Search Results

Quote from Dealer of Death: “Introducing, ... The Weyhoun U-DvM Stealth Bomber! ” Oooooohh! Where can I get one? Can you sign me up? I want one! Gimmie, gimmie, gimmie, gimmie!!!!

Quote from Dealer of Death: “Are you trying to form a more perfect Union? ” Given the current state of affairs should not be that hard...

I cannot believe that after what should be now 135 days Russia could not muster the required VPs to end this... Must be a total noob or lost interest went inactive several times, or both.

If you care to look in the research tree of any doctrinie, you can't help but notice that MAAs fall squarelly under the heading of Support. What I have been arguing from the very beginning is that a support unit is exactly that, a support unit, its not there to win the war for you, it is not your work horse that gets stuff done it supports your main effort units. Your expectations of what MAAs should be able to do are completely unrealistic. I undestand this is a game and cannot compare to real …

You want to try ground warfare more and yet you are discussing which flying units to produce? Not sure I am tracking your thought process...

Which brings us back full circle to what I have already proposed earlier, perhaps there should not be an effective counter for helos from ground units only. The reasons for which this may be true, have been mentioned by myself and others such as entrenchment bonus, defensive infrastructure, the cost of a string of bases required to operate helos, comperative research and production costs etc... Also known as game balance! The fact that both of you are not willing to entertain the idea that perha…

Quote from WalterChang: “Quote from corax: “This entire line of hypothesis is just wrong. You can't render everything into a one dimensional equation saying can this many units of helos attack a stack of that many units of arty plus MAAs and based on that we need to nurf or buff x unit. This is NOT how you balance a game. Sorry but CoN is not one diemensional it has many facets that need to be carefully considered. Did you factor in entrechment bonus for the ground units? Did you factor in bunke…

This entire line of hypothesis is just wrong. You can't render everything into a one dimensional equation saying can this many units of helos attack a stack of that many units of arty plus MAAs and based on that we need to nurf or buff x unit. This is NOT how you balance a game. Sorry but CoN is not one diemensional it has many facets that need to be carefully considered. Did you factor in entrechment bonus for the ground units? Did you factor in bunkers? Did you think about the costs of a serie…

The problem stems from the belief that units should be easily countered. Do lvl1 helos attacking have an advantage over lvl1 MAAs defending? They certainly do, now the better question: is that necesserily a bad thing? No it is not, as MAAs are not meant to be a stand alone deterent. There are ways to counter this such as, using combined arms aproach, fly fighter CAP if your opponent has lots of helos, make researching 50 range for your MAAs a priority. Saying nurf this or that unit or buff this …

Or you could just upgrade your MAAs to 50 range...

He is clearly asking for a meatshield stack and just to make sure we are all on the same page, the way I interpret that, a stack able to soak up damage surviving as long as possible. Ergo he doesn't care about damage output, just a high HP pool of varied units. If you are putting more than 3 to 4 of the same unit in that stack you are doing it wrong. What you need is a combined arms approach. As to what that combo will be depends on what units you have researched, your doctrine etc... Cheers

Quote from Dealer of Death: “Quote from corax: “Quote from Dealer of Death: “WAIT! I DO have a solution: Build MRLS, MRLS is always the solution. ” Call me crazy, but I have a thing for towed... ” OK, ... crazy corax, at least it is alliterative ” Well from that perspective I guess you are all about the Double Ds... Can't say I blame you

Quote from Dealer of Death: “WAIT! I DO have a solution: Build MRLS, MRLS is always the solution. ” Call me crazy, but I have a thing for towed...

Quote from ewac123: “Play Call of war. ” I used too until they made all the changes a couple of years back and ruined what was a great, very well balanced game, turning in it into the crap that it is today. Any other useless thoughts please share, cause sharing is caring after all!

Several times I have experienced a bug, usually its when my troops are embarking or disembarking (land to sea) where I randomly declare war on a nation that is literally on the other side of the planet. I have no troops near that nation and they have no troops anywhere near me. Anyone else experience this problem, is there a solution?

And here is another for the NPC cities lesser production output both cities status is occupied one starts as NPC the other as human Map: Flashpoint Atlanta: Original nation USA starts as human Pop: 5.6 Morale: 53% No buildings Output: 313 components Port au Prince: Original nation Haiti starts as NPC Pop: 5.9 Morale: 60% Port lvl1 Output: 229 components

Here is a concrete example to illustrate the point, two cities both status is occupied: Map Flashpoint Malaga: Original nation Spain only has 1 supply city Pop: 6.8 Morale: 71% Port lvl1 Output: 622 supplies Palermo: Original nation Italy has 2 supply cities Pop: 6.9 Morale: 71% Port lvl1 Airport lvl1 Output: 493 supplies

Great job! Just be aware that there are other hidden variables that skew the numbers beyond the known modifiers for pop size, morale etc. For instance I have noticed that on flashpoint maps, nations that start with a single supply city have production output values greatly increased to compensate for that. So Manchester, Lisbon, Malaga Algiers will net you better resource output when conquered over supply cities belonging to nations that start with 2 supply cities like Palermo and Florence for I…

Haha if you think that's unfair wait until you notice the dependencies in production output between cities of the same resource which have equal morale, equal pop size and identical infrastructure....

I fail to see what role this new missile would fill in the game the way it is currently structured: Cruise and Ballistic missiles can be conventional, chemical or nuclear. Ballistic have stronger stats then cruise but can only be aimed at city/province centers. ICBM have the strongest stats in the game can only be nukes and be aimed at city/province centers. What you propose is another type of missile even stronger then ICBMs , my question is what for?