Pinned Questions

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

    • Well, i may be wrong, because i didn't used the naval version for over a month, but from what the tech tree implies, you need to research each tier to get the "pre-requisite" to research its naval equivalent.

      If it's not the case :
      1°) You are right, no good reason to pay for the main line ---> better spare those rare materials to get the aircraft carrier and get some power projection
      2°) Don't think it works as intended
      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.
    • Opulon wrote:

      Well, i may be wrong, because i didn't used the naval version for over a month, but from what the tech tree implies, you need to research each tier to get the "pre-requisite" to research its naval equivalent.

      If it's not the case :
      1°) You are right, no good reason to pay for the main line ---> better spare those rare materials to get the aircraft carrier and get some power projection
      2°) Don't think it works as intended
      Thanks for the reply. I thought the two arrows into a research was meant as alternate routes and not that both have to be completed to unlock it. I could be wrong!
    • dessimator wrote:

      My question is regarding Air superiority fighters and Naval Air superiority fighters. Based on my understanding both provide the same amount of attack, defense, range, speed, etc. with slightly varying production and upkeep costs. The major difference is the carrier landing capabilities of the Naval versions.

      Taking these into consideration, why would anyone spend valuable rare materials in researching the upgrades of Air superiority fighters rather than just focusing on the naval versions?
      Keep in mind, that you can research upgrades for the conventional Air supremacy fighter. However the naval strike fighter wont recieve this upgrades until you research the new tier. So at many times the Conventional air supremacy fighter will have an edge (Presuming you are waiting on research tree unlocks)

      However personally, I do want to keep in mind that naval strike planes are very good against Corvettes, Destroyers and Cruisers.
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu
    • I would like to know, whether there are more information about the future release of the 100 player map. Is there a sort of road map or time table about it? Furthermore I would like to know what nations will be playable and whether there are some special victory conditions etc.
      Last but not least: How do you want to secure a populated map, which won't "bleed out" of players and thus leading to very boring AI bashing session.
    • Can't say for the details of the 100 map. I don't know, and would indeed be very curious.

      concerning bleed out players, you ask one of the most difficult questions :

      "How will you retain players on maps. How will you raise activity".

      There is no short answer, and many tweaks made on the game those last monthes had the impact of raising the general activity in early game and reducing the drop off of players.
      Why were starting resources raised ? To allow more initial decisions to be taken from Day 1, which means, for a new player, the "first impression of the game". Beginners drop off is a huge percentage in every game.
      Why were upkeep often tweaked to low levels ? To allow the "reservoir" of possible actions at each daily connexion more important.
      Why were added more starting units ? To showcase the toys in the game and allow a more direct approach to the military side of the game
      Why were mobilisation/production/research time modified to 25-50% ? To shift the "time" between two economical respirations. Longer times fit better to the average player latency and connexions, as well as raising dramatically how many things he can build/do.

      Slowing down the airborn capacity to instatake a country also raised the "average span of life" observed on game. From the bigger picture, it's simple : if you reduce the speed at which the deers are killed by the skilled hunters using bazookas ("like my granpa did"), you see more deers in the forest. Hunters will of course complain that the governement forbid them using such a "noble weapon of civilised times", but they will remain very efficient with a crossbow or a bolt action rifle, so they'll be fine. I hope i'm not misunderstood when i compare the average user to a deer and the experienced player to a hunter, it's just a comparison to emphasize the general outcome of a battle between an average player and a experienced one ^^. A player inflicting a 20 K/D ratio to his opponent is possible, normal even, but still it must not be forgotten for game balance.


      (Rare footage of a hyper active Veteran complimenting his opponent for surviving the first 24 hours)

      Economical tweaks to come will, i'm sure, try to reduce friction in early mid for players to have a good feeling of "growing in power" , and create new ways/reasoning pathes for experienced players.

      Situation will never be perfect because ultimately, we are speaking of a very specific part of the game design : people.

      Taken in chunks of 1 000/10 000/100 000, people follow patterns. Taken individually, their behavior often has a good parameter of "chaos effect".

      Keeping a player interested in a map and coming back to play again is a complex mix between frustration and capacity. The most important and relevant thing related is "user action". It's simply the user "doing something" : clicking, sending a request to the game server, and getting an answer. The simple fact you have input=output pleases our brain, that likes to be rewarded for its actions, and begin the process of acquired tolerance.

      There is, however, some strategies that should be put in place, slowly.

      - Already partially in place, separating bigger maps from flow of beginners and players with a high drop off rate ---> it was actually a problem encountered on 500 players maps on supremacy, and since begineers can't join them (or at least are not automatically put in them), activity has raised. Future maps should continue this strategy of making the bigger maps accessible to "already regular players".

      - Keeping game creation under system control, and keep game creation a premium feature, to reduce the "one man map" that dissipate uselessly activity as well as "flooding" the server. Biggest maps can and maybe will be considered as "regular events". Basically, if the game achieves to get players asking "when the next 100 will begin ?", then it will be total victory.

      - Encourage slowly alliances to build and to grow. Alliances are one of the most powerful yet invisible forces under a community, to ciment activity and retention. Problem : it's hard to get such alliances to be created and maintained :).

      - Reffiting some more the gameplay and expansion/eco mechanics in order to make people feel they have not to give up when a player "takes the lead" will increase activity too. This is maybe the thing i see happen the most in mid-game, actually.

      Of course, this is a general approach on activity
      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.
    • If i press air assualt for the SAS special units and land them in enmy territory will it show there position i want to get them behind Enemy Lines
      من المبالغة أن ندعو إعلان حماس والجهاد الإسلامي عن تحالف عسكري. إنها رسالة بأن شعبنا متحد في وجه العدوان الإسرائيلي - أحمد ياسين



      twitter.com/i/status/1107767831981105153