Because of the ridiculous situation with over-powered Tactical Bombers, I've decided to start a Poll to see what the community at large thinks of the situation. If you have issues with Tactical Bombers, you will want to vote in this poll to let your voice be heard by the people at Bytro.
After voting, click here if you want to learn about an awesome solution that would fix this problem once and for all. I have made a proposal that will solve this issue. For the past year or so, the folks at Bytro have seemed either incapable or unwilling to fix this broken problem and they have not acted to provide a solution. But now, they are without excuse because I have come up with a real solution that eliminates all possibility of imbalancing the game while still fixing the bomber issue once and for all.
It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.When exactly are you going to wake up to the fact that if they haven't changed it in a years time they probably have no intention on it?
They probably haven't changed it either because they haven't realized the issue was this bad or else they haven't been able to think up the ultimate solution as I have done. Calculating for overlapping patrol zones is not a difficult thing, but the only thing they've had the imagination to consider -- considering the overlap -- is how opaque to make the overlapping portions to be....purely graphical, not game-play oriented, at all.
This is why they clearly need to hire me for the dev team. My deeper natural understanding about game-play algorithms and my supernatural ability to solve problems makes me a fantastic candidate for employment. Unfortunately, they probably aren't willing to pay me enough to have to move to Germany or insightful enough to allow me to e-commute from America. But that's not an insult to the illustrious people in charge at Bytro, just an acknowledgement of their likely shortsightedness. Indeed, it is possible that my reputation for genius hasn't reached Germany, yet.
It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.I got a solution for ya
You can use delay function on your ground troop stacks to get that 100% SBDE that you crave.. or you can copy your enemy and build some boomers yourself. Or you can rocket their airbase or use spies. Lots of possibilities.
And I can tell you, no tripple, quadrouple stack of planes can just easily kille a stack of this type of config: 15AA 10SPAA 10LT 10MT 10HT 10MechInf 20INF 10Commandos. You should try it, it's fun. Now throw in a fort, use delay function, or just use planes yourself?
The possibilites are almost endless 
Sorry, Wild, but by the time you've built up all that, the enemy has already taken over half your empire with a couple stacks of bombers. And when you do bring up that huge stack...to a fortress and delayed and whatever else, guarded by a stack of fighters, no less, and he'll just overlap 10 stacks of bombers each with about 8 bombers and 10 fighters and your really strong ground force will get dwindled to nothing in a couple hours.
I've already tested the ultimate stack defense and the multiple stack defense and got my ass handed to me as well as my dominating status shot down from second-strongest world-wide power to lowly court jester in a matter of hours. I documented how all this went down here.
It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.You can't just presume that. AT/AC/LT/Arty/AA are all available from day one so it's not true that you can't build a proper stack that you can use to penetrate your enemies defenses before it's too late. Just build some planes damnit, otherwise you'll lose. Which should be obvious. Paki/India war was won with planes - you can't go without em!
You say a lot of things that sound smart Diabolical. It's like reading my company's visionary / weekly updates from the brass that are more PR and stunt than actual subject.
Maybe your problem is that you do not put in enough time in your games or give up too easily? There are a number a ways to beat a Tac/LT spammer, you just don't seem to grasp it I'm afraid.
*This is not meant as a personal attack, but I'm close to giving up you, so that's why the tone of this letter is probably not so nice! Nothing personal!
#roasted
I agree with WildL. I know I often lose a portion of bombers taking out large AI stacks with no AA. This is late game, so the stacks are pretty big.
50/50 opinions.
This will be as intense as the US election
Actually, I do build all that. But, like I just posted here, you can't account for the underhanded methodology of the "other side". They will exploit the system to ensure that any decent player that doesn't use exploits are quickly put down like a rabid dog. The truth is that those exploiters really fear the decent players because most of the exploiters are themselves not very good when playing fair. A good player is one that can win without using exploits. I've done that. In fact I do that quite a bit.wildL SPQR wrote:
You can't just presume that. AT/AC/LT/Arty/AA are all available from day one so it's not true that you can't build a proper stack that you can use to penetrate your enemies defenses before it's too late. Just build some planes damnit, otherwise you'll lose. Which should be obvious. Paki/India war was won with planes - you can't go without em!You say a lot of things that sound smart Diabolical. It's like reading my company's visionary / weekly updates from the brass that are more PR and stunt than actual subject.
Maybe your problem is that you do not put in enough time in your games or give up too easily? There are a number a ways to beat a Tac/LT spammer, you just don't seem to grasp it I'm afraid.
*This is not meant as a personal attack, but I'm close to giving up you, so that's why the tone of this letter is probably not so nice! Nothing personal!
As far as not putting enough time into my games or quitting early...these are completely foreign to me. I always stick it out and I will fight tooth and nail against the exploiters until I have nothing left to fight with. The reason I do that is because -- so long as I keep fighting -- maybe other players will get a chance to build up enough forces to counter the bad guys -- especially after I've wounded them and took out as many forces as I can.
I am no quitter. And as for "grasping" how to beat the spammers, I get it. I know how to beat them. But I don't want to have to build nothing but fighters and AA and get a huge number of allies and make them build more fighters and then beg them to loan them to me. I don't like playing that way and I don't want to get drug into having to play that way because having to do that RUINS the game for me every time it happens.
Sure, I could win every match I ever played if I did that strategy. But that would not be fun. Call of War would be far too boring and I'd have to leave out of shear boredom. I want to build armies. I want to build navies. I want to conquer lands and create alliances and fight world wars. I don't want to have to tweak a bunch of air forces to play one way and only one way for the rest of the future history of all matches in Call of War.
Bombers are supplemental to ground units. And I'm tired of fighting against people that think that bombers are all you need in this game. And I'm tired of making fighter production the greatest demand of my factories.
I want diversity in game play. Or else Call of War is dead.
It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.Tacs are not OP; you just gotha learn how to defeat them. Learn its weaknesses. And see beyond the tac itself. There are even ways of defeating it without engaging it.
And try a stack of 5 rocketfighter with 6 or 7 ints. Attack the 4x5 tac stacks individually if they are attacking or patrolling or if its a stack of 20 then set your stack to patrol.
You will see how frustrating it is for the guy who just lost 20tacs against rocket and 2ints
Though, the rocketfig range is hilarious. It should be upped
I don't believe you.Diabolical wrote:
Actually, I do build all that. But, like I just posted here, you can't account for the underhanded methodology of the "other side". They will exploit the system to ensure that any decent player that doesn't use exploits are quickly put down like a rabid dog. The truth is that those exploiters really fear the decent players because most of the exploiters are themselves not very good when playing fair. A good player is one that can win without using exploits. I've done that. In fact I do that quite a bit.wildL SPQR wrote:
You can't just presume that. AT/AC/LT/Arty/AA are all available from day one so it's not true that you can't build a proper stack that you can use to penetrate your enemies defenses before it's too late. Just build some planes damnit, otherwise you'll lose. Which should be obvious. Paki/India war was won with planes - you can't go without em!You say a lot of things that sound smart Diabolical. It's like reading my company's visionary / weekly updates from the brass that are more PR and stunt than actual subject.
Maybe your problem is that you do not put in enough time in your games or give up too easily? There are a number a ways to beat a Tac/LT spammer, you just don't seem to grasp it I'm afraid.
*This is not meant as a personal attack, but I'm close to giving up you, so that's why the tone of this letter is probably not so nice! Nothing personal!
As far as not putting enough time into my games or quitting early...these are completely foreign to me. I always stick it out and I will fight tooth and nail against the exploiters until I have nothing left to fight with. The reason I do that is because -- so long as I keep fighting -- maybe other players will get a chance to build up enough forces to counter the bad guys -- especially after I've wounded them and took out as many forces as I can.
I am no quitter. And as for "grasping" how to beat the spammers, I get it. I know how to beat them. But I don't want to have to build nothing but fighters and AA and get a huge number of allies and make them build more fighters and then beg them to loan them to me. I don't like playing that way and I don't want to get drug into having to play that way because having to do that RUINS the game for me every time it happens.
Sure, I could win every match I ever played if I did that strategy. But that would not be fun. Call of War would be far too boring and I'd have to leave out of shear boredom. I want to build armies. I want to build navies. I want to conquer lands and create alliances and fight world wars. I don't want to have to tweak a bunch of air forces to play one way and only one way for the rest of the future history of all matches in Call of War.
Bombers are supplemental to ground units. And I'm tired of fighting against people that think that bombers are all you need in this game. And I'm tired of making fighter production the greatest demand of my factories.
I want diversity in game play. Or else Call of War is dead.
I am not disarmed with four words. Not to insult, but your words are hollow. If you come back with reason, then I shall listen.wildL SPQR wrote:
I don't believe you.
My point stands.
It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.There is no arguing with you, you've got yourself stuck in a crack and there is no pulling you out.
Now, as a mod I urge you to stop spamming the forum with threads about Tactical Bombers unless you have something new to say. We've heard you already in several of your threads.
I've only added new when starting new threads...or in explaining the problem and/or solution in more detail. Otherwise, the only posts are in defense of my position against the naysayers.
You don't need to make vague threats against me. I know full well what is considered good usage of the forums and I practice what I preach.
It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.Just saying what I see - no threats - you've created several threads with the same topic, just saying there is no reason to do that and that you should not continue or we will close down the old ones.
