Remove all those cold war weapns!

but this game has somewhat of a what if, for long games it's like, what if WW2 lasted to 1946 or later, the whole world would have had jets, nuke ships, "Amerika Bombers", and more

Call of War would be a much more interesting strategy game if it simply focused on the technology of 1939-45, with a little bit of wiggle room for new weapons technologies that were under active development at the end of World War II, such as first-generation jet aircraft (but not rocket fighters, which were an aviation dead end), intermediate range missiles of appropriate strength and accuracy (but not nuclear armed), advanced diesel-electric submarines (but not nuclear-powered), large fleet carriers (but not nuclear-powered super carriers), etc.

It is really quite remarkable how quickly and how far weapons technology evolved in six years, and adding anachronistic technologies of the late 1950s, 1960s and 1970s to the game ignores some of the more interesting nuances of the real 1939-46 tech.

If Call of War were to focus on the real technology of the era, instead of 1945-46 fantasy weapons ---- many of which never existed or would not exist for a decade or two after 1945, the game would be both more challenging for aficionados and would alleviate the problem of players with a poor grasp of tactics who nevertheless "buy" late-game victories by spamming over-powered tactical rockets and nuclear missiles that were no more than a dream in 1945.

injinji wrote:

. . . if WW2 lasted to 1946 or later, the whole world would have had jets, nuke ships, "Amerika Bombers" . . .

As for nuclear propulsion for submarines and capital ships, that technology would require another decade, and a five-year crash program by the U.S. Navy to mature to deployable combat tech, with the commissioning of the USS Nautilus in late 1954. It would be another 7 years before the U.S. Navy was satisfied with the safety and reliability of nuclear propulsion before it was incorporate into an aircraft carrier (USS Enterprise CVN-65).

Call of War would have fewer "balancing problems" and present more interesting challenges for ground combat if it simply focused on the real WW2-era tech, with a hard cut-off of 1950 for anything that was not deployed in combat-ready condition by that time.

MontanaBB wrote:

injinji wrote:

. . . if WW2 lasted to 1946 or later, the whole world would have had jets, nuke ships, "Amerika Bombers" . . .

. . .The "Amerika Bomber" concept went into production in mid-1944, too, except the Americans produced it, not the Germans; it was called the B-29. . . .

injinji wrote:

the Junkers Ju 390 (one of the Amerika Bombers) flew from a base in France to where the USA appeared on the horizon and back

As for the B-29, it routinely flew combat missions over distances of 3,000 to 3,250 miles with its maximum bomb load of 16,000 pounds (eight tons), but its usually listed combat range of 3,250 miles assumes an 8-ton bomb load. What is rarely mentioned on the various published spec sheets, is that it could easily extend its range to 5,000 miles when carrying only a 2,000-pound (1-ton) bomb load. Like most bombers, the B-29 had excess fuel capacity, and could trade the weight of additional aviation gas for more bombs, or vice versa.

Most B-29 spec sheets list its ferry range as 5,600 miles. After the war, in 1946, modified B-29s set non-stop distance records of 6,400, 7,916 and 9,422 miles. Clearly the type never fully realized its potential full combat range, largely because the U.S. Marines and Navy captured Saipan and Tinian in the Marianas, shortening the distance to most major Japanese cities to 1,500 miles or less, which in turn allowed the planes to reduce fuel load and maximize bomb load from October 1944 to August 1945.

In comparison, the combat stats for the Ju 390 are non-existent and its potential range and bomb load are matters for speculation.

Fine, you win this one Montanaman, but please keep the weapons guys, I like the what-if