Hello everyone, and welcome to the Call of War unofficial Comprehensive Suggestion List.
The goal of this thread is to list everything that has been suggested on the forums, and categorize them based on what players want. For now, there will be a simple 3 category system, but in the future I may rank some items depending on how important they are, or the frequency of discussion.
Items in the "Positives" section have a general support from most players, and some are very likely to be added in the future. Items in the "Negatives" section have been discussed and have been found to be a feature that should not be added to Call of War. Items in the "Undecided" category have mixed reviews and probably need more discussion to determine whether the majority of players want them or not. So, without further ado...
List of Suggestions for Call of War:
Positive Reviews:
Aircraft no longer defending against ground troops when not moving on an airfield
Disbanding Units
Marines
Paratrooper (sorry Bill)
Trading technology
Larger amount of men per infantry unit
Pacific Map
Faroe islands
Tank Destroyers
Coastal Guns
Naval Bomber Buff
Railroad gun buff
Cancel all orders button
Radio operators
Breaking down buildings
Commando rebalance w/ stealth
Minelayers + sweeper ships
Cruiser variants
Corvettes/Patrol Boats
Escort ships
World Map
Kiel Canal
Group Conversations
Intelligence Station building
Ocean Zones (to incentivize island hopping)
Other Maps (America, Middle East, Asia, etc.)
Group Chat for nations
Healing buildings
Healing troops
Farms/food rebalancing
SAM (mix of bomber and fighter)
Dynamic view range in different terrain
Sort TRADE LIST provinces in alphabetical order
Negative Reviews:
Resource Sliders (like S1914)
Buffing Infantry
Less resource intake from building things (food, manpower, etc.)
Tanks/mech inf only using oil when moving
More specific types of bombers (subject to change)
Multiple ports
Old graphics
Police
Recruiting office
Non-core production penalty removal
Minimap
Super Weapons
play as small AI countries
Retreating
Renaming Provinces
Undecided:
Province detail page
Kicking active players for RP
Prize Wheel (like S1914)
Capturing planes
Music
Wonder Weapons
Supply line logistics
Different Monetization features
Tank destroying aircraft
Faster railroads
Bunkers
Limit on Nukes/Reactors
Naming Regiments
Province View
Weather
Encirclement debuffing troops/province
Medals for First/Second/Third
Choosing where to place airfields within provinces
Rivers
Gold-free games
Gold limits
Radar
Deconstruction
I'm sure there's plenty of things that I've missed here, so feel free to include any suggestions I may have missed.
689 Replies
12 Apr 2016, 21:41
Redd Baron wrote:
Now that we have carriers, I have been experimenting with them a bit. In general I like them a lot. I do have one suggestion though. At some point on the tech tree, upgrading aircraft carriers should allow one to use rocket planes on carriers. Maybe carrier 4? Whatever people think is right.
PS the only complaint I actually have with carriers is a mechanics issue with combining them into fleets. Trying to move a destroyer into a fleet with a carrier will result in a message saying only naval aircraft can join the fleet. Destroyers are not even a plane! You can get around this by instead joining the carrier group to the destroyer, but it is annoying in certain circumstances.
Not on carriers, they never are or were launched from there
I want them to be able to be launched from a new unit.. rocket subs
or a missile cruiser.. but off the top of my head, they didnt have them around this time..
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
13 Apr 2016, 13:03
I am aware of this. But I suspect the reason the Germans never developed one for carriers is they didn't ever complete their carrier. If they had completed their carrier, a rocket interceptor would have made perfect sense. The japanese actually had a design for one, even had a carrier based jet in the works, just never got off the drawing board and onto a ship. All the carrier producing countries were working on rocket assist. So it's not too big a leap.
But since this game isn't 100% historical, but rather allows to to run your country a bit differently than the rest.......It is something a country could have done, if they were so inclined.
13 Apr 2016, 14:22
oceanhawk wrote:
I want them to be able to be launched from a new unit.. rocket subs
Why do you want RINT launched from subs....?
13 Apr 2016, 14:32
Quasi-duck wrote:
oceanhawk wrote:
I want them to be able to be launched from a new unit.. rocket subs
Why do you want RINT launched from subs....?
Cos you have a strike ability..
If you lack naval dominance, you can support offensive operations
they can hugely support seaborne operations
Adds more options
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
13 Apr 2016, 14:38
oceanhawk wrote:
Cos you have a strike ability..
Rocket interceptors are useless for this............
13 Apr 2016, 14:46
Quasi-duck wrote:
oceanhawk wrote:
Cos you have a strike ability..
Rocket interceptors are useless for this............
I never said I wanted Rocket fighers..
I said I wanted Rockets or missiles...
how the hell could you get rocket fighters on a submarine?
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
13 Apr 2016, 14:49
oceanhawk wrote:
I never said I wanted Rocket fighers..
That is what RINT are......
oceanhawk wrote:
how the hell could you get rocket fighters on a submarine?
Boxes.
13 Apr 2016, 14:53
Quasi-duck wrote:
oceanhawk wrote:
I never said I wanted Rocket fighers..
That is what RINT are......
oceanhawk wrote:
how the hell could you get rocket fighters on a submarine?
Boxes.
And tell me where you would launch them from?
RINT.. Also stands for Results in no time...
Rockets, are fast and always kill...
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
13 Apr 2016, 14:59
oceanhawk wrote:
And tell me where you would launch them from?
The deck, sure, the Japs did it.
oceanhawk wrote:
RINT.. Also stands for Results in no time...
That would be R.I.N.T. not RINT.
oceanhawk wrote:
always kill...
They don't, they cannot track.
13 Apr 2016, 15:18 (edited)
Quasi-duck wrote:
oceanhawk wrote:
And tell me where you would launch them from?
The deck, sure, the Japs did it.
oceanhawk wrote:
RINT.. Also stands for Results in no time...
That would be R.I.N.T. not RINT.
oceanhawk wrote:
always kill...
They don't, they cannot track.
Hardly doubt the Japanese launched rocket fighters from their subs..
No no.. still RINT..
sure BAR Is browning automatic rifle ( I know that stuff confuses you)
Not B.A.R
Yes they dont track, but they are lethal..
sure I just killed over 180k enemy troops with a few rockets...
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
13 Apr 2016, 15:34
oceanhawk wrote:
Hardly doubt the japs launched rocket fighters from their subs..
They launched planes, not RINT. Still possible. Landing is the hard part but just glide down with some pontoons, job done. Not sure how aerodynamic that is that is though but the US and USSR as well as others had jet hydroplanes and flying-boats.
oceanhawk wrote:
Yes they dont track, but they are lethal..
So are blades of grass and hugs!
oceanhawk wrote:
sure I just killed over 180k enemy troops with a few rockets...
And?
13 Apr 2016, 15:37
Quasi-duck wrote:
oceanhawk wrote:
Hardly doubt the japs launched rocket fighters from their subs..
They launched planes, not RINT. Still possible. Landing is the hard part but just glide down with some pontoons, job done. Not sure how aerodynamic that is that is though but the US and USSR as well as others had jet hydroplanes and flying-boats.
oceanhawk wrote:
Yes they dont track, but they are lethal..
So are blades of grass and hugs!
oceanhawk wrote:
sure I just killed over 180k enemy troops with a few rockets...
And?
Flying boats, didnt land on submarines..
Its not possible that RINT could land on subs..
No Grass is not lethal..
Trying to prove a point that rockets are good...
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
13 Apr 2016, 15:48
oceanhawk wrote:
Flying boats, didnt land on submarines..
Yeah, it was float planes!
oceanhawk wrote:
Its not possible that RINT could land on subs..
You don't know.
oceanhawk wrote:
No Grass is not lethal..
You must be very uncreative.
13 Apr 2016, 15:52 (edited)
Quasi-duck wrote:
oceanhawk wrote:
Flying boats, didnt land on submarines..
Yeah, it was float planes!
oceanhawk wrote:
Its not possible that RINT could land on subs..
You don't know.
oceanhawk wrote:
No Grass is not lethal..
You must be very uncreative.
No... didnt land on subs..
Yes it is.. Japanese never had jet aircraft...
Im very creative.. just seems to die arguing with you
my suggestions were already very creative..
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
13 Apr 2016, 15:57
oceanhawk wrote:
No... didnt land on subs..
Oh yeah, water next to it.
oceanhawk wrote:
japs never had jet aircraft...
Yeah, it is meant to be a RINT!
oceanhawk wrote:
my suggestions were already very creative..
I would disagree.
13 Apr 2016, 16:09
I found I could combine DDs & CCs okay (but don't remember if I was joining the CV to the CC/DD or vice versa).
But I was having a problem using Ctrl to gather my subs to the CV stack. It was like trying to gather a gaggle of geese...they'd come together and then wander off a li'l bit.
13 Apr 2016, 16:16
Quasi-duck wrote:
oceanhawk wrote:
No... didnt land on subs..
Oh yeah, water next to it.
oceanhawk wrote:
japs never had jet aircraft...
Yeah, it is meant to be a RINT!
oceanhawk wrote:
my suggestions were already very creative..
I would disagree.
Yes exactly the water.. not the sub
RINT is jet powered... japs didnt have any, and certainly didnt have any that can land on subs
you disagree on everything, even stuff you say a few months before hand
so...
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
13 Apr 2016, 16:19
oceanhawk wrote:
RINT is jet powered.
Rockets are not jets.....
13 Apr 2016, 16:36
No surprise there...
your so far behind all of us lol
yes rockets are not jets...
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
13 Apr 2016, 16:44
oceanhawk wrote:
yes rockets are not jets...
You said RINT are jets. RINT stands rocket interceptor, which are quite clearly not jets, like you said. You make so many moronic statements it is a disgrace.
🔒This thread is locked. No new replies can be posted.
