Ooh the Changes!

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

    • What about the geography?
      Even experient players agree that it's easier to beat the shed out of a oversized nation because of it's trashy geography, you have to put a lot of strategy if you want to play with one of these and especially Russia as it's surrounded by hungry enemies.

      I don't want to change your opinion though and i need more reasons of why you think it's easier for oversized nations.


      But if you don't know how to waste your resources, then it doesn't matter, for proof try playing with Japan without a navy and with 0 arms industries.
      National Guards Should Not Be Underestimated 8)

    • KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      What about the geography?
      Even experient players agree that it's easier to beat the shed out of a oversized nation because of it's trashy geography, you have to put a lot of strategy if you want to play with one of these and especially Russia as it's surrounded by hungry enemies.

      I don't want to change your opinion though and i need more reasons of why you think it's easier for oversized nations.


      But if you don't know how to waste your resources, then it doesn't matter, for proof try playing with Japan without a navy and with 0 arms industries.
      Geography is still the same. So its invalid to mention it .
      Look , im not saying it is impossible to win with a small country . Done it .
      I am saying that reducing the cities on small countries makes it even easier for the big ones .
      When i say small/ big country i dont mean size but number of cities .
      My reason is production / resources.
      Your tech is gonna be late or your army smaller.
      You simply can not produce and research with one supply city ( i am assuming no gold and no allies to feed you resources)

    • Morpheas78 wrote:

      KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      What about the geography?
      Even experient players agree that it's easier to beat the shed out of a oversized nation because of it's trashy geography, you have to put a lot of strategy if you want to play with one of these and especially Russia as it's surrounded by hungry enemies.

      I don't want to change your opinion though and i need more reasons of why you think it's easier for oversized nations.


      But if you don't know how to waste your resources, then it doesn't matter, for proof try playing with Japan without a navy and with 0 arms industries.
      Geography is still the same. So its invalid to mention it . ces)
      Im sorry but it's impossible to unmention geography when we are talking about size of countries.

      Capturar.JPG
      National Guards Should Not Be Underestimated 8)

    • Morpheas78 wrote:

      KoopKoopyGuy wrote:


      My reason is production / resources.
      No, take a look at this again.

      Capturar.JPGMongolia, the worst resource production country, beating the shit out of China, the best resource production country and as long with it's 9 homeland cities.


      I don't want to compare my in-game hability with anyone's as there is people much better than me out there and i know it.



      Got 6 SFs, upgraded my units to level 3 as long as with the 6 SFs that are being upgraded to level 4.


      And why? Because of Arms Industries and market.

      And no gold + no ally to watch my back.
      National Guards Should Not Be Underestimated 8)

    • Morpheas78 wrote:

      KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      Morpheas78 wrote:

      Im sorry but it's impossible to unmention geography when we are talking about size of countries.Capturar.JPG
      You still dont get it , do you ? First of all when i say size i mean number of cities .
      Second , geography did not change so it is irrelevant to the changes in the number of cities
      That is exactly what im talking about, god damn it.

      Even after you checked the second image you didn't realize this before?



      Further on, i may stop argumenting with you to avoid mass conflict in this thread.
      National Guards Should Not Be Underestimated 8)

    • Morpheas78 wrote:

      Morpheas78 wrote:

      KoopKoopyGuy wrote:


      Then you have not met a decent player with a lange country
      Ok, listen up.


      If you want to keep talking about ranks wich is NOT closely related to this topic, then it's your problem, okay?


      You keep going into wrong points, mentioning topics that are not closely related to the size (amount of cities) of countries, we are talking about S I Z E. Not R A N K S.

      Even huge losses gives you R A N K S even faster than wins.


      Now comment whatever you want, im done argumenting with you, thanks.
      National Guards Should Not Be Underestimated 8)

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

    • Zozo001 wrote:

      Morpheas78 wrote:

      KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      I never said it IS possible, instead, i said it IS easier
      Then you have not met a decent player with a lange country
      Somehow, the more competent a player the less likely is to pick large countries.
      Makes you wonder, doesn't it.
      Yea it does .
      On the other hand , i could be speaking in general gameplay and not about what i want .
      But as i said . If you think that 2 equal skilled players fighting each other while one having a much bigger production is easy, then please come and show me how .

    • KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      Morpheas78 wrote:

      Morpheas78 wrote:

      KoopKoopyGuy wrote:


      Then you have not met a decent player with a lange country
      Ok, listen up.

      If you want to keep talking about ranks wich is NOT closely related to this topic, then it's your problem, okay?


      You keep going into wrong points, mentioning topics that are not closely related to the size (amount of cities) of countries, we are talking about S I Z E. Not R A N K S.

      Even huge losses gives you R A N K S even faster than wins.


      Now comment whatever you want, im done argumenting with you, thanks.
      Who is talking about irrelevant topics here?
      The op talked about the changes in the number of cities while you keep mentioning SIZE ...and now RANKS ??
      LOL.
      PS . Ranks does not equal skills or proper gameplay .
      Learn a bit more and come back

    • Morpheas78 wrote:

      KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      Morpheas78 wrote:

      Morpheas78 wrote:

      KoopKoopyGuy wrote:


      Then you have not met a decent player with a lange country
      Ok, listen up.
      If you want to keep talking about ranks wich is NOT closely related to this topic, then it's your problem, okay?


      You keep going into wrong points, mentioning topics that are not closely related to the size (amount of cities) of countries, we are talking about S I Z E. Not R A N K S.

      Even huge losses gives you R A N K S even faster than wins.


      Now comment whatever you want, im done argumenting with you, thanks.
      Who is talking about irrelevant topics here? The op talked about the changes in the number of cities while you keep mentioning SIZE ...and now RANKS ??
      LOL.
      PS . Ranks does not equal skills or proper gameplay .
      Learn a bit more and come back
      Yes, i will learn a bit about how you are ignorant in understanding my arguments, thank you. :rolleyes:

      Case closed.
      National Guards Should Not Be Underestimated 8)

    • I hope we calmed down now, but:


      Yes, your math is right, but there are some other better vessels that don't require supplies like SFs (removing researches.)


      By that, you have to use the market very carefully and avoid spending resources in unecessary vessels until you get better arms industries if your nation starts starving for supplies, that's kinda what im currently doing right now, if i could i would spend money in the market like crazy but it's not the right thing.


      Case is not closed now.
      National Guards Should Not Be Underestimated 8)

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

    • KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      I hope we calmed down now, but:


      Yes, your math is right, but there are some other better vessels that don't require supplies like SFs (removing researches.)


      By that, you have to use the market very carefully and avoid spending resources in unecessary vessels until you get better arms industries if your nation starts starving for supplies, that's kinda what im currently doing right now, if i could i would spend money in the market like crazy but it's not the right thing.


      Case is not closed now.
      You think im struggling with playing?
      Or you think im new player ? ?(
      Trust me , i propably know more about economy and spending resources than you .
      Im simply talking about the reduction of cities that made the gap worse between big (in city number ) nations vs small

    • Morpheas78 wrote:

      KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      I hope we calmed down now, but:


      Yes, your math is right, but there are some other better vessels that don't require supplies like SFs (removing researches.)


      By that, you have to use the market very carefully and avoid spending resources in unecessary vessels until you get better arms industries if your nation starts starving for supplies, that's kinda what im currently doing right now, if i could i would spend money in the market like crazy but it's not the right thing.


      Case is not closed now.
      You think im struggling with playing?Or you think im new player ? ?(
      Trust me , i propably know more about economy and spending resources than you .
      Im simply talking about the reduction of cities that made the gap worse between big (in city number ) nations vs small
      No?? I never said you are a new player + never assumed that you are struggling, im calmly discussing with you about the topic because that's what the forum deserves for...


      I just wanted to know if my resource spending and economy strategy is right.
      National Guards Should Not Be Underestimated 8)