear capacity...because this is WW2 era and there needs to be a more spies options...TOO MUCH NUCLEAR!!....

The guard unit can make a more practicable account here and balance the espionage content.

I like your suggestion as it makes sense, however, let me remind you of the true role of rockets in this game (and it was not very different in real war).

Rockets are used for strategic warfare - destroying fortifications defended by AA, disabling airports, destroying important factories or the industry and morale in core cities. That's pretty much the same effect they had in real war and there is enough strategy in this. Rockets make airforce more viable as they can be easily sniped by it, so you need to gain control of the air. Then, you can use relatively cheap rockets to destroy factories easily and lower morale, making it very difficult for the enemy to rebuild. As buildings to be affected by incoming damage are selected randomly, this makes a building less likely to be hit if there are more buildings in the province. This then reflects the smart strategies to protect important facilities from destruction, though at a cost, which is the extra buildings you have to build.

Rockets aren't very expensive (1620 resources per lv1 rocket, not counting money). Compare that to the 2820 for a lv2 armoured car, which has 29 hp. The rocket will deal 14 damage to it on average, so two rockets almost destroy it, costing you 3240 resources. That doesn't sound very cost-effective, but if you're hitting a unit stationed in a province centre, you can also cause serious damage to the buildings and morale. If it's 7 rockets attacking 7 armoured cars in a city they'll deal about 12 * 7 = 84 damage to morale, likely getting it to around 0%. And 0% morale provinces always revolt and the revolts are very strong, so the province will likely revolt to someone with the whole army in it. Even worse, if your enemy is in a province newly captured from you it only takes 2 rockets to get it to almost 0%. This way, with good planning and execution, you can give your enemy a very hard time if he isn't prepared.

This then rewards players for being active, planning ahead and gaining intelligence to reveal a possible threat, like the rockets. They can really mess things up if used the right way, but they can get destroyed easily if your enemy is advancing slowly, and so has time to rebuild airports, operate planes and find the armies ahead of him. This can allow you to punish quick and not well-planned expansion, where there is no time for airports, the enemy doesn't see and gets his whole stack revolted to a random country or you, even worse for him.

Armies that move 5 units away after the rocket's been launched won't be hit, which is a great disadvantage, though as we learned, rockets aren't good at just hitting armies anyway, they are strategic. I think they really can be fun to play with and surprise your opponent. Your suggestions would make it even more fun but would require great balancing changes and paperwork, just like the first one. There are other proposals that would make the game so much more strategic, so it's difficult to choose the right one and please all of us

Then, you can use relatively cheap rockets to destroy factories easily and lower morale, making it very difficult for the enemy to rebuild

Why bother using rockets on infrastructure in this game.... Hits/assassins to unit stacks are more ideal. (I noticed you mention snipe).... As an example I have barely ever been hit by a rocket upon city buildings, however when it is to hit unit stacks... there has been dearly suffered losses.

This then reflects the smart strategies to protect important facilities from destruction, though at a cost, which is the extra buildings you have to build.[/b]

ok... You certainly have a point here. I did consider thsi and decided to introduce the idea of a guard unit (that only defends) so as to consider all buildings and make gaming balance that is worse... meaning, more fun!

Rockets aren't very expensive (1620 resources per lv1 rocket, not counting money). Compare that to the 2820 for a lv2 armoured car, which has 29 hp.

Not that expensive... please... be in mind this game seeks to be considered as a WW2 strategy game. Thats right..... A rocket once established by those mathematicians and measurements of parameterizations and implicitizations will only be an advanced fuel tank strapped to a mere hollow tube and called fuselage, or perhaps with wings. Too expensive and devs. know this. $$$ Rocket joy!!!! lol

And 0% morale provinces always revolt and the revolts are very strong, so the province will likely revolt to someone with the whole army in it

This can work in logic, however the province may fall to neutral hands... Than what. Players want to destroy, not decimate, eachother..... Its clear &cut...Rockets are too costly. lol.

This then rewards players for being active, planning ahead and gaining intelligence to reveal a possible threat, like the rockets. They can really mess things up if used the right way, but they can get destroyed easily if your enemy is advancing slowly, and so has time to rebuild airports, operate planes and find the armies ahead of him.

Absopositively..... Couldn't agree more.

There are other proposals that would make the game so much more strategic, so it's difficult to choose the right one and please all of us

Thats true, however I do think that the guard unit should be a consideration for this game.. Thats what cities do in WW2, is employ, deploy and regulate home defence. Guard.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

The upkeep is not according to game consumption. During WW2 a rocket will not need the amount of manpower to build, especially at later stages.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

The rare materials upkeep is not right.. once a rocket is built its ready to go... why on earth upkeep to the rare...for testing? How... A rocket explodes!!

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

BTW: For those curious gamers.. rare metals/materials WILL BE.. Chromium, Uranium, and Gold

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

This can work in logic, however the province may fall to neutral hands... Than what. Players want to destroy, not decimate, eachother..... Its clear &cut...Rockets are too costly. lol.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Thats true, however I do think that the guard unit should be a consideration for this game.. Thats what cities do in WW2, is employ, deploy and regulate home defence. Guard.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Regarding new gaming units I have also mentioned the guard unit as an option and I think that this is workable and will make the game worse

Hornetkeeper wrote:

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

This can work in logic, however the province may fall to neutral hands... Than what. Players want to destroy, not decimate, eachother..... Its clear &cut...Rockets are too costly. lol.

If you want to destroy, you just make his army shift to another nation like that, what's the issue? You will get ahead a lot as numbers advantage is exponential on large front wars or early game, so if he has 5/6 his original unit count, he will have 25/36 strength, which isn't very nice for him. You have a point, provinces revolt to the nation they were taken from or a nearby one with high individual popularity with the current owner, so the army may revolt to his allies. Though I often see provinces revolting to me when I destroy their morale.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Thats true, however I do think that the guard unit should be a consideration for this game.. Thats what cities do in WW2, is employ, deploy and regulate home defence. Guard.

Yes, it's a very nice addition to the game, my point is that there are a couple of others that would also be pretty nice, so if we get ours implemented it will probably take time.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Thanks.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Regarding new gaming units I have also mentioned the guard unit as an option and I think that this is workable and will make the game worse

Oh you denied it

For your consideration.