Call of War 1.5 iteration 3: Balancing changelog
Welcome Generals,
The following list describes which balancing changes happened from the second CoW1.5 iteration (from March) to the third CoW1.5 iteration (from May). It does not describe changes from the current CoW 1.0 version to CoW 1.5. You can find a general list of changes from CoW1.0 to CoW1.5 in the manual.
Building balancing
The SBDE value in the unit details panel only reflects the efficiency loss due to lost health now.Akulla3D wrote:
Has anyone noticed that State-Based Damage Efficiency may have changed. I have a 10 stack of infantry and it is showing 100% efficiency.
The efficiency limit of 10 units per stack is not shown in the interface yet (we will add it in the future).
@Little Racoon, you said it quite right. Only have to explain what "most powerful means":Little Racoon wrote:
Yes, Akulla, the SBDE has changed. Now it counts as the top 10 most powerful units for the SBDE (or something like that, I'm sure someone else can explain better).
Imagine stack A attacking stack B. Let's say stack B contains 4 units. Then what each unit in stack B receives as damage is 25% of the 10 strongest attack values in stack A against the armour class of that (targeted) unit.
Same in case of defending, of course.
But let's not call it SBDE any more. SBDE in CoW1.5 now correctly reflects solely the reduction of attack/defense values a unit gets from low health. What we're talking about here is the stack size limit to damage output.
Forced March is still not working in 1.5, this is really annoying as I need to move something fast and I cant. See my linked video.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xTnv9-fGRJbm43LuSTBXJAvPCtzoO0ze/view?usp=sharing
I justed tested it in a 1.5 game and for me it works correctly:Akulla3D wrote:
Forced March is still not working in 1.5, this is really annoying as I need to move something fast and I cant. See my linked video.https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xTnv9-fGRJbm43LuSTBXJAvPCtzoO0ze/view?usp=sharing
https://gyazo.com/96d1c465a8e9c370681a2217c967ca40
Maybe you just were not connected to the server anymore at that moment? Look out for the spinning arrows in the bottom right corner and try it again after refresh.
Maybe also some specific circumstances? Because it can't be a general bug if it works in my tests.
works for me toofreezy wrote:
I justed tested it in a 1.5 game and for me it works correctly:https://gyazo.com/96d1c465a8e9c370681a2217c967ca40Akulla3D wrote:
Forced March is still not working in 1.5, this is really annoying as I need to move something fast and I cant. See my linked video.https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xTnv9-fGRJbm43LuSTBXJAvPCtzoO0ze/view?usp=sharing
Maybe you just were not connected to the server anymore at that moment? Look out for the spinning arrows in the bottom right corner and try it again after refresh.
Maybe also some specific circumstances? Because it can't be a general bug if it works in my tests.
So into day 2 or so for the new revisions. There is something off in the games, not sure what it is but I am spending to much time micromanaging the resources to get my manpower and other resources up. Maybe I am missing something or just plain stupid but I cant seem to generate enough stuff to keep steadily building stuff.
I have to build Factories all over my land just to get my manpower up high enough to keep things moving, and that leaves me with no rss to build anything else. The point of the game is strategy and its become a micromanaging nightmare. I have been in games where I have seen some people generate lots of units but not sure how they are doing it. (Maybe Gold not sure)
I really like this idea of upgrading units and different buildings but I feel the algorithm is unnecessary reducing overall rss at the expense of game play.
I guess the point you are missing is that you are not supposed to keep all your production/construction/research slots busy at all times as you do in CoW1.0. In 1.5 the production times etc. are lower, so you can produce more stuff in a shorter amount of time. But that also means that you run out of resources faster if you do so. So you have to balance your spendings more and can't mindlessly queue up the next thing.Akulla3D wrote:
So into day 2 or so for the new revisions. There is something off in the games, not sure what it is but I am spending to much time micromanaging the resources to get my manpower and other resources up. Maybe I am missing something or just plain stupid but I cant seem to generate enough stuff to keep steadily building stuff.I have to build Factories all over my land just to get my manpower up high enough to keep things moving, and that leaves me with no rss to build anything else. The point of the game is strategy and its become a micromanaging nightmare. I have been in games where I have seen some people generate lots of units but not sure how they are doing it. (Maybe Gold not sure)
I really like this idea of upgrading units and different buildings but I feel the algorithm is unnecessary reducing overall rss at the expense of game play.
Managing your resources and economy by making the right decisions when to spend and on what to spend is actually a macromanagement task. Micromanagement would be precisely controlling units on the battlefield.
I am sure you will get the hang of it once you played for a while 
btw. hope your forced march issue is resolved, you didnt comment on it anymore.
Thanks for the encouragement will work it more, seems forced march is working now. Good luck.freezy wrote:
I guess the point you are missing is that you are not supposed to keep all your production/construction/research slots busy at all times as you do in CoW1.0. In 1.5 the production times etc. are lower, so you can produce more stuff in a shorter amount of time. But that also means that you run out of resources faster if you do so. So you have to balance your spendings more and can't mindlessly queue up the next thing.Akulla3D wrote:
So into day 2 or so for the new revisions. There is something off in the games, not sure what it is but I am spending to much time micromanaging the resources to get my manpower and other resources up. Maybe I am missing something or just plain stupid but I cant seem to generate enough stuff to keep steadily building stuff.I have to build Factories all over my land just to get my manpower up high enough to keep things moving, and that leaves me with no rss to build anything else. The point of the game is strategy and its become a micromanaging nightmare. I have been in games where I have seen some people generate lots of units but not sure how they are doing it. (Maybe Gold not sure)
I really like this idea of upgrading units and different buildings but I feel the algorithm is unnecessary reducing overall rss at the expense of game play.
Managing your resources and economy by making the right decisions when to spend and on what to spend is actually a macromanagement task. Micromanagement would be precisely controlling units on the battlefield.
I am sure you will get the hang of it once you played for a while
btw. hope your forced march issue is resolved, you didnt comment on it anymore.
I had the same learning curve on that. I'm trying something a little different this time around. Since build times are so much shorter, I did 2 levels of Research on my primary unit, before I started building any. Might even go higher in resarch on someunits. If you don't need them yet, why build and pay for upgrades when you can just wait to build them after the upgrades.freezy wrote:
I guess the point you are missing is that you are not supposed to keep all your production/construction/research slots busy at all times as you do in CoW1.0. In 1.5 the production times etc. are lower, so you can produce more stuff in a shorter amount of time. But that also means that you run out of resources faster if you do so. So you have to balance your spendings more and can't mindlessly queue up the next thing.Akulla3D wrote:
So into day 2 or so for the new revisions. There is something off in the games, not sure what it is but I am spending to much time micromanaging the resources to get my manpower and other resources up. Maybe I am missing something or just plain stupid but I cant seem to generate enough stuff to keep steadily building stuff.I have to build Factories all over my land just to get my manpower up high enough to keep things moving, and that leaves me with no rss to build anything else. The point of the game is strategy and its become a micromanaging nightmare. I have been in games where I have seen some people generate lots of units but not sure how they are doing it. (Maybe Gold not sure)
I really like this idea of upgrading units and different buildings but I feel the algorithm is unnecessary reducing overall rss at the expense of game play.
Managing your resources and economy by making the right decisions when to spend and on what to spend is actually a macromanagement task. Micromanagement would be precisely controlling units on the battlefield.
I am sure you will get the hang of it once you played for a while
btw. hope your forced march issue is resolved, you didnt comment on it anymore.
Got an interesting surprise from 1.5 combat. Apparantly 1st level Infantry units can sink Cruisers. Keep in mind that an infantry unit in early world war 2 carried the equivelent of today's hunting rifle as a weapon.
The infantry actually go into the water and block the cruiser from existing, like a sub. Doesn't make a whole lot of historical combat sense, but hey, if that's the new rule, it changes a lot.
I learned that one fast, the AI did it to me and my DD and a Cruiser were stuck on the beach. In this case they only lost half of their health after a very long battle. The second time, I tried to get smart and lure the AI into the water by firing and turning around. The problem was that it was a city that was very close to the waters edge and I could not turn around due to the snap distance and was locked into engagement. I don't mind land units being able to attack naval units on the beach, but why not have the naval units be able to disengage and retreat? Also I have a current game where an allies landing party disembarked, but he is stuck engaged with a submarine that was trying to stop it. Let both land and navy be able to disengage during land and navy lockups.Balhog wrote:
Got an interesting surprise from 1.5 combat. Apparantly 1st level Infantry units can sink Cruisers. Keep in mind that an infantry unit in early world war 2 carried the equivelent of today's hunting rifle as a weapon.The infantry actually go into the water and block the cruiser from existing, like a sub. Doesn't make a whole lot of historical combat sense, but hey, if that's the new rule, it changes a lot.
I have a second game in play on the latest upgrade to 1.5. The naval bombardment in this game is behaving like 1.0. That is, no damage to Cruisers from Infantry or other land units. Perhaps it is related to doctrine or something else.FinnDaddy wrote:
I learned that one fast, the AI did it to me and my DD and a Cruiser were stuck on the beach. In this case they only lost half of their health after a very long battle. The second time, I tried to get smart and lure the AI into the water by firing and turning around. The problem was that it was a city that was very close to the waters edge and I could not turn around due to the snap distance and was locked into engagement. I don't mind land units being able to attack naval units on the beach, but why not have the naval units be able to disengage and retreat? Also I have a current game where an allies landing party disembarked, but he is stuck engaged with a submarine that was trying to stop it. Let both land and navy be able to disengage during land and navy lockups.Balhog wrote:
Got an interesting surprise from 1.5 combat. Apparantly 1st level Infantry units can sink Cruisers. Keep in mind that an infantry unit in early world war 2 carried the equivelent of today's hunting rifle as a weapon.The infantry actually go into the water and block the cruiser from existing, like a sub. Doesn't make a whole lot of historical combat sense, but hey, if that's the new rule, it changes a lot.
Land units do damage to naval units in order to be able to sink disembarking troop convoys (which have the naval armor class). Surely player want to keep doing that, as it has been a staple in the game, therefore lang units need damage vs. naval units.Balhog wrote:
Got an interesting surprise from 1.5 combat. Apparantly 1st level Infantry units can sink Cruisers. Keep in mind that an infantry unit in early world war 2 carried the equivelent of today's hunting rifle as a weapon.The infantry actually go into the water and block the cruiser from existing, like a sub. Doesn't make a whole lot of historical combat sense, but hey, if that's the new rule, it changes a lot.
Realistically speaking you can imagine this as follows: A ship which is parked directly on the shoreline is considered as anchoring at land. Therefore land units can try to board the ship and overthrow the crew. You don't need explosive firepower for that. This said, and Infantry regiment in the game consists of more than just riflemen, it is considered to also have mortars, grenadiers etc.
So if you don't want your ships to be hurt by coastal troops, try to not place them directly on the coastline
Its a stretch. First of all, these weren't land units disembarking. They were cruisers, off shore, bombarding. In WW2 combat that's what, 10 miles offshore? I don't believe there is any case of a cruiser being sunk by infantry with their standard 30 cal rifles. Let me know if I'm wrong, but it seems quite unlikely.freezy wrote:
Land units do damage to naval units in order to be able to sink disembarking troop convoys (which have the naval armor class). Surely player want to keep doing that, as it has been a staple in the game, therefore lang units need damage vs. naval units.Realistically speaking you can imagine this as follows: A ship which is parked directly on the shoreline is considered as anchoring at land. Therefore land units can try to board the ship and overthrow the crew. You don't need explosive firepower for that. This said, and Infantry regiment in the game consists of more than just riflemen, it is considered to also have mortars, grenadiers etc.Balhog wrote:
Got an interesting surprise from 1.5 combat. Apparantly 1st level Infantry units can sink Cruisers. Keep in mind that an infantry unit in early world war 2 carried the equivelent of today's hunting rifle as a weapon.The infantry actually go into the water and block the cruiser from existing, like a sub. Doesn't make a whole lot of historical combat sense, but hey, if that's the new rule, it changes a lot.
So if you don't want your ships to be hurt by coastal troops, try to not place them directly on the coastline
Here's a list of all US Cruisers lost or damaged in WW2. I didn't read the whole list. But I didn't see any sunk by infantry in the list. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_Navy_ships_sunk_or_damaged_in_action_during_World_War_II#Light_cruiser_(CL)
So if you don't want your ships to be hurt by coastal troops, try to not place them directly on the coastline 
I think this may have been my issue. I got to close. Can you position close enough to bombard with a cruiser, but not close enough to be attacked by infantry?
Yes, of course. Attack range of a cruiser is 50, attack range of infantry is 5. So placing the cruiser at any distance between 6 and 50 away from the beach will make him safe from infantry attacks.Balhog wrote:
Can you position close enough to bombard with a cruiser, but not close enough to be attacked by infantry?
Unfortunatley that wasn't the case. The infantry units actually went into the ocean and trapped, not 1, but a fleet of cruisers and other ships. Unrealistic. Nothing like that ever happened in COW 1.0. In fact in the history of WW2 there were zero events of this occurring. But this is mnor compared to the real issues you guys created in this disaterous version.Hans A. Pils wrote:
Yes, of course. Attack range of a cruiser is 50, attack range of infantry is 5. So placing the cruiser at any distance between 6 and 50 away from the beach will make him safe from infantry attacks.Balhog wrote:
Can you position close enough to bombard with a cruiser, but not close enough to be attacked by infantry?
On my final note, I've had another round of 1.5 decided by AI BS decision making.
What do you mean went into the ocean? Were they a convoy? In that case your cruisers should have the advantage.Balhog wrote:
The infantry units actually went into the ocean and trapped, not 1, but a fleet of cruisers and other ships.Hans A. Pils wrote:
Yes, of course. Attack range of a cruiser is 50, attack range of infantry is 5. So placing the cruiser at any distance between 6 and 50 away from the beach will make him safe from infantry attacks.Balhog wrote:
Can you position close enough to bombard with a cruiser, but not close enough to be attacked by infantry?
Ok so it was actually not land based Infantry which attacked your Cruiser, but convoys. Convoys also have small fighting stats vs. ships, because they are considered to have light arming and escort ships. Also in CoW1.0 can transport ships attack and eventually sink a Cruiser. It all depends on the number of troops involved on either side as well as the level of the units. This said your cruiser has a big combat advantage against them. So normally one cruiser can hold off against multiple convoys, but if the convoys become too many, also a cruiser will get overwhelmed. But you can also easily kite the incoming convoys and bombard them by range. As was stated here before, cruisers have a range of 50, while land units or convoys only have a range of 5, and your cruiser moves faster.Balhog wrote:
Unfortunatley that wasn't the case. The infantry units actually went into the ocean and trapped, not 1, but a fleet of cruisers and other ships. Unrealistic. Nothing like that ever happened in COW 1.0. In fact in the history of WW2 there were zero events of this occurring. But this is mnor compared to the real issues you guys created in this disaterous version.Hans A. Pils wrote:
Yes, of course. Attack range of a cruiser is 50, attack range of infantry is 5. So placing the cruiser at any distance between 6 and 50 away from the beach will make him safe from infantry attacks.Balhog wrote:
Can you position close enough to bombard with a cruiser, but not close enough to be attacked by infantry?On my final note, I've had another round of 1.5 decided by AI BS decision making.
What happens when you attack a unit that is in the middle of an upgrade? Do they get their old stats? Or are they so disorganized that they are easy to attack?
