What are the signs of dangerous players in game?

To me, the stats is like a job resume. They might have the best resume but if they don’t know how to play the game, they still will lose

now, anyone can get a good k/d ratio. The army composition shows the experience of tough troops in the game.

cl0xy wrote:

Win ratio is misleading because someone could have a 0.000001% win ratio and be very good, they have that win % because they have went inactive a lot or have found a lot of events and games boring so left

I go inactive because I dont want to fight bots, and my ally isn't retiring

cl0xy wrote:

I go inactive because I dont want to fight bots, and my ally isn't retiring

probably players using gold like nuts are the most troublesome than ever... like, if you just start the game, and they make troops a lot using gold then make a death stack, you're doomed if they pound you. otherwise, i'd say kill ratio tells roughly tells whether the player is good at attacking and defending or just yolo charge everything. solo wins usually tell the player is really good at going one on one.

Golders have the advantage of unit hp regeneration, and also research time and contruction/production, but units on force march has the same speed for both the spender and unspending player. We should also note that the few nuisances that spend are the people sponsoring this game, just get over with it, or bytro's not going to exist for long if they ban gold users. You can run around units, while using forced march, and try to capture undefended cities. They may spam troops, but they are limited to cities, and they need time to rally and move the units.

mindfields wrote:

Doing recon on other players regions and seeing these type of marks.

Correctly analyzing players statistics is of coarse one way, and another is viewing who are the poorest players. Those who spend every last drop of their resources and cash are maximizing their country's ability to grow stronger, while the richest players for what ever reason, are not. And as for those of you who say players with many solo victories are untrustworthy is total nonsense. In order to justify that claim you would have to have full knowledge of how they attained all their wins. Anything else is just pure speculation. If any of you have been betrayed by someone with many solo victories, that does not mean they do that all the time. You would be wiser not to trust players who have played many games with no solo victories and few or no coalition ones, especially if they are in a coalition with you. They may be loyal but their obvious lack of skill makes them unreliable and vulnerable to experienced generals. I've played this game for a long time and encountered many untrustworthy players. Most of them had poor records, with a few from fair to good. Having a high solo victory score only means a player is DANGEROUS, and knows how to win games by themselves. Could it be I detect a little jealousy here instead?

If you see this. Then you know you are done for. No average player can pull this off. This is advanced strategy in my honest opinion.

Eunizerx03 wrote:

If you see this. Then you know you are done for. No average player can pull this off. This is advanced strategy in my honest opinion.

Also with all those forces on a single province I can imagine his outer provinces and cities might be quite vulnerable.

Eunizerx03 wrote:

If you see this. Then you know you are done for. No average player can pull this off. This is advanced strategy in my honest opinion.

Eunizerx03 wrote:

If you see this. Then you know you are done for. No average player can pull this off. This is advanced strategy in my honest opinion.

If they have skilled anti-air, there comes the real problem.

cl0xy wrote:

Eunizerx03 wrote:

If you see this. Then you know you are done for. No average player can pull this off. This is advanced strategy in my honest opinion.

Depending on what day this is, you could easily counter it with a 30 stack airforce, I make that by day 10.

If they have skilled anti-air, there comes the real problem.

-0-0-0 wrote:

Eunizerx03 wrote:

If you see this. Then you know you are done for. No average player can pull this off. This is advanced strategy in my honest opinion.

Overstacking wouldn't be more a "noob" sign?

Also with all those forces on a single province I can imagine his outer provinces and cities might be quite vulnerable.

Eunizerx03 wrote:

cl0xy wrote:

Eunizerx03 wrote:

If you see this. Then you know you are done for. No average player can pull this off. This is advanced strategy in my honest opinion.

Depending on what day this is, you could easily counter it with a 30 stack airforce, I make that by day 10.If they have skilled anti-air, there comes the real problem.

The person who took it, it's not my picture FYI, said it had 4anti air and 4 antitank in each stack. The rest of them are rocket artilleries. All of them are max-level units.He has high command.

Eunizerx03 wrote:

-0-0-0 wrote:

Eunizerx03 wrote:

If you see this. Then you know you are done for. No average player can pull this off. This is advanced strategy in my honest opinion.

Overstacking wouldn't be more a "noob" sign?Also with all those forces on a single province I can imagine his outer provinces and cities might be quite vulnerable.

Not overstacking if he separated it like that so that each stack can fire its own damage if ever an enemy stack approaches

-0-0-0 wrote:

Any army with +10 units is Overstsacked

BMfox wrote:

-0-0-0 wrote:

Any army with +10 units is Overstsacked

That's not true. A stack with 10 artillery, 10 infantry and 5AA is within SDBE. The 10 artillery will always attack from range. If the stack is attacked in melee battle than the 10 infantry will fight. If the stack gets attacked by planes than the 5AA and 5 infantry will defend. So the stack is 25 units but still in range, melee or in air defence it is always SDBE optimized.

On the wiki says the following:

• The combat system works in a way that only the 10 strongest units per damage category deal damage to an enemy. Try to keep your unit count in an army close to 10 to not lose damage efficiency.

  https://wiki.callofwar.com/wiki/GUIDE:_HOW_TO_PLAY#Optimize_your_army_stack

-0-0-0 wrote:

BMfox wrote:

-0-0-0 wrote:

Any army with +10 units is Overstsacked

That's not true. A stack with 10 artillery, 10 infantry and 5AA is within SDBE. The 10 artillery will always attack from range. If the stack is attacked in melee battle than the 10 infantry will fight. If the stack gets attacked by planes than the 5AA and 5 infantry will defend. So the stack is 25 units but still in range, melee or in air defence it is always SDBE optimized.

Could you clarify then what are the penalties of overstacking an army with +10 units? As I understand from your response there are no penalties as the 10 stonger units are the ones that will fight in every situation, so it's just a super-army with masive hitpoints that will always fight at 100% in the area needed.

On the wiki says the following:

• The combat system works in a way that only the 10 strongest units per damage category deal damage to an enemy. Try to keep your unit count in an army close to 10 to not lose damage efficiency.

  https://wiki.callofwar.com/wiki/GUIDE:_HOW_TO_PLAY#Optimize_your_army_stack

Also, on the unit display there's a clear sign where the maximun is 10:

As BMFox said. If you have lets say 30 units in a stack composed of 10 ARTY, 10 AT, and 10 AA. It works like this. For example a stack of 10 tanks enters the range of the 30 stack, the 10 ARTY damage it with their stats since the AA and AT really cant do anything since they dont have range.

When that unit comes close enough that they lock with the 30 unit stack in Close Quarter Combat (CqC), the 10 AT have the highest dmg on the tanks, so they become the strongest 10 units.

Same goes if a unit of planes attacks the 30 stack, its the AA that become the 10 strongest units.

But while this happens, the damage done by the tanks and the planes are distributed to the entire 30 units of that stack. So thats how it works great.