Global Conflict Map: (Unrealistic) Hopes and Dreams

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

    • Global Conflict Map: (Unrealistic) Hopes and Dreams

      Just a little while ago, there was the announcement of a new map (HOORAY!!), but the announcement did not include any details about the new maps aside from the fact that it would included 64 playable countries. So, for fun and to pass the time until the map is available, I thought it might be entertaining to discuss our hopes and dreams for this new map.

      Here are some of mine:

      - I hope there's a 4x version
      - I hope it's a straight conquest type and not a victory sites type
      - I hope early research is restricted (base WW3 style)
      - I hope the 64 countries are in some way slightly different than the WW3 map, but not TOO far from modern realism like the Rising Tides map
      - I hope formal coalitions aren't allowed; i.e. it's a solo map
      - I hope the Rogue State is playable

      If I think of more hopes, I'll add them.

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

    • Definitely hoping for some of the same things.

      - If there’s no 4x option, I’m not playing it
      - Victory sites suck
      - Unrestricted research makes it easier for golders to get an advantage
      - I actually like the Rising Tides map, as a geography/history buff its super interesting to think about alternate geopolitical situations/polities and I would love to see more of that
      - I don’t envision a solo map being added, but you never know.
      - A playable Rogue State would be super interesting, but not sure how it would work gameplay-wise.

      I would also like to see
      - An Antarctica map
      - A dinosaur/Jurassic world map (maybe that’s too similar to WWZ)
      - Caribbean Battleground map, or some other naval heavy island map (Pacific might be too large)

      I think each of these ideas could have their own thread, but these are some of my hopes for other maps.
      The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his. - George S. Patton

    • Fusion7857 wrote:

      Definitely hoping for some of the same things.

      - If there’s no 4x option, I’m not playing it
      - Victory sites suck
      - Unrestricted research makes it easier for golders to get an advantage
      - I actually like the Rising Tides map, as a geography/history buff its super interesting to think about alternate geopolitical situations/polities and I would love to see more of that
      - I don’t envision a solo map being added, but you never know.
      - A playable Rogue State would be super interesting, but not sure how it would work gameplay-wise.

      I would also like to see
      - An Antarctica map
      - A dinosaur/Jurassic world map (maybe that’s too similar to WWZ)
      - Caribbean Battleground map, or some other naval heavy island map (Pacific might be too large)

      I think each of these ideas could have their own thread, but these are some of my hopes for other maps.
      Just to clarify/inform, @Fusion7857: The game mechanics for a playable Rogue State already exists and has been used, and there have been previous maps that didn't allow formal coalitions. Both of these things were true of a map titled Middle East Crisis.

    • PerigeeNil wrote:


      Just to clarify/inform, @Fusion7857: The game mechanics for a playable Rogue State already exists and has been used, and there have been previous maps that didn't allow formal coalitions. Both of these things were true of a map titled Middle East Crisis.
      Good to know. I don’t claim to be knowledgeable or an expert at this game, but it’s a bit embarrassing that I wasn’t aware of this. Thanks for the clarification.
      The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his. - George S. Patton

    • In this same vein (since I am still impatiently awaiting a map spawn)...

      Ways in which the new map could ruin my entire life:

      - There's no 4x version
      - It has some kind of weird gimmick like you have to collect Baby Yodas or something
      - the maps don't begin to spawn until days after the announcement
      - brand new accounts are funneled directly into the new map
      - a major unit quality (like amphibious travel) is almost completely nullified (*ahem*!)
      - some unforeseen and weird imbalance

    • LastLiving wrote:

      How does a playable rouge state work?
      I'm not sure on how many maps used it and/or if they all used it the same way, but here's basically how it worked in Middle East Crisis:

      One player would select it when they entered the game just like any other country.

      IIRC, in MEC, the Caliphate (the name of the Rogue State) started out with a lesser number of cities (like 4? or 3?), relatively little resources, and a very small section of land.

      BUT every game day when the Rogue units would spawn (back then it was always at the beginning of the day), they may pop up in some (you didn't know which) cities with morale less than 34% and the player playing as the Caliphate could control them. The Caliphate player could build buildings and develop units in the normal fashion, but may also get newly spawned units in cities with low morale every day.

      The way that I'm explaining it, it seems like it would be terribly imbalanced, but it wasn't. It was actually pretty challenging to play as the Caliphate. A lot of players focused on wiping you out, and it could be hard to really get and keep an established area.

      My personal perception of how the Caliphate popularity trend went was that at first everyone wanted to try it because it was new and different, but once players had tried it, they weren't as excited about palying it again in future matches. That was just my impression, though. I tried it a number of times, but I was a newer player back then. Every time, it ended the same way: I would do good for a brief while (often even gaining the lead at some point), but then everyone would band together to gang up on me and take me out (because I would automatically be at war with everyone anyway, because you automatically go to war with them when your units spawn in their newly conquered cities).

      I'm not sure what else to say about it, but I'm happy to answer questions (to the best of my recollection) if you have them.

    • PerigeeNil wrote:

      LastLiving wrote:

      How does a playable rouge state work?
      I'm not sure on how many maps used it and/or if they all used it the same way, but here's basically how it worked in Middle East Crisis:
      One player would select it when they entered the game just like any other country.

      IIRC, in MEC, the Caliphate (the name of the Rogue State) started out with a lesser number of cities (like 4? or 3?), relatively little resources, and a very small section of land.

      BUT every game day when the Rogue units would spawn (back then it was always at the beginning of the day), they may pop up in some (you didn't know which) cities with morale less than 34% and the player playing as the Caliphate could control them. The Caliphate player could build buildings and develop units in the normal fashion, but may also get newly spawned units in cities with low morale every day.

      The way that I'm explaining it, it seems like it would be terribly imbalanced, but it wasn't. It was actually pretty challenging to play as the Caliphate. A lot of players focused on wiping you out, and it could be hard to really get and keep an established area.

      My personal perception of how the Caliphate popularity trend went was that at first everyone wanted to try it because it was new and different, but once players had tried it, they weren't as excited about palying it again in future matches. That was just my impression, though. I tried it a number of times, but I was a newer player back then. Every time, it ended the same way: I would do good for a brief while (often even gaining the lead at some point), but then everyone would band together to gang up on me and take me out (because I would automatically be at war with everyone anyway, because you automatically go to war with them when your units spawn in their newly conquered cities).

      I'm not sure what else to say about it, but I'm happy to answer questions (to the best of my recollection) if you have them.

      Seems very interesting. Where on the map would they get their first cities?
      All Shall Eventually Fall

    • LastLiving wrote:

      Sounds good. This would make conquering cities and leaving it to rouge state not as good as an option, as now you just allowed an enemy player to gain land and attack you
      Exactly. And that player also has the ability to move the newly spawned units (to concentrate them, pick up additional land, etc. Plus, it gives one player (the Rogue player) an incentive to keep morale low in some areas (cities with low morale, regardless of who they belong to, have a chance to produce additional Rogue State units).

      Also, as the Rogue player, you're pretty much rooting for conflict between any players everywhere all the time, because more "turnover" and damage means a better environment for your possible spawns.

    • PerigeeNil wrote:

      Just a little while ago, there was the announcement of a new map (HOORAY!!), but the announcement did not include any details about the new maps aside from the fact that it would included 64 playable countries. So, for fun and to pass the time until the map is available, I thought it might be entertaining to discuss our hopes and dreams for this new map.

      Here are some of mine:

      - I hope there's a 4x version
      - I hope it's a straight conquest type and not a victory sites type
      - I hope early research is restricted (base WW3 style)
      - I hope the 64 countries are in some way slightly different than the WW3 map, but not TOO far from modern realism like the Rising Tides map
      - I hope formal coalitions aren't allowed; i.e. it's a solo map
      - I hope the Rogue State is playable

      If I think of more hopes, I'll add them.
      Key:

      Nice suggestion!
      No. Just no.
      idgaf

      I would like to see most of those implemented (most)...
      Here are some of my suggestions:

      • Re-establish Czechoslovakia (and make it playable)
      • Make each country get a reasonable amount of rural provinces (an issue in some areas ex. argentina)
      • If adding arctic territory (antarctica) make some resource hotspots to make it actually WORTH conquering
      • Let each country start with basic researches completed (but more powerful countries IRL would start with more researches than others)
      "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:

    • Tom_Cruise wrote:

      I'm lost...is this map available on public servers now? 8|
      RIght? The announcement made it sound like it was immediately available. However, this new map has not yet spawned on public servers since the announcement.

      I know that in the past, CoN has announced maps days (maybe even more than a week?) before making them available. However, IIRC, at those times in the past, it was clearly stated in the announcements that the new maps were "coming soon." This most recent announcement made it sound like the "Global Conflict" map was already live, but it hasn't shown up on the servers yet.