Call of war IS dying!

I don't know, but in the games that I have started lately I only see 3 kind of people: inactive players, goldenboys and the normal players getting bored. Also I see more multiaccounts, farmer players and strange things than ever, you can report it and nothing happens, no answer, at least at the spanish server.

I'm playing for 5 years, met a lot of good warriors that leave the game because, you know, 10 minutes to conquer a city and suddenly 20 tanks arrise. These kind of facts ruin any kind of strategic game experience.

I know this is a business, no complain about the use of gold, so is just evolution, with the time only the big wallets remains, and the new players that come and go, just like in poker.

Pd. excuse my english.

NOOB1433223 wrote:

the essence of this community isnt how many new player who plays 5 games and leave, is about how many commited and experienced players (well, with hundreds of games) are here

lets be honest here, 1.5 has made a good proprotion of the most active and experianced veterans around leave

well, in that perspective, the game is dying

YDSTRIKER wrote:

CoW dies not because there are no new ones. He is dying because many of the veterans of the game have either already passed away or are openly making plans to get out. Here's just a kick on a.. for these players. And the community is created by them, not by some random user who will stay up to 10 days.

Somanta wrote:

I don't know, but in the games that I have started lately I only see 3 kind of people: inactive players, goldenboys and the normal players getting bored. Also I see more multiaccounts, farmer players and strange things than ever, you can report it and nothing happens, no answer, at least at the spanish server.

I'm playing for 5 years, met a lot of good warriors that leave the game because, you know, 10 minutes to conquer a city and suddenly 20 tanks arrise. These kind of facts ruin any kind of strategic game experience.

I know this is a business, no complain about the use of gold, so is just evolution, with the time only the big wallets remains, and the new players that come and go, just like in poker.

Pd. excuse my english.

Solution A- Give them more to conquer. Since players are getting bored of dominating the same maps over and over perhaps mix things up a bit - bring back old maps, add new ones, just give them an interesting puzzle that they need to solve with the right military.

Solution B- Make conquering a challenge. I think another reason vets are leaving is that it doesn’t feel satisfying fighting a map made of half inactive players and the other half clueless newbies. I think that pairing veterans against veterans would increase enjoyment because we all know that the feeling of fighting an opponent that is equal in skill can’t be beat by anything else in this game besides defeating them. While something like the Player League may do this it is certainly not the only solution and I’m sure someone somewhere can think of another way to match up equally skilled players.

Habo778 wrote:

bring back old maps

Habo778 wrote:

veterans against veterans

There are a few problems.

Problem 1: The lack of different maps is one of the problems. For example, you can add more historical or regular maps.

Problem 2: Pros shouldn't be allowed into newbie games. You should only be allowed to play with people who have similar rankings as you.

Problem 3: Gold use cannot affect actual gameplay at all. Maybe you could buy skins for your troops or unlock unique maps with gold.

Problem 4: Most players go inactive at some points. The game should either replace inactive players with active players, or the player automatically wins the game when all players go inactive.

Problem 5: Warfare and politics have not changed much in general in call of war. Maybe the game should give troops a negative penalty when they are encircled or enable players to create puppet states.

"CoW is dying" is a bit hyperbolic.

But, I can provide some feedback from my personal experience.

Initially, I was disgusted. Some of the changes really turned me off. I continued to play 1.0 maps.

Then, I resigned myself to the new rules, and started playing 1.5 maps. In large part, because there was no choice.... old maps are getting harder to find, fewer players active on old maps.

Now, I've reached my second "wall" with the game. It's burning me out. It keeps demanding more of my time and attention. The game is faster, for one thing. Battles, especially so, but also builds and movement. And there is more "work" to do. Production queues need constant baby-sitting. Every time a unit reaches a new level, I have to remove the unit from all production queues, else they will continue producing the old unit level. Then, one of my least favorite changed to the game: manual unit upgrades.

The end result is that I'm just burned out. I don't want to start any new maps. It's too much work, and it's eating into my real life. The second issue is that much of the work is not fun. I've complained about this before (manual upgrades, queue management, production balancing).

Do I really want to lose sleep over.... this?

No, probably not.

So if your "engagement" metrics are up, that I completely believe. The game demands greater engagement. More clicks per hour, more active hours per day. But is this sustainable? Is this "good" engagement"?

In my case, no. I'm burned out. You can keep my High Command subscription, I don't mind Bytro making some money, I just don't care any more.

another key reason why this is going down hills is simple

the severe lack of faith the "old" players who had been playing for years, have in the game

if people belives the game will die, then it cannot survive

in all honesty, people now starts to feel that this game has now lost its unique identity, its core values

now, when we look at the game, we will no longer see it as an original bytro title, but a mere copy of CON

NOOB1433223 wrote:

in all honesty, people now starts to feel that this game has now lost its unique identity, its core values

now, when we look at the game, we will no longer see it as an original bytro title, but a mere copy of CON

It's been the same with Supremacy, many veterans have left and the servers are empty (Or they are, but few). Even our GOs have a proposal to be GO in supra, because there are not many of them there. All because of this thorough modernization. The same thing happens with us, but BYTRO DOESN'T SEE IT. Once again. They are either blind or stubborn.

Sorry for English

I really hope that there can be a compromise between 1.0 and 1.5 that would make everyone at the very least moderately happy because I like the game flow of 1.0 but I also like 1.5’s new units and resource balancing. Overall its a very controversial subject but while I stuck to only 1.0 for a while I have begun to play 1.5 and see the value in it but we can only keep voicing our opinions, give suggestions and pray that Bytro can pull off a miracle with 2.0 that satisfies most people.

z00mz00m wrote:

"CoW is dying" is a bit hyperbolic.

But, I can provide some feedback from my personal experience.

Initially, I was disgusted. Some of the changes really turned me off. I continued to play 1.0 maps.

Then, I resigned myself to the new rules, and started playing 1.5 maps. In large part, because there was no choice.... old maps are getting harder to find, fewer players active on old maps.

Now, I've reached my second "wall" with the game. It's burning me out. It keeps demanding more of my time and attention. The game is faster, for one thing. Battles, especially so, but also builds and movement. And there is more "work" to do. Production queues need constant baby-sitting. Every time a unit reaches a new level, I have to remove the unit from all production queues, else they will continue producing the old unit level. Then, one of my least favorite changed to the game: manual unit upgrades.

The end result is that I'm just burned out. I don't want to start any new maps. It's too much work, and it's eating into my real life. The second issue is that much of the work is not fun. I've complained about this before (manual upgrades, queue management, production balancing).

Do I really want to lose sleep over.... this?

No, probably not.

So if your "engagement" metrics are up, that I completely believe. The game demands greater engagement. More clicks per hour, more active hours per day. But is this sustainable? Is this "good" engagement"?

In my case, no. I'm burned out. You can keep my High Command subscription, I don't mind Bytro making some money, I just don't care any more.

As always, excuse my mistakes in english.

Att. Teniente Somanta.

The one area I really do not like 1.5 in is the stacks of 10.

I've read the guides, reports and strategies for stacking more units than 10 and try to maximize combat efficiency against other players who are stacking 10+ but they are still beating me. The combat system isn't really clear on this.

the one part i enjoy the most is the resource dispersion of 1.0

this alone is enough for me to be stuanchly pro- 1.0

the SBDE system in 1.0 is also greatly dumbed down

how can this game still claim its unique identity when its most iconic foundations are so severely eroded?

Oh waaw, all this negativity, change is for the better, embrace it!

Wow. I stop going on the forums over Christmas and the first thing I come back to is garbage like this.

If you paid any attention at all you would see that Call of War is doing the best it has ever done. More players than ever which means more money than ever which means more game than ever. Of course that makes you sad because that business strategy doesn't cater to your "veteran" status" but guess what? Bytro doesn't care, because not only is the game not dying, it's thriving. All without whiny babies like you.

Agent47 wrote:

Wow. I stop going on the forums over Christmas and the first thing I come back to is garbage like this.

If you paid any attention at all you would see that Call of War is doing the best it has ever done. More players than ever which means more money than ever which means more game than ever. Of course that makes you sad because that business strategy doesn't cater to your "veteran" status" but guess what? Bytro doesn't care, because not only is the game not dying, it's thriving. All without whiny babies like you.

BMfox wrote:

Oh waaw, all this negativity, change is for the better, embrace it!

maybe try spending some time scrolling through posts in the early stages of 1.5?

and no, change is not for the better, and this game is in decline

just looking at the player count doesnt explain a thing

it is okay to not know what you are talking about, however its not okay to not know what u are talking about and pretend that you do

Yet we've seen a lot of growth from our player base. Personally as a mod I see a lot of new faces in chat. And why go to the early stages? I gotta give it to Freezy and the rest of staff because they've been improving 1.5 a lot; from doctrines to new buildings. Though I'd say I still mourn the loss of 1.0, especially for the new players, we still see new faces enjoying CoW, even some veterans as well.

NOOB1433223 wrote:

Agent47 wrote:

Wow. I stop going on the forums over Christmas and the first thing I come back to is garbage like this.

If you paid any attention at all you would see that Call of War is doing the best it has ever done. More players than ever which means more money than ever which means more game than ever. Of course that makes you sad because that business strategy doesn't cater to your "veteran" status" but guess what? Bytro doesn't care, because not only is the game not dying, it's thriving. All without whiny babies like you.

BMfox wrote:

Oh waaw, all this negativity, change is for the better, embrace it!

kinda funny how you think its the "best" its ever donemaybe try spending some time scrolling through posts in the early stages of 1.5?

and no, change is not for the better, and this game is in decline

just looking at the player count doesnt explain a thing

it is okay to not know what you are talking about, however its not okay to not know what u are talking about and pretend that you do

Ciro702 wrote:

Yet we've seen a lot of growth from our player base. Personally as a mod I see a lot of new faces in chat. And why go to the early stages? I gotta give it to Freezy and the rest of staff because they've been improving 1.5 a lot; from doctrines to new buildings. Though I'd say I still mourn the loss of 1.0, especially for the new players, we still see new faces enjoying CoW, even some veterans as well.

The tournaments and role play are completely community-based. Second, I'd like to ask about the "ranking manipulation". Would you elaborate please? Lastly, we have the normal games where it is indeed real time.

Ciro702 wrote:

Second, I'd like to ask about the "ranking manipulation". Would you elaborate please?

Multiple breaks on weak alliances, such five breaks from the bottom of the table is actually 30 free points, You only need to get 5 people from one alliance, 1 from the other and there is a ranking map. I start to encounter such practices more often.

It is also the same with alliances established by multiaccounts. Then he plays with him 3 times, and then the "multialliance" is canceled, for no recognition.

Actually, when I have contact with such a GO, is it possible to add the "Unranked Game" function, where players would count statistics, but the alliance would not lose and gain ELO? It would be a lot easier in sparings and workouts.

Ciro702 wrote:

Personally as a mod I see a lot of new faces in chat