New Year Update (180116)

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

    • After this update i logged into a new server , started my initial building/training and studied the new training lines. I logged off and let my first Arms industries build and first motorized / crv's build , i logged on the next morning , re examined the training lines and archived the game.

      efreet wrote:

      - It's to easy to get ballistic missiles - only research, lab lv1, launcher, ammo, comparing to costs of anti-missile protection able to shoot them, it's profitable to rush those missiles. Maybe lab lv3.
      Right , you can have unstoppable ballistic missiles before day 10 without gold , on day 3 with gold but you cannot get your first CM until day 20 or later without gold and it is a watered missile when you get it. Pushing Strike Fighter - CM combo back to day 20 or beyond and adding the ability to destroy airfields at will by day 3 insures that early CRV-Motorized invasion will win 100% of the time , the defender has zero chance without gold.
    • I think that some of the new upgrades were good. Yes, strike fighters were OP. The countdown timer was too short. And they have fixed those issues.

      However it is true that you can get ballistic missiles on day 3, maybe even day 2, with gold. Wheras now cruise missiles now arrive into the game too late and the promised 'mid to late game potential' never arrives. I think that cruise missiles should have slightly earlier research and buffed stats. Ballistic missiles should either be nerfed of have their research moved back.
      Famous quotes from me:
      "Just my important opinion"
      "The best player is the player who is patient, who is clever and who is ruthless."
      "I'm really great at diplomacy, terrible at strategy ;) "
    • Superchan wrote:

      I think that some of the new upgrades were good. Yes, strike fighters were OP. The countdown timer was too short. And they have fixed those issues.

      However it is true that you can get ballistic missiles on day 3, maybe even day 2, with gold. Wheras now cruise missiles now arrive into the game too late and the promised 'mid to late game potential' never arrives. I think that cruise missiles should have slightly earlier research and buffed stats. Ballistic missiles should either be nerfed of have their research moved back.
      Strike Fighters were in no way OP , the opposite is true , you needed CM to supplement their poor damage output to ground units and the losses to strikes are staggering vs relatively weak ground forces. Only with CM did they have good damage and even then by the time you could train that combo air defense was readily available so you still suffered losses. The only thing i agree to is the Strikes air to air damage was too high late game , AS fighters were taking too much damage from them. The Air to ground damage buff should have gone to strikes , not AS.
    • thanks for your feedback guys, but reiterating the same old arguments which I answered previously will really make us change our minds?

      Your dislike is noted but it does not contain any valid data or calculations or such. To me it reads much more as if we disrupted your well honed play style and strategy, resulting in deminished fun - for you.

      This is regrettable but we are looking at the broader picture here - not the alpha gamer experience.

      Hope you understand
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • Yes I agree with Germanico. My only suggestions:

      1.Move ballistic missile research a day back

      2.Make it so you need secret weapons lab 2 to have a BM launcher
      Famous quotes from me:
      "Just my important opinion"
      "The best player is the player who is patient, who is clever and who is ruthless."
      "I'm really great at diplomacy, terrible at strategy ;) "
    • Germanico wrote:

      Your dislike is noted but it does not contain any valid data or calculations or such.
      You already have that data , post it and prove me wrong.

      Germanico wrote:

      To me it reads much more as if we disrupted your well honed play style and strategy, resulting in deminished fun - for you.
      Seems to me the only people being disrupted are the players who spend enough time to actually develop a well honed style and strategy. I would think in a strategy game , strategy would play a vital role.