Rename units & officers limit? my suggestions

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

    • Rename units & officers limit? my suggestions

      So i managed to find a way to rename a division by stacking it with an infantry officer or an officer relevant for the division which allows a nickname kind of but then i realised this has a limit of 1 on the battlefield which i dont get why? officers cost an awful lot to make and sure you shouldn't be able to just stack officers together but why limit it to 1? i want all of my infantry divisions to have infantry officers and all of my tank divisions to have tank officers....its not like its cheap to build an officer especially air and tank commanders so why limit it to 1?


      I want to be able to rename my divisions which helps me organise and plan things better or even being able to colour code them would suffice but currently there is no way to rename or organise your divisions except making an officer which allows you to nickname whatever division its stacked with but you can only have 1 so its pointless. Having used officers especially infantry sure they look cool and boost things but when you look at the cost its not exactly cheap and you cant say being able to create multiple officers is unfair as thats on the others who don't bother...it would be like limiting nukes to 1 per country as some people in the game forget or cant be bothered to create nukes themselves....if i want to invest in officers i don't see why i can't or why a basic system to organise troops can't be implemented as its a big deal to some who take the game serious especially when your spending 30+ days of your life in one game unless your x4 etc.

      Why can't a simple renaming or adding a option to nickname a division be added? if you can do it for officers why cant it be done for normal units?

      Why is the officers limit 1?

      Maybe you could argue this isn't a military simulator but its based on wars right and running countries and commanding troops? i feel like the game needs an update to add more systems in to actually make it seem like you're commanding armies starting with being able to do basics of renaming a unit.

      My suggestions :
      • Be able to rename or nickname divisions or colour code
      • Be able to have more than one officer out on the field
      • Be able to request troops from other countries in your collation that you can command rather than have to rely on them to command them to where you need them
      • Be able to take POW that boosts your manpower and production based on the amount of troops captured
      If we cant get a system where we can request troops from alliances and command them what about a POW system? if you encircle cities and the troops in it fall below a certain morale or are not relieved in time they can surrender automatically which then those POWs are taken by the invader who then gains extra manpower and production, and no before people bang on about "oh camps" no im not suggesting any system involving camps....you simply can force weak units to surrender which in turn would make people play more tactical and strategic as well as actually encircling cities which is more realistic and its something i know i would do as its rewarding as currently the only thing you can do is destroy every troops they have and is no option to surrender and its not realistic...and a POW system where capturing troops boosts manpower and production would make the game more realistic and fun and people would actually plan attacks and would stop countries just sending silly units like one guy in my current game is trying to hold a city with one infantry when i have it encircled its just pointless...if this system was in place that infantry would surrender to me giving me production and manpower boosts so why destroy it? now i have to go in and destroy a 15hp infantry unit with a 160 officer division like its just silly and this POW system wouldn't show anything or even remotely be offensive...prisoners of war happen in wars and the only argument i have seen is something about not implementing camps which is nothing like im suggesting at all! im not talking about being able to construct prisons or camps it would be a built in system based on morale and the units efficacy to defend itself and everything else would be done automatically by itself, whenever i invade i always encircle cities and would love to be able to take POWs rather than have to go in when not needed....of course if the defenders units are strong they wont surrender but if you ware them down and they become weak and encircled the game should automatically surrender these units or allow the person to surrender them which gives them some sort of moral boost for doing so rather than going down to the last man.

      Just my thoughts that in my opinion would make the game more realistic and fun as i play this game a lot :) ps sorry about so many edits its every time i save it i think of something else lol.

      The post was edited 10 times, last by ITzCorey32 ().

    • About the officer suggestion I think that you should be able to stack officers, just that their boosts will be negative, because there is never good for any group to have two leaders. Onto your PoW suggestion, I like the idea, but CoN is a game that is supposed to be simple, not the ultimate realistic. Dont misunderstand me, I’d love a more complex game, but I think the best option then would be to play HoI4
    • ITzCorey32 wrote:

      So i managed to find a way to rename a division by stacking it with an infantry officer or an officer relevant for the division which allows a nickname kind of but then i realised this has a limit of 1 on the battlefield which i dont get why? officers cost an awful lot to make and sure you shouldn't be able to just stack officers together but why limit it to 1? i want all of my infantry divisions to have infantry officers and all of my tank divisions to have tank officers....its not like its cheap to build an officer especially air and tank commanders so why limit it to 1?


      I want to be able to rename my divisions which helps me organise and plan things better or even being able to colour code them would suffice but currently there is no way to rename or organise your divisions except making an officer which allows you to nickname whatever division its stacked with but you can only have 1 so its pointless. Having used officers especially infantry sure they look cool and boost things but when you look at the cost its not exactly cheap and you cant say being able to create multiple officers is unfair as thats on the others who don't bother...it would be like limiting nukes to 1 per country as some people in the game forget or cant be bothered to create nukes themselves....if i want to invest in officers i don't see why i can't or why a basic system to organise troops can't be implemented as its a big deal to some who take the game serious especially when your spending 30+ days of your life in one game unless your x4 etc.

      Why can't a simple renaming or adding a option to nickname a division be added? if you can do it for officers why cant it be done for normal units?

      Why is the officers limit 1?

      Maybe you could argue this isn't a military simulator but its based on wars right and running countries and commanding troops? i feel like the game needs an update to add more systems in to actually make it seem like you're commanding armies starting with being able to do basics of renaming a unit.

      My suggestions :
      • Be able to rename or nickname divisions or colour code
      • Be able to have more than one officer out on the field
      • Be able to request troops from other countries in your collation that you can command rather than have to rely on them to command them to where you need them
      • Be able to take POW that boosts your manpower and production based on the amount of troops captured
      If we cant get a system where we can request troops from alliances and command them what about a POW system? if you encircle cities and the troops in it fall below a certain morale or are not relieved in time they can surrender automatically which then those POWs are taken by the invader who then gains extra manpower and production, and no before people bang on about "oh camps" no im not suggesting any system involving camps....you simply can force weak units to surrender which in turn would make people play more tactical and strategic as well as actually encircling cities which is more realistic and its something i know i would do as its rewarding as currently the only thing you can do is destroy every troops they have and is no option to surrender and its not realistic...and a POW system where capturing troops boosts manpower and production would make the game more realistic and fun and people would actually plan attacks and would stop countries just sending silly units like one guy in my current game is trying to hold a city with one infantry when i have it encircled its just pointless...if this system was in place that infantry would surrender to me giving me production and manpower boosts so why destroy it? now i have to go in and destroy a 15hp infantry unit with a 160 officer division like its just silly and this POW system wouldn't show anything or even remotely be offensive...prisoners of war happen in wars and the only argument i have seen is something about not implementing camps which is nothing like im suggesting at all! im not talking about being able to construct prisons or camps it would be a built in system based on morale and the units efficacy to defend itself and everything else would be done automatically by itself, whenever i invade i always encircle cities and would love to be able to take POWs rather than have to go in when not needed....of course if the defenders units are strong they wont surrender but if you ware them down and they become weak and encircled the game should automatically surrender these units or allow the person to surrender them which gives them some sort of moral boost for doing so rather than going down to the last man.

      Just my thoughts that in my opinion would make the game more realistic and fun as i play this game a lot :) ps sorry about so many edits its every time i save it i think of something else lol.
      If people could have an unlimited amount of officers on the field, then everyone can just add officers to all their armies, and then there would be no point in it anymore.
      "CoN is a game of 80% skill and 20% luck" - Tifo_14

      "I don't get paid enough to do anything" - Germanico

      Nothing stops the Tifo :thumbup:
    • Tifo_14 wrote:

      ITzCorey32 wrote:

      So i managed to find a way to rename a division by stacking it with an infantry officer or an officer relevant for the division which allows a nickname kind of but then i realised this has a limit of 1 on the battlefield which i dont get why? officers cost an awful lot to make and sure you shouldn't be able to just stack officers together but why limit it to 1? i want all of my infantry divisions to have infantry officers and all of my tank divisions to have tank officers....its not like its cheap to build an officer especially air and tank commanders so why limit it to 1?


      I want to be able to rename my divisions which helps me organise and plan things better or even being able to colour code them would suffice but currently there is no way to rename or organise your divisions except making an officer which allows you to nickname whatever division its stacked with but you can only have 1 so its pointless. Having used officers especially infantry sure they look cool and boost things but when you look at the cost its not exactly cheap and you cant say being able to create multiple officers is unfair as thats on the others who don't bother...it would be like limiting nukes to 1 per country as some people in the game forget or cant be bothered to create nukes themselves....if i want to invest in officers i don't see why i can't or why a basic system to organise troops can't be implemented as its a big deal to some who take the game serious especially when your spending 30+ days of your life in one game unless your x4 etc.

      Why can't a simple renaming or adding a option to nickname a division be added? if you can do it for officers why cant it be done for normal units?

      Why is the officers limit 1?

      Maybe you could argue this isn't a military simulator but its based on wars right and running countries and commanding troops? i feel like the game needs an update to add more systems in to actually make it seem like you're commanding armies starting with being able to do basics of renaming a unit.

      My suggestions :
      • Be able to rename or nickname divisions or colour code
      • Be able to have more than one officer out on the field
      • Be able to request troops from other countries in your collation that you can command rather than have to rely on them to command them to where you need them
      • Be able to take POW that boosts your manpower and production based on the amount of troops captured
      If we cant get a system where we can request troops from alliances and command them what about a POW system? if you encircle cities and the troops in it fall below a certain morale or are not relieved in time they can surrender automatically which then those POWs are taken by the invader who then gains extra manpower and production, and no before people bang on about "oh camps" no im not suggesting any system involving camps....you simply can force weak units to surrender which in turn would make people play more tactical and strategic as well as actually encircling cities which is more realistic and its something i know i would do as its rewarding as currently the only thing you can do is destroy every troops they have and is no option to surrender and its not realistic...and a POW system where capturing troops boosts manpower and production would make the game more realistic and fun and people would actually plan attacks and would stop countries just sending silly units like one guy in my current game is trying to hold a city with one infantry when i have it encircled its just pointless...if this system was in place that infantry would surrender to me giving me production and manpower boosts so why destroy it? now i have to go in and destroy a 15hp infantry unit with a 160 officer division like its just silly and this POW system wouldn't show anything or even remotely be offensive...prisoners of war happen in wars and the only argument i have seen is something about not implementing camps which is nothing like im suggesting at all! im not talking about being able to construct prisons or camps it would be a built in system based on morale and the units efficacy to defend itself and everything else would be done automatically by itself, whenever i invade i always encircle cities and would love to be able to take POWs rather than have to go in when not needed....of course if the defenders units are strong they wont surrender but if you ware them down and they become weak and encircled the game should automatically surrender these units or allow the person to surrender them which gives them some sort of moral boost for doing so rather than going down to the last man.

      Just my thoughts that in my opinion would make the game more realistic and fun as i play this game a lot :) ps sorry about so many edits its every time i save it i think of something else lol.
      If people could have an unlimited amount of officers on the field, then everyone can just add officers to all their armies, and then there would be no point in it anymore.
      Isn't that the whole point in the officers though to lead armies and organise? same argument can be said about missiles...currently anyone can make as many missiles as they want and even use gold to get it quicker so whats the difference? i have joined games and a few weeks in most countries have missiles and nukes launching them at everyone making the game pointless from then onwards so do i cry about it and leave or make missiles of my own? if i don't make missiles back then thats my problem not theirs and they shouldn't get limited missiles simply because others might not invest in them...and thats the same with officers like why should players be limited in something simply because others choose not to invest in making officers themselves? I just don't see the big deal in wanting officers commanding your divisions or atleast have a way of nick naming or colour coding i suppose.
    • ITzCorey32 wrote:

      Isn't that the whole point in the officers though to lead armies and organise? same argument can be said about missiles...currently anyone can make as many missiles as they want and even use gold to get it quicker so whats the difference? i have joined games and a few weeks in most countries have missiles and nukes launching them at everyone making the game pointless from then onwards so do i cry about it and leave or make missiles of my own? if i don't make missiles back then thats my problem not theirs and they shouldn't get limited missiles simply because others might not invest in them...and thats the same with officers like why should players be limited in something simply because others choose not to invest in making officers themselves? I just don't see the big deal in wanting officers commanding your divisions or atleast have a way of nick naming or colour coding i suppose.
      Counterpoint: The Officers you build are once in a time genius (geniuses? idk the plural) and not the officers that are attached to every normal units; which is also what makes them such high value targets
      the whole "but muh realism" approach is incredible silly the second you fail to even consider what impacts that change would have on the actual gameplay and no "it would make the game better is not an argument"
      "We should give Teburu Infinite Gold; Why? Because it would immensly improve the quality of Gameplay!"
      I am The Baseline for opinions
    • Teburu wrote:

      ITzCorey32 wrote:

      Isn't that the whole point in the officers though to lead armies and organise? same argument can be said about missiles...currently anyone can make as many missiles as they want and even use gold to get it quicker so whats the difference? i have joined games and a few weeks in most countries have missiles and nukes launching them at everyone making the game pointless from then onwards so do i cry about it and leave or make missiles of my own? if i don't make missiles back then thats my problem not theirs and they shouldn't get limited missiles simply because others might not invest in them...and thats the same with officers like why should players be limited in something simply because others choose not to invest in making officers themselves? I just don't see the big deal in wanting officers commanding your divisions or atleast have a way of nick naming or colour coding i suppose.
      Counterpoint: The Officers you build are once in a time genius (geniuses? idk the plural) and not the officers that are attached to every normal units; which is also what makes them such high value targetsthe whole "but muh realism" approach is incredible silly the second you fail to even consider what impacts that change would have on the actual gameplay and no "it would make the game better is not an argument"
      "We should give Teburu Infinite Gold; Why? Because it would immensly improve the quality of Gameplay!"
      So Teburu admits he needs gold to play well? :whistling:
    • So lets scratch officers why not just add a basic way of renaming units or giving them a nickname like you can with officers which wouldn't effect or mess up anything? even being able to colour code divisions would be nice and organised and to the guy who said about stacking officers i said that shouldn't be allowed, only one officer per division but anyway forget officers.

      As for the POW system adding this would not turn the game into HOI4 where you have to spend 60 hours on youtube lol, there would be no system on the players side the POW system would automatically do everything itself all the players have to do (if they care and want to) is encircle cities and divisions and wear them down until a morale bar drops below a certain percentage which then causes those units to surrender then it simply flashes text saying (number) POW's captured or something similar and it adds that number to your manpower and gives a slight boost in production. Maybe its just me who plays CON strategically as my plan is always encircle cities and cut off reinforcements while having air superiority and would allow you to stop wasting units and having to destroy every single unit they have like why would i waste tanks and infantry moving into a city if i can encircle and play the patience game then they surrender and i get more manpower and production?

      I like CON as its simple and you don't need to spend hours just to figure out one thing but basic things like this would add realism and make the game more fun and and about tactics while also not increasing the difficulty of the game at all and maybe its just me but i'd like to see things like nicknames and POWs as i dont just go storming in or firing nukes i like to plan things plus third world countries that are smaller such as say Afghanistan that i am playing as now they are very slow to get started with due to manpower and production so a POW system would help balance out things as obviously Afgan wont have the same productions and manpower as Germany for example so having a system where i can encircle say Pakistan and boost my manpower and production it would help an awful lot.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by ITzCorey32 ().

    • POW system.. gtfoh. there is no quarter for enemy troops. what purpose would POW serve; do i need to haul you back to my homeland; guard you and risk you killing me. OR slaughter you on battlefield.

      This is similiar to players who join a war game and call people mean for attacking them (although its fine when they attack others ;) ). When players beg for mercy i just hit them harder. Now if they put up a good fight and may be able to use them; then maybe then cut them some slack. Its usually the guys who as what they could do better next time, and if cool may give them quarter.
    • Instead of a full POW system for all units, just have a system for POW officers. If you capture one of the enemy officers it grants you some kind of bonus/buff (like free Intel, faster research in that officers field of expertise, etc) until that officer is rescued. Of course the owner of the officer can always see the officers location to plan that rescue.
    • Tifo_14 wrote:

      ITzCorey32 wrote:

      So i managed to find a way to rename a division by stacking it with an infantry officer or an officer relevant for the division which allows a nickname kind of but then i realised this has a limit of 1 on the battlefield which i dont get why? officers cost an awful lot to make and sure you shouldn't be able to just stack officers together but why limit it to 1? i want all of my infantry divisions to have infantry officers and all of my tank divisions to have tank officers....its not like its cheap to build an officer especially air and tank commanders so why limit it to 1?


      I want to be able to rename my divisions which helps me organise and plan things better or even being able to colour code them would suffice but currently there is no way to rename or organise your divisions except making an officer which allows you to nickname whatever division its stacked with but you can only have 1 so its pointless. Having used officers especially infantry sure they look cool and boost things but when you look at the cost its not exactly cheap and you cant say being able to create multiple officers is unfair as thats on the others who don't bother...it would be like limiting nukes to 1 per country as some people in the game forget or cant be bothered to create nukes themselves....if i want to invest in officers i don't see why i can't or why a basic system to organise troops can't be implemented as its a big deal to some who take the game serious especially when your spending 30+ days of your life in one game unless your x4 etc.

      Why can't a simple renaming or adding a option to nickname a division be added? if you can do it for officers why cant it be done for normal units?

      Why is the officers limit 1?

      Maybe you could argue this isn't a military simulator but its based on wars right and running countries and commanding troops? i feel like the game needs an update to add more systems in to actually make it seem like you're commanding armies starting with being able to do basics of renaming a unit.

      My suggestions :
      • Be able to rename or nickname divisions or colour code
      • Be able to have more than one officer out on the field
      • Be able to request troops from other countries in your collation that you can command rather than have to rely on them to command them to where you need them
      • Be able to take POW that boosts your manpower and production based on the amount of troops captured
      If we cant get a system where we can request troops from alliances and command them what about a POW system? if you encircle cities and the troops in it fall below a certain morale or are not relieved in time they can surrender automatically which then those POWs are taken by the invader who then gains extra manpower and production, and no before people bang on about "oh camps" no im not suggesting any system involving camps....you simply can force weak units to surrender which in turn would make people play more tactical and strategic as well as actually encircling cities which is more realistic and its something i know i would do as its rewarding as currently the only thing you can do is destroy every troops they have and is no option to surrender and its not realistic...and a POW system where capturing troops boosts manpower and production would make the game more realistic and fun and people would actually plan attacks and would stop countries just sending silly units like one guy in my current game is trying to hold a city with one infantry when i have it encircled its just pointless...if this system was in place that infantry would surrender to me giving me production and manpower boosts so why destroy it? now i have to go in and destroy a 15hp infantry unit with a 160 officer division like its just silly and this POW system wouldn't show anything or even remotely be offensive...prisoners of war happen in wars and the only argument i have seen is something about not implementing camps which is nothing like im suggesting at all! im not talking about being able to construct prisons or camps it would be a built in system based on morale and the units efficacy to defend itself and everything else would be done automatically by itself, whenever i invade i always encircle cities and would love to be able to take POWs rather than have to go in when not needed....of course if the defenders units are strong they wont surrender but if you ware them down and they become weak and encircled the game should automatically surrender these units or allow the person to surrender them which gives them some sort of moral boost for doing so rather than going down to the last man.

      Just my thoughts that in my opinion would make the game more realistic and fun as i play this game a lot :) ps sorry about so many edits its every time i save it i think of something else lol.
      If people could have an unlimited amount of officers on the field, then everyone can just add officers to all their armies, and then there would be no point in it anymore.
      i always put a officer in my biggest army, so to boost more units that way
      "doug" -nobody