GENERAL UPDATE 20170928

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

    • GENERAL UPDATE 20170928

      Dear Players,
      This week we bring you a small update containing fixes and improvements. Most importantly all unit researches will now also grant another small statistics improvement. Nuclear Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear ICBMs just got a significant damage improvement, Air Bases and Airports are no longer usable with Hit points lower than 80%, also over-stacking has more severe consequences now. In other important news, we now officially have a dedicated Discord server. All you need to do is download Discord and head on over to this link , we promise the process is very straight forward and intuitive to use. Join a text channel if you would like to text chat and/or a voice channel to speak via mic with your friends. Also, the forum has been revamped to fit inline with our representation.
      Discord link: https://discord.gg/by66wzg


      UI and GFX improvements and fixes

      • Player will now be notified every time they loot a city
      • National Guard received visual overhaul and vehicle graphics
      • Fixed bug where New Rank pop up missed the rank image
      • Fixed bug where Money double production was not being displayed on the province bar
      Stacking penalty changes
      • Decreased damage efficiency for 6th-10th units in Aircraft and Naval stacks from 50% to 25%
      • Decreased damage efficiency for 11th-15th units in Ground stack from 50% to 25%
      Unit Balancing
      General
      • Improved outcome for small researches, making them grant small increments of other statistics besides (see Detailed unit minor upgrades change list below)
      Towed Artillery
      • Decreased Industrial Components production cost from 500/500/750/750/750/950/950 to 350/350/500/500/500/750/750
      Conventional Warhead
      • Introduced Fuel cost at 500
      Chemical Warhead
      • Introduced Fuel cost at 625
      Nuclear Warhead
      • Decreased Basic Supplies cost from 1975 to 1500
      • Introduced Fuel cost at 750
      • Decreased Electronics cost from 1325 to 750
      • Decreased Money Cost from 4350 to 4000
      Nuclear Ballistic Missile
      • Increased Infantry damage from 220/220/220/275/275/330 to 250/260/275/315/325/375
      • Increased Armored damage from 265/265/265/330/330/400 to 300/325/350/400/425/450
      • Adjusted Population damage from 110/110/110/130/130/150 to 110/115/120/130/135/150
      • Adjusted Building damage from 30/30/30/40/40/50 to 30/35/40/45/50/60
      Nuclear ICBM
      • Increased Infantry damage from 340/340/340/425/425 to 500/525/550/575/600
      • Increased Armored damage from 500/500/500/650/650 to 625/650/675/725/750
      • Adjusted Population damage from 160/160/160/180/180 to 160/180/200/220/250
      • Adjusted Building damage from 60/60/60/80/80 to 50/60/70/90/100
      Research Balancing
      Chemical Weapons Program
      • Postponed research day available from 2 to 3
      Nuclear Weapons Program
      • Postponed research day available from 4 to 5
      ICBM
      • Postponed research day available for Level 1 from 5 to 6
      Building Balancing
      • Air Bases and Airfields are no longer usable if HP is below 80%
      Detailed Unit minor upgrades changes

      Motorized Infantry

      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 3/3/3/4.5/4.5/4.5/5.5/5.5 to 3/4/4/4.5/4.5/5.5
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 2/2/2/3/3/4.5/4.5 to 2/2/2/3/3.5/4.5/4.5
      • Adjusted Hit points from 15/15/15/17/17/18/20 to 15/15/17/18/18/19/20
      Airmobile Infantry
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 5/5/5/7/7/7/9 to 5/6/6/7/7/8/9
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 3/3/3/4/4/4/5 to 3/3/3.5/4/4.5/4.5/5
      Naval Infantry

      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 6/6/6/8/8/11 to 6/6/7/8/8/11
      • Adjusted Hit points from 20/20/20/25/25/30 to 20/20/22/22/25/27/30
      Mechanized Infantry
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 5/5/7.5/7.5/7.5/10 to 5/6/7.5/8.5/8.5/10
      • Adjusted Hit points from 25/25/27/27/30/35 to 25/25/27/27/32/35
      Special Forces
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 7/7/10/10/13 to 7/8.5/10/11.5/13
      Combat Recon Vehicle
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 6/6/6/8/8/11/11 to 6/7/7/8/9/11/11
      • Adjusted Hit points from 25/25/25/28/28/31/35 to 25/25/27/29/29/32/35
      Amphibious Combat Vehicle
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 7/7/7/9/9/11/11 to 7/8/7/9/9/11/11
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 2/2/2/3/5/6 to 2/2/2.5/3/5/6
      • Adjusted Hit points from 22/22/22/24/24/28 to 22/22/22/24/26/28
      Main Battle Tank
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 8/8/8/10/10/12/12 to 8/9/9/10/10/12/12
      • Adjusted Hit points from 50/55/55/60/60/65/65 to 50/55/57/60/62/65/65
      Tank Destroyer
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 8/8/8/10/10/12 to 8/8.5/9/10/10.5/12
      Mobile Radar
      • Adjusted Radar range from 100/150/200/200/200/250/250 to 100/150/175/200/225/250/250
      Towed Artillery
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 3/3/4/4/4/5/6 to 3/3.5/5/5.5/6/7/7.5
      Mobile Artillery
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 5/5/5/7/7/9 to 5/5.5/6/7/7.5/9
      Multiple Rocket Launcher
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 7/7/7/9/11 to 7/7.5/8/9/11
      Mobile Anti-Air Vehicle
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 2.5/2.5/2.5/4/4/5/5 to 2.5/2.5/3.5/4/4/5/5
      • Adjusted Helicopter damage from 5/5/5/6/6/7/8 to 4.5/5.5/5.5/6.5/7/8/9
      Mobile SAM Launcher
      • Adjusted Aircraft damage from 8/8/8/10/10/11/11 to 8/8.5/9/10/10.5/11
      Theater Defense System
      • Adjusted Missile damage from 8/8/8/10/10/12 to 8/8.5/9/10/10.5/12
      Helicopter Gunship

      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 7/7/7/9/9/12/12 to 7/8/8/9/9/11/12
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 1/1/1/2/3/4/4 to 1/1/1.5/2/3/4/4
      • Adjusted Hit points from 15/18/18/20/20/24/24 to 15/18/18/20/22/24/24
      Attack Helicopter
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 7/7/10/10/10/13/13 to 7/8/10/10/11/12.5/13
      • Adjusted Hit points from 20/23/25/25/25/30/30 to 20/23/25/27/27/30/30
      ASW Helicopter
      • Adjusted Submarine damage from 7/7/7/10/10/15/15 to 7/8.5/8.5/10/12/15
      • Adjusted Hit points from 15/15/15/18/18/20 to 14/14/16/18/18/20
      Air Superiority Fighter

      • Adjusted Aircraft damage from 5/5/5/10/10/15/15 to 5/6.5/8/10/11.5/14/15
      • Adjusted Helicopter damage from 7.5/7.5/7.5/10/10/15/15 to 7.5/8/8.5/10/11.5/14/15
      Naval Patrol Aircraft
      • Adjusted Submarine damage from 6/6/9/9/12/12 to 6/7.5/9/10.5/12/13
      AWACS
      • Adjusted Hit points from 5/8/8/12/12/20 to 5/8/10/12/16/20
      • Adjusted Radar range from 150/150/200/250/300/350 to 150/175/200/225/250/300/350
      Heavy Bomber
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 7/7/7/9/9/13/13 to 7/7.5/8/9/9.5/12/13
      • Adjusted Buildings damage from 5/5/5/7/7/9/9 to 5/6/6/7/8/9/9
      Strike Fighter
      • Adjusted Infantry and Armored damage from 4/4/4/6/6/9/9 to 4/4.5/5/6/7/8/9
      UAV
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 4/4/4/7/7 to 4/4.5/5/6.5/7
      Corvette
      • Adjusted Naval damage from 5/5/5/6/6/8/8 to 5/5.5/5.5/6/6/8/8.5
      • Adjusted Submarine damage from 4/4/4/5/5/6/6 to 4/4.5/4.5/5/5/6/6.5
      • Adjusted Hit points from 20/20/22/22/25/25/30/30 to 20/20/22/23/25/26/30/30
      Cruiser
      • Adjusted Naval damage from 10/10/15/15/20 to 10/12.5/15/17.5/20
      Destroyer
      • Adjusted Naval damage from 8/8/8/10/10/12 to 8/9/9/10/11/12
      • Adjusted Hit points from 40/40/40/43/45/50/50 to 40/40/42/45/48/50/50
      Frigate
      • Adjusted Naval and Submarine damage from 8/8/8/10/10/10/12 to 8/8.5/9/10/10.5/11/12
      Aircraft Carrier
      • Adjusted Hit points from 100/100/125/125/125/150 to 100/115/125/135/145/150
      Attack Submarine
      • Adjusted Naval damage from 8/8/8/10/10/12 to 8/8.5/9/10/10.5/12
      • Adjusted Submarine damage from 5/5/5/10/10/12/12 to 5/5.5/6/10/10.5/12
      Ballistic Missile Submarine
      • Adjusted Naval and Submarine damage from 4/4/4/6/6/6/8 to 4/4.5/5/6/6.5/7/8
      Conventional Cruise Missile
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 30/30/30/50/50/70 to 30/35/40/50/55/70
      Chemical Cruise Missile
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 50/50/50/75/75/100 to 50/55/60/75/80/100
      Nuclear Cruise Missile
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 100/100/100/125/125/150 to 100/105/110/125/135/150
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 125/125/125/150/150/200 to 125/130/135/150/160/200
      Conventional Ballistic Missile
      • Adjusted Armored damage from 80/80/80/120/120/150 to 80/90/100/120/130/150
      Chemical Ballistic Missile
      • Adjusted Infantry damage from 125/125/125/175/175/225 to 125/140/155/175/195/225


      //Your CON Team

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

    • I like everything I see so far except for the airport functionality.

      I think the adjustment to nukes could make them be seen a bit more. It definitely makes them worthwhile to pub players and gold users. We'll have to see if they are feasible to use in a challenge match though. I still think their overall cost / impact is too risky of a venture. But I love the direction your headed.

      it is a really smart move to list the looted materials. While functionality is the same, this is the type of things that make players feel happy. It is good marketing.

      I love the direction your headed in regard to the stat increases for minor upgrades.

      The 80% functionality cap for airports is a mistake. And here is why:

      When we face a expert opponent such as French Legion, the game is all about the airports. We attack airports over units. And when both skill and force is equal, this becomes an AFK battle. Whoever is present more to run more sorties under a watchful eye, is the winner.
      It takes an average of 3 sorties to disable an Airport (without missiles and depending on size of force). But now it will only take 1 sortie. Or 1 missile.
      Previously we had a game that was highly sensitive to afk's.
      Now we have a game that is nearly completely about the AFK's. Instead of it taking all night to disable your airports, a team like ours will now disable your entire defense structure in 1 hour. While you sleep.

      The change to airports will increase the overall game time required to complete the conquest. But this change greatly increases the advantage your opponent has over you when you sleep. Very very greatly... if you were trying to accomplish some type of slow down, try working with refueling stats. It will not punish the players who sleep so dramatically.
      Remember... high end games are essentially only about airports. We have many other things happening. Naval battles and such. But in the end, the team controlling the most airports will win.

      I think overall it was a wonderful and hugely successful patch.
      I can't wait until I have time to investigate Discord.
    • Two points.

      (1) The land speed for national guard seems to be 1.0 regardless of terrain type. Are they really faster than Marines, Special Operations, Mechanized Infantry in the jungle, forest and mountains?

      (2) I agree with Cyclone46 that disabling an airport which has only 20% damage is going to make them and all air units too vulnerable. Will all helicopter units and air-borne units suddenly be grounded until the airport is rebuilt? A level 5 airport (think O'Hare, Atlanta, or Toronto) has many runways, and multiply redundant systems for everything. A 20% loss would not shut them down.
      With in the game will high level airports not degrade gracefully 5-4-3-2-1-broken? Does this apply to outpost airbases too? As long as there is fuel, helicopters can use an airport.
      This change is puzzling to me.
      "Gentlemen, When the enemy is committed to a mistake we must not interrupt him too soon"
      -- Admiral Horatio Nelson --
    • I think it is a mistake with the speed of national guard. They have changed the speed from 0,1 to 1,0, but 0,1 was in all terrain like the surface speed from airmobile infantrie. They have forgot to give different speeds for the terrains.
      „Morgen, ihr Luschen!“ --- „Morgen, Chef!“ (Ausbilder Schmidt alias Holger Müller bei der Arbeit)
    • There might be an unintended problem with airports.

      I just attacked an airport with a lone strike fighter (no missiles).
      I took it from 100% to around 30% and disabled it with just 1 attack.

      I do not recall the precise % that a solo strike fighter used to do to airports. But i am pretty darn sure that 1 attack from 1 plane did not used to do 70% damage.
      it does now.

      This combined with the 80% thing is very game changing. One puts up a barrier between the average player and the super active player. And the other creates a Grand Canyon sized gorge between skilled players and non skilled.
    • Learn how to play with it - we put it in deliberately.
      And it's not a lone strike fighter. it's a wing of planes bombing a level 1 airbase... just please picture that for a moment... all the damage, the smoke, the screams?
      The strike's attack and base HP are precisely what they were before - it's just that, well, now they matter.

      //G
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • I've already learned to play with it.

      I just attacked a player who was afk. With a much inferior force, I managed to wagon almost 30 aircraft in 5 separate airbases in about 2 hours time.
      And the only reason it took me that long is that I did it with my scouting force and I was not prepared for how easy it would be.

      I was under the impression that I understood some of your design objectives. I thought you wanted to extend the life of the games. But I also thought you wanted it to be a game we can play even if we are not glued to the monitor 24 hours a day. A game where high activity gives you an edge, but is not all powerful and decisive.
      I suspect that you are not aware of just how much of a disadvantage this is to players who are on less than 12 hours per day. The most active players will reign supreme now.
      If that's what you intended, so be it.
    • Just a suggestion for the airport damage rule, as Germanico said they did that to intentionally ground aircraft.. What if we had air units that when an enemy air unit came in radar range, they went into patrol over the airbase, but only if they didn't have orders already in place.

      So 4 strikes come in and attack an airfield with 5 air sup's on the ground. The air sups instead of sitting there and letting their field get destroyed, actually scramble to engage the enemy?

      If I get close to an artillery unit, it will attack me, if i get close to a ship, it will attack me... air craft ONLY do that if on patrol. Seems in congruent.

      Now clearly a gunship going up to meet a stealth fighter is going to lose, but at least he would engage, not sit on the ground like a coward. This would effectively nullify Cyclones strategy of bomb him while he sleeps. AND it has the added benefit of getting players to actually make air sups and keep one or two at each airfield.

      What do you think?
      ----------------------

      Jacopo: Why not just kill them? I'll do it! I'll run up to Paris - bam, bam, bam, bam. I'm back before week's end. We spend the treasure. How is this a bad plan?

      Remember that no one ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb idiot die for his country.
    • War-spite wrote:

      Just a suggestion for the airport damage rule, as Germanico said they did that to intentionally ground aircraft.. What if we had air units that when an enemy air unit came in radar range, they went into patrol over the airbase, but only if they didn't have orders already in place.

      So 4 strikes come in and attack an airfield with 5 air sup's on the ground. The air sups instead of sitting there and letting their field get destroyed, actually scramble to engage the enemy?

      If I get close to an artillery unit, it will attack me, if i get close to a ship, it will attack me... air craft ONLY do that if on patrol. Seems in congruent.

      Now clearly a gunship going up to meet a stealth fighter is going to lose, but at least he would engage, not sit on the ground like a coward. This would effectively nullify Cyclones strategy of bomb him while he sleeps. AND it has the added benefit of getting players to actually make air sups and keep one or two at each airfield.

      What do you think?
      I like your idea.
      But that being said, it still would not change much.
      The 5 air sups on patrol would kill 1 strike fighter, maybe 2 at best.
      And it only takes 1 strike fighter to get through to disable the airport and ground the sup fighters.
      Same result.

      Add 2 or 3 SAMS. 1 more strike fighter dies. 2 to 3 still get through.
      Same result.

      The only thing that can counter it now, is to kill their air base first.
      There is really no defense now. Only offense.
      This is why it is a battle of AFK now. The least active player will always lose. Previously, there was still a lot of strategy involved.

      But your idea...
      I really like it. It is how it should be. The only time the sup fighters should not go into an automatic defensive scramble is if stealth technology is being used.
      Yes... I like this very much. It wont accomplish the goal you set for it. But it would make the game better. More realistic. And aid the less active players (which is a good thing).

      I'd like to add to your idea:
      The sup fighters scramble to defend against incoming air automatically. And then when their airbase is disabled, they land at the nearest airbase instead of becoming wagons.
      This would add a strong defensive air element to the game. It would make players have to think hard when choosing which air path to take. And it would open the door for new strategy.
      The only reason we get Sup fighters now is because they are fast and cheap. This idea would make them important and strategic.

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Cyclone46 ().

    • Cyclone46 wrote:

      War-spite wrote:

      Just a suggestion for the airport damage rule, as Germanico said they did that to intentionally ground aircraft.. What if we had air units that when an enemy air unit came in radar range, they went into patrol over the airbase, but only if they didn't have orders already in place.

      So 4 strikes come in and attack an airfield with 5 air sup's on the ground. The air sups instead of sitting there and letting their field get destroyed, actually scramble to engage the enemy?

      If I get close to an artillery unit, it will attack me, if i get close to a ship, it will attack me... air craft ONLY do that if on patrol. Seems in congruent.

      Now clearly a gunship going up to meet a stealth fighter is going to lose, but at least he would engage, not sit on the ground like a coward. This would effectively nullify Cyclones strategy of bomb him while he sleeps. AND it has the added benefit of getting players to actually make air sups and keep one or two at each airfield.

      What do you think?
      I like your idea.But that being said, it still would not change much.
      The 5 air sups on patrol would kill 1 strike fighter, maybe 2 at best.
      And it only takes 1 strike fighter to get through to disable the airport and ground the sup fighters.
      Same result.

      Add 2 or 3 SAMS. 1 more strike fighter dies. 2 to 3 still get through.
      Same result.

      The only thing that can counter it now, is to kill their air base first.
      There is really no defense now. Only offense.
      This is why it is a battle of AFK now. The least active player will always lose. Previously, there was still a lot of strategy involved.

      But your idea...
      I really like it. It is how it should be. The only time the sup fighters should not go into an automatic defensive scramble is if stealth technology is being used.
      Yes... I like this very much.
      I see your point BUT.. if you have air transport units en route to an airfield that gets captured or destroyed while in flight, they turn back. Why couldn't the air units on patrol simply land at the next closest airfield within range?

      Yes you might still lose the airfield, and I agree that 20% damage seems a bit light to shut down an aerodrome, but at least you don't lose your ability to launch those units in counter strikes, and you don't lose the units to sitting on the ground getting pounded by the incoming attackers. I have literally had gunships and attack helos attack an airbase with 7 ASF's and 7 SF's, not lose a single unit, and wipe out the entire wing.

      And one little side suggestion, can a CV's CAP follow the carrier when it moves please? It is troublesome to have a carrier move and leave it's fighters in the air because they didn't think to keep up. or maybe have a new mode for aircraft "GUARD" so that they follow the units they are guarding? So sending two ASF's to guard your column of armor as it rolls, doesn't get wiped out by a handful of apaches. Just a thought.
      ----------------------

      Jacopo: Why not just kill them? I'll do it! I'll run up to Paris - bam, bam, bam, bam. I'm back before week's end. We spend the treasure. How is this a bad plan?

      Remember that no one ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb idiot die for his country.
    • Ok sidebar - Does anyone else feel the urge to salute when they say "General Update" in their head? Y'know like Colonel Klink, or Captain America... General Update! Hey look a squirrel!
      ----------------------

      Jacopo: Why not just kill them? I'll do it! I'll run up to Paris - bam, bam, bam, bam. I'm back before week's end. We spend the treasure. How is this a bad plan?

      Remember that no one ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb idiot die for his country.
    • War-spite wrote:

      Just a suggestion for the airport damage rule, as Germanico said they did that to intentionally ground aircraft.. What if we had air units that when an enemy air unit came in radar range, they went into patrol over the airbase, but only if they didn't have orders already in place.

      So 4 strikes come in and attack an airfield with 5 air sup's on the ground. The air sups instead of sitting there and letting their field get destroyed, actually scramble to engage the enemy?
      I like this idea a lot. It is a good start toward getting air wings to behave... like an air wing.
      Given the new rules an air base with more than five units should put a maximum of five like aircraft up in each flight. A base with 12 planes shouldn't scramble one flight of 12, Instead, scramble two flights of 5, and one flight of 2, or 3 flights of four....whatever... put them up to battle because that is what pilots do. A variable behavior setting similar to ranged weapons would be wonderful. Some days we want to run away, some days patrol, some days attack would be perfect.

      Given how fragile airbases have become, and how useless so many units become without an airbase to launch from, we really need to have aircraft try harder to defend their home airbases.

      One of the challenges of CON that I have struggled with is redirecting planes which are flying combat air patrol over their bases... to attack inbound enemy aircraft. Right now planes on patrol land - refuel - and get shot to ribbons on the ground while they refuel. I don't know which nation's reality that is supposed to reflect, but it sure isn't Western or European. CAP planes attack when given an attack vector, it is the only reason they are in the air.

      I stopped building AWACS aircraft when I realized that the AWACS was not vectoring fighters onto inbound enemy planes. Flying radar isn't nearly as useful if fighters nearby don't respond. Before going AFK, I put every single air unit up on patrol, It is better than getting shot up on the ground, but I lose 15 minutes every time I start to play again.

      War-spite is on to a good idea.
      I don't know why the CON game design team is trying so hard to make aircraft, helicopters, airborne, and cruise missiles insignificant. I'm sure they have a good reason.
      For better or for worse, air power rules the world. We don't have to like that in reality, but it would be wonderful if the game allowed us to keep our planes in the air.

      There is a lot to like about CON. This latest change to airports feels like redefining gravity again. It would be great if we knew what kind of "balance" the game design team was striving for.
      "Gentlemen, When the enemy is committed to a mistake we must not interrupt him too soon"
      -- Admiral Horatio Nelson --
    • We change the rules on damaged airbases and you challenge us about the general balance of the game. Seems a bit out of scope ;)

      But in all honesty I did this for a clear reason: utilizing unfinished or broken airbases is not realistic or expected by new players.

      In fact the old rule is essentially totally in favor of the offensive player - quickly putting up/conquering an airbase and then funneling in all units he can muster.

      About the idea of CAP over airbases:

      I usually never let my air sup fighters idle on the ground. Why should I? If not needed I simply put them on patrol over cities or other important places.

      This all being said we will look into tuning this feature further for instance by adding auto defense to air sups.
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • @Germanico

      I found another change that is not listed and am wondering if it was on purpose.

      Game #2118170
      I started to build a sup fighter at my capital in the level 1 airbase I originated with.
      Later, I started an upgrade to the airport for level 2.
      I noticed that my sup fighter is now "Paused due to deactivated building".
      But the base never took damage. And the base is half way through level 2 construction.

      If you intended this, then why is it not this way when building ships while upgrading to level 3?