Artillery/ships should attack every 5 minutes and anti-air should scan every 2 minutes

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Seroslav wrote:

      And it won't fry the servers as in x4 already those units have very similar times of reaction and they do not fry :) pure nonsense about frying :)
      You still don't understand.
      1x and 4x are the same game, just owerall speed is different.
      If you change something in 1x it will reflect to 4x.
      Meaning if in 1x game AA radar check occurs more often, than in 4x is also the same.
      It is already too fast in 4x.
      And you want to make it a lot faster, claiming it's ok for server?

      Btw, AA is working just fine. If you have a problem, build more AA and put it in different locations nearby.
      However you'll never create impregnable AA bubble. It seems you want exactly that.
    • Seroslav wrote:

      You guys made your own discussion in topic which is not related to what you discuss.

      I believe that guys who choose CoN over other games is that they can play it in a meantime of work/life/sleep, putting some small portions of time few or once a day sometimes.

      If they have more hours in a row to stay in game, they could play some RTS, when the full game can be started and ended in a sigle sit.

      x1 CoN games, lasts for weeks and that's why it should be made more game-life-balanced, making hit&run less attractive, both for navy and artillery.

      As hit&run works well, guys who actually choose CoN over others, in some part, probably a big one, tend to lose more often navy/artillery fights, so it's anti-productive for Dorado, as they unmotivate their core segment of players.

      And it's not about skill, cause hit&run is not a skill but a determination to stick online and check the game as often as possible to just click once per hour to hit the offline guy and run. It's not a skill, nothing big to learn, no secretive knowledge, just being online more often. Nothing much about strategy, just micro-managing to win thorough activity, not thorougy skill or strategy.

      Is CoN a game to log-in-often-to-win or it should be a strategy game, to compete by outsmart the opponent.

      Being active is not same as being smarte.

      I believe getting hit & run less effective will make the game better.

      Same to make anti-air scan radar more often, to be more realistic and make airforce less dominating.

      Often planes can go in the range of rathar hit something and run away with no punishment, cause scans are so rarely done, comparing to speed of strikers. It's unrealistic for SAMs or frigates not to react and make airforce too strong, comparing to other types of units.

      And it won't fry the servers as in x4 already those units have very similar times of reaction and they do not fry :) pure nonsense about frying :)

      And thanks for advices, but I am actually the guy who mostly outplay others with bigger activeness, but I just believe it's not what this game should be about. It should be more as a strategy game, not click-more-to-win-without-much-of-strategy game.
      wrong.jpg
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Zemunelo wrote:

      Btw, AA is working just fine. If you have a problem, build more AA and put it in different locations nearby.
      However you'll never create impregnable AA bubble. It seems you want exactly that.
      Airforce is dominating, and one of the reasons is that AA is too weak, and one of reasons for it is that they scan to rarely, so airforce can operate in reach of AA without AA reacting often.
    • WalterChang wrote:

      Aircraft always take damage if they attack something that's within range of AA, don't they? Even if they're stealth.

      Of course not. If you use patrol, you can attack a unit inside of AA range and your aircraft gets 0 damage from the AA.

      You dont know this basic mechanic?

      Simply learn how to use aircrafts first.

      No wonder you dont use them, as you dont know how to use them properly.
    • Ever left a 5 stack of aircraft patrolling an area for them all to be shot down when you come back?
      How realistic is it for aircraft to keep circling as one by one they are shot down?

      AA has its inherit weaknesses, knowing them is what makes a good commander, thats what makes me an officer and you a grunt.
      You might think your AA, your Tanks and Infantry should roam freely, but i have the largest airforce on the planet at my disposal, armed with nuclear cruise missiles.
      We are not the same, if you want to combat aircraft, then build aircraft, its literally that simple.

      But of course, you need radars, you need situational awareness and ideally strike capability to limit the airfields they are operating out of.

      Which brings me to my next point, hit and run's only work when you have a range advantage or a radar advantage.
      If i run at you with my maxxed out submarines, against your maxxed out destroyers im going to lose, infact its highly likely i will get hit first.
      So when i run at you with my maxxed out submarines, they are maxxed out so i have the range and radar advantage, since destroyers are 75 radar locked for along time.

      Once the enemies reaches 100 atk range 100 radar range, the only way to launch hit and run attacks is with support of AWAC or Carriers or Radars or Naval Patrols.

      You talk about realism, there is a reload time after a volley. We are talking about modern warfare inwhich naval ships do not have naval guns, that have missiles.
      You shoot a volley of missiles and leave the area to rearm, reload, same with submarines, you fire your torpedo's and a leave. While the enemies has no concept the attack is underway and no concept of how to retaliate effectively.

      I mean seriously, you wouldn't have these issues if you were a somewhat decent commander.
      My advice, purchase security council and unlock railguns, even if you are countered with enemy artillery, the investment is so huge that you can easily take advantage with aircraft or naval assets.

      If you want to cry about anything, it should the notion that a stack of 5 carriers loaded with 100 aircraft can be sunk by a single corvette.
      As you actively have to send your aircraft on strike missions, worst still your aircraft take massive damage sitting on the hardtop, there is no stow away option.
      Not that i've had much carrier on carrier crime, it ends pretty swiftly when you annihilate their entire airforce in a single strike because its all sitting on the deck.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by crazystoner ().

    • Seroslav wrote:

      Of course not. If you use patrol, you can attack a unit inside of AA range and your aircraft gets 0 damage from the AA.

      You dont know this basic mechanic?

      Simply learn how to use aircrafts first.

      No wonder you dont use them, as you dont know how to use them properly.
      I guess this is fair criticism. I usually go for helicopters, because they do more damage and they don't have to worry about SAMs and they are harder for the enemy to see coming and they're cheaper. But you're right, I haven't used Strike Fighters for a long time, so maybe I'm missing out.

      It does seem to me, though, that Strike Fighters only dominate if other the players aren't building enough ASFs, or aren't protecting their key ground units with SAMs. To me, this doesn't call for a change in the game mechanics - it just means people should better use the units they've already got available.
    • Seroslav wrote:

      Learn how to discuss or leave my topic. Inserting some big shouting word is not how intelligent people do discuss. Learn something about net ethics. You are just rude and nonsense.
      LOL, the only thing needed to be learned is by you, and that thing is "a sense of humor". I can just imagine your family reunions, with everyone alternately scowling and biting each other in the ass.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • WalterChang wrote:

      Seroslav wrote:

      Of course not. If you use patrol, you can attack a unit inside of AA range and your aircraft gets 0 damage from the AA.

      You dont know this basic mechanic?

      Simply learn how to use aircrafts first.

      No wonder you dont use them, as you dont know how to use them properly.
      I guess this is fair criticism. I usually go for helicopters, because they do more damage and they don't have to worry about SAMs and they are harder for the enemy to see coming and they're cheaper. But you're right, I haven't used Strike Fighters for a long time, so maybe I'm missing out.
      It does seem to me, though, that Strike Fighters only dominate if other the players aren't building enough ASFs, or aren't protecting their key ground units with SAMs. To me, this doesn't call for a change in the game mechanics - it just means people should better use the units they've already got available.
      Yes using patrol to attack is awesome - you still take point defence damage tho just to be clear. Strike fighters get used too often as a blunt force object. They need to be used with a bit of care. I use the naval variety mostly as they are so versatile.

      But things like hitting an airbase as enemy planes are refueling is just one of my favourite moves - destroy the airbase and wipe out the airforce while its on the ground :)
    • Seroslav wrote:

      I believe getting hit & run less effective will make the game better.

      Same to make anti-air scan radar more often, to be more realistic and make airforce less dominating.
      I agree hit and run is no life stuff. Exploiting a game bug to win is grotty stuff. You can easily kill stuff with the same attack range with it. I did it once and felt like a bottom feeder from some scum sucking netherworld. Even a simpleton can see waiting till your opponent is offline then unsing hit and run is one way to "win".

      Cant see how AA scan frequency can be increased tho - it would make bombers and missiles useless.
    • scommysoggys wrote:


      Cant see how AA scan frequency can be increased tho - it would make bombers and missiles useless.


      I don't see how making first attack of AA, faster, would make anything useless.

      My suggestion is to make SCAN more frequent, NOT the attack. It's not to make attack of AA 5 times more frequent, just the scan. Attack would be still in 10 minutes manner, so only the first one would be sooner, to get rid of planes operating in range of AA with no reaction of AA, which is totally weird.

      Plane go through range of AA but it does not react... what kind of solution it is? AA is to hit what flies, not to stay there and not react, especially that we have attack-through-patrol mechanic in game. It gives huge advantage to planes, when the planes are already strongest types of units in game.

      Making scan more frequent = first attack, would change something, but would not make any type of unit useless.
    • I already feel like CM are useless against AA...
      In my last game there was a stack of tanks and infantry with one SAM...
      I got my 2 stacks of bombers and 2 stacks of ASF right outside it's range...
      I timed it, triggered the response... launched 10 CM... none of them made it.
      Tried again... same deal... triggered the response, launched 14 CM... none of them hit.
      This is ONE SAM we're talking about.

      It doesn't seem like it is underpowered, infrequently scans, or is ineffective... quite the opposite.


      The only issue with AA that needs to change is the MAAVs range... it's essential smaller than the patrol radius.
    • It's to note CMs have a very odd tech line, where they jump from 5 hp to 11 , in T2.


      A single SAM can, even at max level, only deal 5,5 / 5,5 . Hence, it can, with luck, shoot down a single T2 CM, but it will not be able to shoot down in point defense T2 CMs once the bubble has been pierced.

      If your CMs were max level, in front of a SAM max level, the single SAM would be unable to stop them, even with its full damages.


      In your case, it just seems your CM tech is outmatched, or you were wrong and there is more than a SAM in here (Usually we do 3 SAM per build stacks, minimum)
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • There was definitely only one SAM... the stack was on my territory... my CM were basic... and my execution was poor.

      There was only 30 min or so until the game closed, so I thought "To hell with it, let 'em fly".... but damn.... 24 fails.... it's pathetic.

      The experience made artillery so much more valuable in my eyes.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Smallsword ().

    • I have issues with the T2... because of the warhead requirement...
      The only time I really build CM is with a heavy bomber strategy... I use them almost exclusively to deploy CM... and If I have 10-20 HB in full swing I can really run through the CMs

      It's the quality vs quantity problem... I usually lvl the CM just under T2 to maintain the warhead stockpile...

      But not against SAM... nope.

      I think I have to rework my tactics... but keep the low level CM... or atleast that's what I'm going to endeavor to do... hopefully with a little guidance ;)
    • Smallsword wrote:

      There was definitely only one SAM... the stack was on my territory... my CM were basic... and my execution was poor.

      There was only 30 min or so until the game closed, so I thought "To hell with it, let 'em fly".... but damn.... 24 fails.... it's pathetic.

      The experience made artillery so much more valuable in my eyes.
      If the point-defense of the SAM is higher then the HP-value of your missile, you can send a million and would only prove Einsteins point:
      "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over without proper evaluation" (freely quoted)
    • Eh, Einstein... like he knew anything about bombs :/


      I just tried the same tactic twice... Trigger the response AA, then launch a massive salvo.


      I think I needed to move my bombers towards the target as I launched the first CM that triggered AA...

      Then Launch a salvo of 9 CM as the bomber gets closer...

      I had my bomber patroling on the edge of the AA range... not moving towards the target... I think that was my critical mistake.
      Any thoughts? @Kalrakh @Opulon