Disband unit option!

This is represented by the automatic upgrade when research finishes. PzKfw-III (level x) is automatically replaced by Panther (level x+1)

Restrisiko wrote:

Ciladen W wrote:

Why does this still not exist?

Ciladen W wrote:

Seriously, why is this not a thing? Even if it returns nothing.

Because, without this feature there is a greater strategic challenge - manage when, where and why you should build which units best, makes the game sophisticated - and, fortunately, most players still love a challenging game.

This.

Welcome to Call of War. Every decision you make is permanent. Ther is no "undo" button. You don't get a second chance at war, you have to get it right from the start.

Next you will be wanting to turn back time so you can correct mistakes before they start.

VorlonFCW wrote:

Welcome to Call of War. Every decision you make is permanent. Ther is no "undo" button. You don't get a second chance at war, you have to get it right from the start.

Decisions are "permanent" only in the sense that they affect the outcome of a particular game. No decision in any given game is fatal to an entire career in Call of War.

Except that disbanding units is perfectly realistic. As it stands, it doesn't make the game terribly strategic, it just encourages kamakazeing old troops. I agree that disbanding units shouldn't return anything. But it makes no sense that units are permanent.

Ciladen W wrote:

... it makes no sense that units are permanent.

Restrisiko wrote:

Ciladen W wrote:

... it makes no sense that units are permanent.

Secret tip: There is a fabulous realistic option to dispose needless and expired units; as it is handled in the martial arts for millennia - send them to the front ..

Quasi-duck wrote:

Restrisiko wrote:

Ciladen W wrote:

... it makes no sense that units are permanent.

Secret tip: There is a fabulous realistic option to dispose needless and expired units; as it is handled in the martial arts for millennia - send them to the front ..

Ciladen said that what you suggest is stupid in the post you quoted lol, and I agree with them.

Restrisiko wrote:

Uh, can you help me please - where did I suggest anything here?

Quasi-duck wrote:

You suggested sending unwanted units on a suicide mission.

Restrisiko wrote:

the ancient Kamikaze tactic he addressed can be applied here at any time for destroying superfluous units - absolute realistically ; because realism is what is desired ..

Quasi-duck wrote:

Lol it is very unrealistic, it is a last resort usually, not when you have a unit you don't want just send them on a suicide mission.

But it was already done in antiquity, when food was no longer enough for everyone; and I like it ..

Restrisiko wrote:

Quasi-duck wrote:

Lol it is very unrealistic, it is a last resort usually, not when you have a unit you don't want just send them on a suicide mission.

It's the last resort when you have nothing more or your back to the wall. But it was already done in antiquity, when food was no longer enough for everyone; and I like it ..

Quasi-duck wrote:

Lol does not mean it is right, or realistic. It is also how to get yourself coup'ed 101.

Restrisiko wrote:

I'm german, here it was realistic - but realistic or not, I don't need neither disband nor kamikaze in this game, because I plan ahead what units I recruit.. - ..in reality, though, I would use....

Quasi-duck wrote:

Restrisiko wrote:

I'm german, here it was realistic - but realistic or not, I don't need neither disband nor kamikaze in this game, because I plan ahead what units I recruit.. - ..in reality, though, I would use....

Lol I think most people would rather disband their troops rather than get them killed, irl or in game. Also some troops might need to built for a one off use, e.g. AA or AT units, and are just left to sit around afterwards.

I prefer the second solution (..and sending units as kamikaze is also still possible there.. )

Restrisiko wrote:

.either be able to spam units haphazardly and later simply dissolve them to spam others and having a monotonous game where it is more important to be able to click quickly, than to planning ahead.. >> ..or having to plan with foresight what and when and why and where you build something and having therefore a game with demanding challenge ..

I see, maybe my English is not good enough to explain what I mean and why the game offers more and something for everyone without a "disband" option; so here's another try in a different way :

With disband option: Possibility to replace units as needed at any time while at the same time losing the challenge of long-term planning ..

The Disbander + The Strategist = 1 1

As it is now, without disband option: Keeps the strategic challenge and, of course, keeps also the option to "disband" unneeded units at the front - where, by the way, with this kind of "disbanding" you can "disband" some units of your enemy at the same time, so that he can be happy too ..

The Disbander + The Strategist + The Enemy = more people happy

Restrisiko wrote:

As it is now, without disband option: Keeps the strategic challenge and, of course, keeps also the option to "disband" unneeded units at the front - where, by the way, with this kind of "disbanding" you can "disband" some units of your enemy at the same time, so that he can be happy too ..

The Disbander + The Strategist + The Enemy = more people happy

Well played, mein herr.

This is all nonsense.

Having no disband option does not make the game "more strategic." It does not add a level of having to plan ahead. Being able to disband units would not allow you to simply spam more. You can always kamikaze units, which is not realistic for the purposes of not wanting to maintain existing units.

Having more options in most cases makes a game *more strategic.* Do you disband those units, or do you need them? In almost all cases, units are worth more than their upkeep (and again, it's already true that you can kamikaze them).

The main reason I want this to change is realism, but it came up because kamikazing all of these troops is bad for my KD ratio. "Difficulty planning" isn't even a factor, and I can't imagine a situation in which it would be. Not having this option adds no strategic value, is dumb, and your defense of it is just pretentious nonsense. "Oh, every infantry I build in the early game is precisely calculated for the end game." No it isn't. You build what you can early so that you can expand and increase your resource production. Then later on, you kamakaze those troops to build new ones. It's already much more efficient than hoarding resources like a newb.

Yeah I don't think either of us are going to change our minds on this matter.