Everyone in chat tells me to shutup and take it to the forums or discord (no way), so here goes:
No more pay to play. Only a buffed subscription account. I'd subscribe if it was a fair price (i.e. $5/month, $50/year). I realize this will be outright disregarded by the company but, insist it would be more profitable. The deletion of microtransactions is necessary for a properly balanced game system and would guarantee steady lasting income. Relying upon credits of those who splurge upon in game microtransactions literally creates an environment of priveledge. In so many words it is the bane of good internet gaming commerce.
Game requires much more balancing. Less units and buildings patterned somewhat realistically in opposition to each other's abilities would be more simple and orderly than the dozens currently. If balance is achieved at a smaller scale of design than it can be expanded but, only from solid foundation. This game should feature economic technology and more economic strategy. A nations economy and logistics are the backbone of it's military. Maps should probably have more equalised province distances. A equidistant hexagon or staggered square map would literally be perfect and balanced with generally far fewer routes. Another specific game imbalance is the similarity of effect for provincial buildings while city buildings cost more. This is an example of design incongruency due to the superior nature of cities over provinces.
I may come back to this thread and type out more suggestions/criticism. Feel free to ignore, badger, or elect me as corporate chief executive. ;]

Uh, thanks for replying friendly moderators :]. Glad to see I was correct in my response when told to take it here. 'Plus ca change' I guess.
I am honestly so out of touch with online gaming that I have no clue what fortnite is. Doesn't seem to be (according to the wiki) in anyway what I referenced though. This thread is meant as a catch all of my stupid suggestions so that I'm not just spamming someone else's thread. I prefaced my first post with the subscription based accounting because I think it is the greatest possible change the company could implement. The entirety of the game cannot be balanced when it is debased by systematic usury. If I were to draw a game comparison to my concept it would be World of Warcraft. I've never played but, understand it is subscription based without microtransaction with the largest world server farm and playerbase (again I'm actually unfamiliar with it). Although, the "DLC" craze has probably hit it by now. So, once more a free to play game with "security council" subscriptions which allow players to receive multipliers on certain in-game values like buildspeed reduction and resource generation. This is primarily why the admin monitored challenge games are popular.
Said and done. No need to beat a dead horse. To move forward I'd also suggest simple member behavior filters that can flag accounts which are joining/leaving games or acting exploitatively. Server side scripting that can get rid of problematic behavior like account inactivity. Another general idea would be to tutorial players with somewhat more lengthy instructions outside of a multiplayer round. I've seen it as a historic Supremacy problem that the simple activation and tutor rounds do not provide enough barrier to the main program in order to hinder multi-account exploitation. So, generally I think server scripts with several client exclaimers should be able to clean up many of the greater game problems.

Today's suggestion is reorganizing the 4x rounds. The parameter values should be quartered instead of quadrupling the server tick. The player's should not have to recalculate all timers themselves through the lazy server tick speed change. Current method also renders news article features rather useless. I might suggest that comparitive to standard games 4x rounds have proven certain changes should be implemented. Standard games should at least have 2x build speeds and resource production. Unit movement speeds are generally good for standard games due to the tactical nature of the system though tweaking is probably required. The building and unit construction timers should be patterned better to their in game effectivity. I'd actually reevaluate all unit and building types and their resource expenses but, that will have to be another much longer suggestion post.
Should a mod/admin read this please post any unit-resource spreadsheet datum somewhere or direct me to it so that I may review your content more easily.

They maximize their user base by offering a better buisness model sir. It isn't exactly a confusing Catch 22. Although you maybe referring too investiture versus future risk potential and web infrastructure overload. I kinda doubt that's a problem when you're running alongside giants like E-Republik.
Next, how dare you agree with me about the tick-parameter flaw. For that I give you my daily suggestion list dump:

-make city interface province title text copyable
-diplomatic resource trading interface. preferrable new/improved/more realistic
-engine map overlay switches saved to user profile
-in-game chat replaced with irc client functionality (channels and all those bells and whistles)
-limit player market postings to one order or offer per resource
-create common market exchange service with "extremely" poor rates
-create international bond interest market for ease of investment in friends (with dividend repayment)
-more land infrastructural speed enhancements with costs determined by terrain
-greater airlift and sea transport time allotment
-map equidistant land route hex pattern. quad sea route pattern (north south east west, not diagnol)
-unit disbandment command
-diplomatic surrender feature with homeland area of denial and automatic loss of territory outside of homeland
-aircraft and naval functions ability to queue between attack, patrol, etc.
-standardising the bombardment feature and construction queuing for 'free to plays'

Kinda straight forward titular suggestions. If anything seems interesting or needs explaining just point it out. Ranting about one thing at a time gives me carpal tunnel vision. Eventually, I'd like to compile a community wide suggestion list organized with headers. Oh, and if you are unfortunate enough to read through this one, again is there a a current working spreadsheet on the game's unit and building values? I will eventually make one if there isn't.

To go in depth on one particular suggestion again I'll babble about air forces. There is an old 'bug' in CoW in which the air layer pathing gets botched during air to air attack orders. The planes will reroute past their moving target, RTB, or fly off in some whacky direction. Although, I thought this was fixed in effect by tieing the timer at mission start to a definite later event. Which is another example why I assume CoN was developed from an obsolete CoW release. The CoW fix method worked per se but, the graphic representation was still awkward and I never playtested for what if the interceptor was intercepted (if they had a check on unit_exist or something).
I'd suggest a step towards perfection of the air model would be to negate all point attacks. Using only the incorruptable patrol mission circle method. At least three air missions must be featured; ground attack, air superiority, and scramble. Ground attack would remain as the small current patrol circle. Air superiority would be three times or more larger. While air scramble, naturally from an airbase, is perhaps half the air units modelled combat radius. A timer prompt would also be very handy in getting these features to work better for strategic planning. Additionally, the variety of orders including ferrying should be queueable together and feature an orders list.
I seem to remember that first came the CoW development pixel air layer than Supremacy 1914 adopted it (probably wrong). Another, method to better define air transit positions during calculations (and recalculations) would be to use a routed grid air layer instead of the massive pixel layer used now. I bet that the excellent pathing algorythm would never mistake a constant tracked route like that. The craft of course could be represented as floating octagonaly to the actual grid. This would also free up alot of process load I think.
That's my daily BS.