Resources Reforged - Test it now on Beta!

So much saltiness in this thread for some reason...

Lord Crayfish wrote:

bosna best wrote:

I tried it and I don’t like it.

Probably write a beta report then. Explain why you don't like it and what you think is wrong with it. Nearly everyone already has deep misgivings, but Bytro would benefit from a piece of someone's mind who has actually played.

Komrade Khrushchev wrote:

So much saltiness in this thread for some reason...

Mostly from @Phillip Bosley and @HenrikSchreiber

z00mz00m wrote:

Geden wrote:

They will be converted, i don't have the specific details for that yet though. As with past updates where we had to convert booster cards to a new variant we'll make sure that no value is being lost.

Geden, thanks for reading and replying to our posts. A big change it's always met with cries of dismay, so your patience is appreciated.

I've been enjoying CoW since the 1.0 version and I still miss it.

The use of rares to power research, industry, and special units gave us an additional layer of strategy that no longer exists. Now, rares are no longer rare or special.

Another fun aspect were the building requirements, like needing infrastructure to build a heavy tank. You couldn't just crank out units in a recently demolished city. Keeping cities whole was important. Areas of the map that changes hands too many times would become a de-industralized wasteland only good for conscripting infantry. That added another layer of strategy to the game, which is now gone.

Regarding resource trades.

The reason players don't trade resources on the market is because the system is broken. Posting a trade costs 10% up front, even if nobody picks up the trade. On the other hand, direct p2p trades are free, and easy to execute. What is the incentive for using the market? There is none. Eliminating resources will not change that basic reality.

Regarding mixing resource requirements within a tree.

This removes another strategic element of the game. The choice of which tree makes economic sense for a given starting location. With the proposed changes, a player no longer needs to care which tree needs what, dumbing down economic decisions.

In summary, if you want to improve game play at a strategic level, please consider bringing back some 1.0 elements. Removing 2 resource types and mixing up the trees takes the game in the opposite direction, making it less special, and less strategic in character.

Thanks for your attention!

Yeah

Bandersnatch wrote:

Komrade Khrushchev wrote:

So much saltiness in this thread for some reason...

I noticed that too.

Geden wrote:

Erecon wrote:

What about the legal issues? Someone properly bought some of those "payday operations" with booster stuff that contains rare or goods. What about the ad boosters that gives goods ? will all these boosters be converted, or will they be deleted?

They will be converted, i don't have the specific details for that yet though. As with past updates where we had to convert booster cards to a new variant we'll make sure that no value is being lost.

They will give compensation.

Read @Geden’s post

I got food boosters

Does anyone know when Goods and Rare Materials will be completely phased out?

Komrade Khrushchev wrote:

Read @Geden’s post

there is a missing spot on the daily mobile ad gifts ( where the usual 6x125 goods where ) - but the top gift icon is back ( with other boosters hurray )

Obviously, primary intention of this update is to bring back uneven starting resources.

So far I totally agree - doing that (on some of the maps) indeed would make things more interesting, increase difficulty to find the right strategy for the nation you play this time and increase need to trade. All very positive.

Additionally, it opens for you (game designers) the great opportunity to distribute resources more like they really are located around the globe. But since we all know that you don't care about realism, I write this addition in grey to make it easier for you to ignore.

Well so far. But then, you must have thought

"Hmmm, with 5 starting cities per nation and 5 resources, we cannot use any other distribution but 1-1-1-1-1 because otherwise nations would start with practically 0 income for at least one resource. Which would be too drastic. So we must reduce number of resources to 3."

And that was a bad mistake. We all love having the five resources - goods and rares totally have their right to be part of the game. It's more beautiful, more interesting and also more strategic with 5 resources. Like all the others already wrote, reduction to 3 is a(nother) major downgrade.

Why didn't you just create disparity of starting resource provinces with the rural provinces? I suggest not to release this update and to stick to 1-1-1-1-1 or 2-1-1-1-1 for the urban provinces, but to change distribution of resources in the rural provinces. You have all options there. Why not make most or all rural resource provinces of the Ukraine grain? Or all rural resources of Saudi Arabia oil? Would have achieved same goal without destruction of features we all like.

Geden wrote:

Before, similar units all used the same resources, but now there’s a lot more variety!

That's too abstruse. Please, pretty please, make units need the resources they really needed in real life. And you will see that interesting, intense and intuitive strategic gameplay will come by itself.

As example:

Milita needs a respectable amount of food; bit of manpower; little bit of money.

Infantry needs same amount of food; bit more manpower; moderate amount of money; some goods; maybe tiny bit of steel.

Mot. Infantry needs same amount of food; bit more manpower; bit more money; some goods; bit of steel; some oil.

Commandos need same amount of food; even more manpower; very much money; some goods; tiny bit of steel.

And so on...

Agree with all the previous posters.

Hans A. Pils wrote:

Milita needs a respectable amount of food; bit of manpower; little bit of money.

Infantry needs same amount of food; bit more manpower; moderate amount of money; some goods; maybe tiny bit of steel.

Mot. Infantry needs same amount of food; bit more manpower; bit more money; some goods; bit of steel; some oil.

Commandos need same amount of food; even more manpower; very much money; some goods; tiny bit of steel.

Of course I agree that (mainly) food for interceptors as proudly boasted in the original post is just plainly ridiculous. Maybe the story here is: the pilots lead a dangerous life; they need to blow off steam when off-duty; they need lots of booze for that; and you need foodstuffs to create booze.

btw - I think it could be fun to make more theories on why building operating fighter planes would need food))) About your tank destroyers, I know the Germans used synthetic fuel in the forties although I have no idea what they made it of...

I have come to the conclusion that Bytro are possibly in financial difficulty.

They dont fix obvious bugs, their servers are at bursting point (noticeable on the weekend about 1700 CET when USA powers up), messing around with gold/war bonds and a takeover.

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Hans A. Pils wrote:

Milita needs a respectable amount of food; bit of manpower; little bit of money.

Infantry needs same amount of food; bit more manpower; moderate amount of money; some goods; maybe tiny bit of steel.

Mot. Infantry needs same amount of food; bit more manpower; bit more money; some goods; bit of steel; some oil.

Commandos need same amount of food; even more manpower; very much money; some goods; tiny bit of steel.

We could already see diverging paths/ideas here))) I'd say the MP requirements for militia and infantry would be roughly the same, but the militia requires less basic equipment (i.e. goods); while commando's are small-sized highly trained units which would require few MP but lots of training (money??) and specialized equipment (rares??)

Of course I agree that (mainly) food for interceptors as proudly boasted in the original post is just plainly ridiculous. Maybe the story here is: the pilots lead a dangerous life; they need to blow off steam when off-duty; they need lots of booze for that; and you need foodstuffs to create booze.

btw - I think it could be fun to make more theories on why building operating fighter planes would need food))) About your tank destroyers, I know the Germans used synthetic fuel in the forties although I have no idea what they made it of...

BladeFisher wrote:

They dont fix obvious bugs, their servers are at bursting point (noticeable on the weekend about 1700 CET when USA powers up), messing around with gold/war bonds and a takeover.

I have no idea what you just said.