CoW 2.0 - Part Two

Why did the command confirmation got removed? The +/- for add target too? Why? they were very useful, certainly one of the best things in 2.0.

Ok so add army is bugged, the accept button is nowhere to be found. Are these just bugs and not intended? I hope so because this is an actual regression.

The resource bar could be displayed more clearly (Chrome browser).

Hourly rates show normally, but Resource amounts do not show units.

Strangely, they are shown in 1k units rounded to the nearest 10.

Please just show the number and forget the k. All the unit costs are listed that way.

While I'm at it, please restore the original spacing. Was not an improvement to space them so far apart.

pod_than wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

you should make the mountains more 3D like so it pops out

also bring the shiny ocean back

Is it a relief map that you want to say?

Another idea(should I make a seperate thread for this?)

Adding more map layers. Things such as terrain types differentiated by colors or something else. This would go beyond just terrain types, however. I've always wanted to propose a coalition map layer, for easier identification of coalitions on the map. I'm sure there are others that can also add to the game a lot.

Donk2.0 wrote:

One major thing I just noticed: Forests and plains look incredibly similar. Forests should also probably have more trees than they do right now. Those tiny little woods aren't really enough to hide tank destroyers in.

polixenes wrote:

I do like the look of the maps - much prettier now. Except the ocean has been replaced by graph paper on my PC. I can't see a toggle anywhere for ocean textures.

But although I do like the look, I have switched to low-res. I won't say the game is "unplayable" with the new graphics, but it is highly impractical considering the importance of distinguishing terrain types, ownership, core vs non-core.

So while I salute the artist(s) I think game design needs some TLC here.

Regarding performance: We have a solution lined up that renders the game at a lower resolution and scales it up, for the mid graphics mode. In tests that looks promising, it may be released with next update. So maybe you can try that setting then.

K.Rokossovski wrote:

I have tried the new style for a few hours, but alas, I also switched back to low graphics. Terrain info is too important. I really hope this will get fixed though, the look is better and it can't be THAT hard to make it distinguish between five terrain types?

Low graphics is kind of ugly to switch back to, and it is really strange that it is official advice to go back to an inferior map mode when people are missing vital info in the new, sexy look.

letsDoThis80 wrote:

I am enjoying the new map look. Unfortunately, It is so laggy on the web that even with LowRes I can only really play it on mobile now.

My Browser Helper process takes 95-98% of my CPU on a 2.3 GHz 8-Core Intel Core i9.

Sidney Ruff-Diamond wrote:

I think the new look is fine as a direction - but, as many have noted, the terrain textures are way too similar. It's a huge part of the game tactics and now I cant tell the difference between them just by looking. Please make them more distinguishable - you don't have to change the aesthetic, just make the differences more obvious - currently its too difficult to play.

Lastly one aesthetic issue; the ocean; not a fan of the flat, matte paper look - the old shimmering shore edge was cool, would prefer having that back.

Regarding the ocean, we think the new version fits a strategy game better. The old shiny effects were a bit too much and more fitting to arcade or action games. Realistically you shouldnt be able to see such finegrained shiny details from high up. But you can still see shorelines when zooming in, the water gets brighter near the coast. When you zoom in as much as possible you can even see the shiny shore waves still, but their amount was reduced.

Destructo the Great wrote:

make plains not like forest

Z. Sakki wrote:

Why did the command confirmation got removed? The +/- for add target too? Why? they were very useful, certainly one of the best things in 2.0.

Z. Sakki wrote:

Ok so add army is bugged, the accept button is nowhere to be found. Are these just bugs and not intended? I hope so because this is an actual regression.

Nooberium wrote:

The resource bar could be displayed more clearly (Chrome browser).

Hourly rates show normally, but Resource amounts do not show units.

Strangely, they are shown in 1k units rounded to the nearest 10.

Please just show the number and forget the k. All the unit costs are listed that way.

While I'm at it, please restore the original spacing. Was not an improvement to space them so far apart.

Another reason for the k was to decrease cognitive load, less numbers to deal with at once. I know for the experienced players in these forums such reasons read kinda strange, but for totally new players we have to take things like this into consideration.

freezy wrote:

hanks for the feedback, but this part didnt change with this update, it was introduced with the new client weeks ago? We will consider it, but we also have to consider smaller screens and mobile screens and want to make it consistent. Usually elements in the interface are compromises intended to work on most screens.

Another reason for the k was to decrease cognitive load, less numbers to deal with at once. I know for the experienced players in these forums such reasons read kinda strange, but for totally new players we have to take things like this into consideration.

Donk2.0 wrote:

Another idea(should I make a seperate thread for this?)

Adding more map layers. Things such as terrain types differentiated by colors or something else. This would go beyond just terrain types, however. I've always wanted to propose a coalition map layer, for easier identification of coalitions on the map. I'm sure there are others that can also add to the game a lot.

I vaguely remember recommending this a while ago but since it’s somewhat related I’ll recommend it again. I think another option should be added to the diplomatic relations view of the map. Another color should be added that applies to countries your coalition partners are at war with or coalition partners of countries you are at war with. These should not be regarded as neutrals.

Yeah, maybe even something like orange for nations that have an embargo on you.

I just want to see the terrain without squinting and getting a headache.

No, the (poop) graphics option is not a solution, it's very faint and hard to see. Plus it's too ugly to play on.

The old graphics had a nice balance of playability, looks, and performance.

@freezy wrote:

"Thanksfor the feedback, but this part didnt change with this update, it wasintroduced with the new client weeks ago? We will consider it, but wealso have to consider smaller screens and mobile screens and want tomake it consistent. Usually elements in the interface are compromisesintended to work on most screens.

Anotherreason for the k was to decrease cognitive load, less numbers to dealwith at once. I know for the experienced players in these forums suchreasons read kinda strange, but for totally new players we have totake things like this into consideration"

Somehow the k increased my cognitive load, requiring conversion to the way costs are displayed. For totally new players, how can a format mismatch be helpful?

I only posted about PC browser. Maybe I'm just ignorant, but why must PC and Mobile formatting be the same? They are already radically different in so many ways.

well..... mobile is ok, desktop is not at all. graphics are jerky, slow scrolling, almost unplayable. Please fix it.

flyingelvisesss wrote:

well..... mobile is ok, desktop is not at all. graphics are jerky, slow scrolling, almost unplayable. Please fix it.

Nooberium wrote:

Adding the grid is a nice touch too.

Destructo the Great wrote:

pod_than wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

you should make the mountains more 3D like so it pops out

also bring the shiny ocean back

Is it a relief map that you want to say?

?

https://www.google.com/search?q=relief+map&rlz=1CDGOYI_enJP763JP764&hl=ja&prmd=ismvn&sxsrf=ALiCzsa1m1H_wmfwbP7NQ3_PqRudSHjLqg:1663826634091&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjhnvib3af6AhUxplYBHQJKCt0Q_AUoAXoECAMQAQ&biw=375&bih=553&dpr=2

pod_than wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

pod_than wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

you should make the mountains more 3D like so it pops out

also bring the shiny ocean back

Is it a relief map that you want to say?

?

I don't know what your query is, but I believed that an image like the one my linked to is called a relief map in English.

https://www.google.com/search?q=relief+map&rlz=1CDGOYI_enJP763JP764&hl=ja&prmd=ismvn&sxsrf=ALiCzsa1m1H_wmfwbP7NQ3_PqRudSHjLqg:1663826634091&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjhnvib3af6AhUxplYBHQJKCt0Q_AUoAXoECAMQAQ&biw=375&bih=553&dpr=2

New map is advanced, would be OG and Nostalgic if you added the old Rare material symbol for like a Throwback Event or something, maybe do an old Throwback Event, where old stuff is brought back for like a week or something

Destructo the Great wrote:

pod_than wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

pod_than wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

you should make the mountains more 3D like so it pops out

also bring the shiny ocean back

Is it a relief map that you want to say?

?

I don't know what your query is, but I believed that an image like the one my linked to is called a relief map in English.https://www.google.com/search?q=relief+map&rlz=1CDGOYI_enJP763JP764&hl=ja&prmd=ismvn&sxsrf=ALiCzsa1m1H_wmfwbP7NQ3_PqRudSHjLqg:1663826634091&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjhnvib3af6AhUxplYBHQJKCt0Q_AUoAXoECAMQAQ&biw=375&bih=553&dpr=2

I said to make it more 3d is there a problem with this?

I just had you rephrasing it.

So it became clear for all.

I appreciate.

Lord Crayfish wrote:

Nooberium wrote:

Adding the grid is a nice touch too.

I hope you're not being serious.