I thought all units did this
Ships shouldn't auto upgrade and other Naval improvements
I think it's pretty silly that for example a early war lvl 1 Carrier I built with room for 2 planes automatically and without cost gets upgraded to a lvl 7 supercarrier with room for 10 planes once I have researched all the technology.
Such late war massive ships should also be significantly more expensive then the small lvl 1 ships.
Historically some upgrades were made on ships, especially on AA and ASW equipment for destroyers, but not really to the same extent for other ships. Speed and main weapons for example was almost never upgraded on ships.
Here is my list of changes I would like to see to ships so the naval combat becomes a bit more realistic:
- No upgrades ( except maybe AA and ASW values )
- Use historical list of shipnames for capital ships ( not some random city names or whatever is used now )
- Carriers capacity get pretty silly later in the game, with the 10 planes costing 17 times as much oil to build as the Carrier does. I think it would be reasonable to remove a few levels and have capacity scale from 2-5 or even 1-3 planes per Carrier. Historically it was hard to bring enough planes to contest an enemy with access to land bases and USA had to build over 100 Carriers in WW2 to get enough capacity to bring the offensive to Japan and find German submarines in the Atlantic. That means you they would have 1000 planes in CoW...
- Only single engine planes can land on Carriers. ( Add torpedo bomber and dive bomber units, current naval bombers become patrol bombers with longer range for scouting and anti submarine and tactical also lose ability to base on Carriers with later tech ).
- To give Cruisers a role more separate from Battleships why not increase Cruisers attacking value a bit and Battleships defending value a little bit?
- A single Submarine should be able to attack and sink a single Carrier. Historically more Carriers were sunk by submarines then by any other warship during WW2 even if they all were protected by destroyers!! Japan lost 8 of their Carriers to American submarines. Carriers should have no submarine attack or defense value but rely on their escorting destroyers.
- Submarines could use some ambush & escape mechanic allowing them to inflict more damage and specifically target capital ships, then dive away and escape from combat that is going badly. More/better destroyers on the enemy side could nullify this ability.
6 Replies
All unit shouldn't auto upgrade.
If you've built BT-7 medium lvl 1 tank, how it can be upgraded to KV-1b medium lvl 2 tank 
It would bring more deep in strategy: build hordes of tanks now, or wait till research would be accomplished.
Hard suggestion, by the way, people already got accustomed to auto-upgrade system.
... besides there is already monarch in hell and he will not tolerate usurpers.
actually, You replenish moral with time right? well, those renforcements would natraly have the newist equepment, so i say yes to land and air auto upgrades
Its a game and should upgrade since it is not a super historical game since what you research is what can lead to victory since in my eyes its good for people who dont use gold or dont play the game 24/7
Regardless of how "realistic" this might be it would totally change the game. It would change how people research and build units and would encourage massive tech stacking. Basically I'm against it because I'm pretty much against anything that ads complexity. The game as it is, is infinitely complex because of the ability to move units anywhere at any time. It's already enough for an average mind like mine to think about. I do sort of like the possibility of tech stacking but eh, there is enough stuff to do already.
War is complex though, I kinda agree with this and kinda don't. I wouldn't mind not having an auto upgrade.
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.


