amphibians, copters and mines

Sounds more like a WWIII game to me but i'm in

I don't like the destroying building part. This means when a player is losing he will destroy all of his building before going AFK. This means a weaker economy and less possibility for troop production. This would drag the game on and wouldn't be cool. Half of the players now don't know how to upgrade an Industrial Complex.

Embarking and dissembarking makes it fair. Otherwise you could invade the UK, Spain, Morrocco, Turkey in a couple of hours while your opponent is asleep.

Well yes you made a few good point

First of all the border between the 2nd world war and the cold war is very slim. The first cold war conflicts, like the 1st berlin crisis and the korean war were the consequences of the WW and the prequels of the cold. In my interpretation this transition belongs to the age of the world war too

I didnt think about the destroying of the buildings that way. I just used to wish to destroy them when i have to retreat from somewhere and scorch the earth before the enemy.

The amphibious units werent my best idea, the real armys arent use the apc-s on the sea

I like some of your idea's, but not all.

I have to agree with BMFox, sounds a lot like the Cold War.

However, I agree with:

• Land mines and anti-ship units.
• Hospital Buildings
• Lower Capital Morale Penalty

There are ways to scorch the earth before an enemy, but being able to destroy all your buildings would make the game drag on forever. Plus you'd never grow.

Of all ideas discussed above, hospital buildings are my favorite ... Though you could assume that barracks have military hospitals ... It may even the field a little for players low in gold ... (-:

I would love to see the capital distance penalty reduced significantly. It doesn't make sense in some cases.

I like the idea for the introduction of mines, that is a big part of strategy on the 20th century era.

I have also amalgamated a number of new ideas for COW, including specialised research doctrines, and infrastructure implementations.

Here is a copy/paste from an earlier thread..titled; New gaming units (March).

MARINE:

Requirements; Barracks lvl. II,

Naval Yards lvl. I

Infantry lvl. III

Strength: 4 on any terrain except mountains (-25%)

Increased speed on coastal cities and water for embarkation & disembarkation

PARATROOPER;

Requirements; Barracks lvl. II

Airbase lvl. I

Infantry lvl. III

Can only land on visible terrain,

Load time, 30 - 60 minutes,

On enemy ground landing strength; +25% mountains, +25% City, +50% hills/forest/jungles, +10% grassland

Cannot land on occupied ground

GUARD;

Requirements; Infantry lvl. I & militia lvl. I

Strength at 2.0 capacity

Can only be stationed in cities

Decreased morale loss to the city stationed

% increase to counter spies/espionage

Only defends

RANGER UNIT:

Requirements; Requires motorized infantry lvl. II

% strength increase in forests, jungles, hills

% increase in health healing

STEALTH BOMBER; (1945 - 1954 era)

Requirements; tactical bomber lvl. VI

Ignores radar

RADAR BASE

Requirements; Research

lvl. I Airbase

Decreases fog of war where built

CAPITAL WORKS;

Attributes; lvl. I increase wealth 10%

lvl. II increase wealth 10%

lvl. III increase wealth 10%

Can only be built in capital city

HOSPITAL;

Attributes; Increased morale & healing

Population growth

GROUP I; ALLIED TYPE

Infantry; Increased HP, Marine unit

Increased HP motorized infantry

Decreased cost artillery

Faster production time, fighter wing

Armour; Increased HP, heavy tank

Increase HP, mobile artillery

Naval; Increased HP, Destroyer

Increased HP, Carrier

Air; Increased HP, strategic bomber

Special; Faster research time strategic bomber & radar.

GROUP II; AXIS TYPE

Infantry; Increased HP, anti air

Faster production time for infantry

Increased HP, paratrooper

Armour; Increased HP, light tank

Increased HP, armoured car

Naval; Increased HP, submarine

Increase HP, cruiser

Air; Increase HP, tac bombers

Increase HP, rocket fighter

Special; Increase HP, rail gun

Decrease cost, missile

GROUP III; SOVIET TYPE

Infantry; Faster time militia production

Increase HP, artillery

Decrease cost commando

Armour; Increase HP, medium tank

Increase HP. mobile anti air

Naval; Increase HP, Nuclear submarine

Air; Reduced research time, fighter wing

Special; Increased capacity for espionage (upgrade spies)

Reduced cost, atomic research & nuclear power research

GROUP IV; EASTERN TYPE

Infantry; Increased HP, infantry

Increased HP, anti armour

Increase HP, guard

Armour; Increase HP, light tank

Increase HP, tank destroyer

Naval; Faster production time, submarine

Increase HP, Battleship

Air; Decreased cost, fighter wing

Increase HP, Naval bomber

Faster research time, jet fighter

Quite a list Bigboss.

Paratroopers have been introduced, guards sound like militia, and rangers are redundant. What would be the point of regular infantry?

Some of the units listed here don't fit in the WW2 Timeline.

However, I like the idea of a radar base and hospitals. Those would be cool.

Every unit provided for is part of the WW2 timeline, either as a concept yet to be industrialised or that it is an actual fighting unit.

Rangers are redundant??? How does this happen..... Think of the ranger unit, as a steroid boost to the already unpopular motorised infantry.

I am glad that you like some of my ideas, it means some of them could realy improove the game.

Also the nazis tested a stealth bomber in 1945 the Horten Ho 229 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229#Specifications_) but the allies had to understand the jet engine first, adn they started to experiment with the radar absorbent materials far later.

Also in the game i always like to react for my opponents new tools, its the military innovation. If there is a radar, than there should be stealth units too.

Also the game already has advanced rocket and nucleal technology, a lots of secret weapons which actualy were used far after the world war. If the secret technology tree can go until 1960, than why cant other technologyes?

All i know is that intercontinental rockets would make this game a spamming party. I dont have much opinions on other points tho, if i bring something i will write it

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Rangers are redundant??? How does this happen..... Think of the ranger unit, as a steroid boost to the already unpopular motorised infantry.

As far as the GUARD you should make the US National Guards like this:

2/3 strength and half the speed of infantry

double the training time

and 3x the amount of food

hakijaa wrote:

All i know is that intercontinental rockets would make this game a spamming party. I dont have much opinions on other points tho, if i bring something i will write it

dw98 wrote:

If you are talking US Rangers - they are nothing like or even close to motorised infantry.

Yes they are similar, these are light mobile infantry based units, small and light weapon equipped....

dw98 wrote:

As far as the GUARD you should make the US National Guards like this:

2/3 strength and half the speed of infantry

double the training time

and 3x the amount of food

As for the national Gaurd unit...COW 1942 is an international gaming strategy, WW2 was an international war encompassing many nations and many cultures. Simply a Gaurd unit will suffice and I say is the unit that should be introduced most of all...exactly how I have suggested it to be. Small coiners will benefit from this, especially that they might hold a safe nation but be significantly less powerful than another geographical sphere of influence, for example, Australia versus Turkey scenario.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Every unit provided for is part of the WW2 timeline, either as a concept yet to be industrialised or that it is an actual fighting unit.

Rangers are redundant??? How does this happen..... Think of the ranger unit, as a steroid boost to the already unpopular motorised infantry.

If rangers were added, with all the other units mentioned, the research train would be huge, with nobody able to research units effectively.

General Nightman wrote:

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Every unit provided for is part of the WW2 timeline, either as a concept yet to be industrialised or that it is an actual fighting unit.

Rangers are redundant??? How does this happen..... Think of the ranger unit, as a steroid boost to the already unpopular motorised infantry.

Motorized infantry fill their place, which mainly is to escort tanks or prep for mechanized infantry.If rangers were added, with all the other units mentioned, the research train would be huge, with nobody able to research units effectively.

A variable research tree is what a strategy game is all about, more complexities = more gameplay = more profits...everybody is happy, I didn't choose to play COW because it was a simple game...people want strategy.

On a world map creators should be able to develop loads of possibilities. Having said that, it may seem unorthodox that a surmountable number of ideas will only redefine any strategy game and be the status quo, as it were, and it might be that it is getting ahead of itself. That is why of course limitations are set, or that prerequisites act as inhibitors to a flush victory.

A more option able research tree should really be implemented on larger maps...for example...I would see a larger sized world map, about the size of the America Home front map to the full world scale.

Motorized infantry are opening the research tree enough to allow for COW to realise that this game is certainly strategical and so why not make more options, not necessarily required as a prerequisite to victory, thus, allows for more alternative gaming scenarios.

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Yes they are similar, these are light mobile infantry based units, small and light weapon equipped....

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

As for the national Gaurd unit...COW 1942 is an international gaming strategy, WW2 was an international war encompassing many nations and many cultures.

dw98 wrote:

bigboss_ironfist wrote:

Rangers are redundant??? How does this happen..... Think of the ranger unit, as a steroid boost to the already unpopular motorised infantry.

If you are talking US Rangers - they are nothing like or even close to motorised infantry.

As far as the GUARD you should make the US National Guards like this:

2/3 strength and half the speed of infantry

double the training time

and 3x the amount of food

I get the joke, National guard eat too much McDonalds.

amphibious vehicle: interesting thought. I don't think there should be a no disembark time but definitely have be significantly lower, like about 30 min.

copter: this is a WW2 game, not a Vietnam game

mines: also a good idea. Iand mines would be cool and also mines in the sea that would do a certain amout of damage when passed over by other ships.