Announcement EARLY ACCESS + DESKTOP UPDATES (200610)

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

    • EARLY ACCESS + DESKTOP UPDATES (200610)


      Dear players,

      This week's patch brings you balancing changes following discussions from the community, map changes, and updates to the mobile client.

      The aircraft carrier is receiving an overall buff to capacity and anti-air capability. As the crown jewel of any fleet, we want it to feel just as imposing as its real-life counterpart. With the ability to launch up to three wings per carrier, the threat of a naval invasion in late game should be even more daunting.

      We’ve reduced anti-ship damage of the helicopter gunship and the attack helicopter, shifting that capability more toward the AWS.

      The Early Access mobile client received user interface and experience changes - refining the overall experience when playing the game we’ve all come to know and love.

      + + + + DESKTOP + + + +
      Changes:
      • Aircraft Carriers
        • Increased capacity from 4/6/8 to 5/10/15 (per Tier)
        • Increased Anti Air envelope from 26 to 50 on level 2 (Air Defense Upgrade)
        • Increased Anti Air envelope from 50 to 75 on level 7
        • Increased Attack vs Helicopter units from 3/5/6/6.5/6.5/7 to 4/6/7/7.5/8/9
        • Reduce speed in High Seas from 3.5/3.5/3.5/3.5/3.8/3.8/3.8 to 3/3/3/3/3.5/3.5/3.5
        • Added maintenance cost of 0/0/50/65/80/100 Rare materials
      • Helicopters
        • Reduced Helicopter Gunship Attack vs Ships from 1.5/1.5/1.5/2/2/3/3 to 1/1/1/1.5/1.5/2/2
        • Reduced Attack Helicopter Attack vs Ships from 2/2.5/3/3.5/4/5/5 to 1.5/1.5/2/2/2/3/3.5
      • Overkill
        • Changed Diego Garcia, Asahikawa (Japan) & Nuuk (Greenland) to Rare Materials
        • Added in new island (Tristan da Cunha) in Atlantic Ocean to place Victory site there instead of Falklands


      + + + MOBILE + + +
      Changes:
      • Added the details panels for buildings
      • We changed the city and province grids to be more visible and have less sprawl
      • Added army status icons for when units are Attacking, Embark/Disembark, Refueling
      Fixes:
      • Fixed issue where combat icon can become obscured by unit country flags
      • Fixed issue where queuing would cause construction panel to become unresponsive when doing so
      Dorado Games
      Conflict Of Nations

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

    • This update killed the game.


      (Why ? I need to give explanations ? i thought that you said that when you had nothing to say)

      Joke apart, cool :D
      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 - you briefly gave me a heart attack - don't do this to me haha :D

      Glad you guys like the changes though, we were discussing the Carrier internally for some time after receiving so much feedback about it and Erick was like "hell - let's make it awesome!" so yeah.
      Let's see what it brings.
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • yes, i think we may see the ASW get some buff In that area, we'll see.


      As discussed with ED, though, the thing that lacks the most, and that MrBookshelf reffered to too : There needs some kind of a light carrier for T1 with a cheaper entry cost. Once the T1 is researched, a T2, even very expensive, is more interesting
      Here the Aircraft carrier is unarguably awesome in late, but "getting there" is another beast in the game of "tech choices".
      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.
    • In some ways, many of us were against a buff to the anti-ship of the helicopters because no ship was really good against them. Even the cruiser was "mildly okay" against them, and they won the attrition war anyway.

      Now, with the aircraft carrier that can claim to be a helicopter killer (75 range XD ), it wouldn't be that over the top to consider a T2-T3 increase of anti-ship damages for the ASW.

      Not too much, though ---> it would be interesting that the main naval counter to the Aircraft carrier would be naval patrol planes (aka torpedo planes)
      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:

      In some ways, many of us were against a buff to the anti-ship of the helicopters because no ship was really good against them. Even the cruiser was "mildly okay" against them, and they won the attrition war anyway.

      Now, with the aircraft carrier that can claim to be a helicopter killer (75 range XD ), it wouldn't be that over the top to consider a T2-T3 increase of anti-ship damages for the ASW.

      Not too much, though ---> it would be interesting that the main naval counter to the Aircraft carrier would be naval patrol planes (aka torpedo planes)
      Wouldn't that speak against an ASW buff vs ships though? The fact that there were no naval units that were really good counters to helis until now? Besides, I doubt we'll see people focusing on developing the (slightly expensive) Aircraft Carrier just to counter helis any time soon, despite its newfound godliness.
    • Yak wrote:


      We’ve reduced anti-ship damage of the helicopter gunship and the attack helicopter, shifting that capability more toward the AWS.
      This quote got me thinking they buffed AWS. For my opinion it actually quite ok atm. It didn't do much damage, need to attack a lot more run but the great is it didn't get wipe out after first and even second run by ship AA.
    • ThePanda wrote:

      Opulon wrote:

      In some ways, many of us were against a buff to the anti-ship of the helicopters because no ship was really good against them. Even the cruiser was "mildly okay" against them, and they won the attrition war anyway.

      Now, with the aircraft carrier that can claim to be a helicopter killer (75 range XD ), it wouldn't be that over the top to consider a T2-T3 increase of anti-ship damages for the ASW.

      Not too much, though ---> it would be interesting that the main naval counter to the Aircraft carrier would be naval patrol planes (aka torpedo planes)
      Wouldn't that speak against an ASW buff vs ships though? The fact that there were no naval units that were really good counters to helis until now? Besides, I doubt we'll see people focusing on developing the (slightly expensive) Aircraft Carrier just to counter helis any time soon, despite its newfound godliness.
      Hm, good point indeed.
      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.
    • I really wonder when ı will be happy after updates

      I tried Aircraft Carriers once and found out that it is waste of resources, never tried again and will never produce. It's a fancy unit but in my humble opinion, at least as far as I see, no experienced player produce it. Actually unexperienced ones as well. So I feel it is a consumption of your energy in vain. And why do you feel compelled to make updates all the time? (not referring to bugs )

      I know you want a balanced unit distribution by making them a little weaker to make players produce various units but this is only theoratically correct. Most likely you have not got much criticism about such changes but to tell the truth many players I personally know hate them. I am playing this game about 3 years and have never seen such amount of complaints. For 6-8 months, ı heard various whining by my alliance players (about 100) and other fellows ı met in fellow alliances. And some players were about to quit the game completely. I stopped some of them, some gone.

      People learn and accumulate experience thanks to history they had in games. This is a psychological process. Earning a habit is difficult, and habits have steps. They build their character in this game with features they learned. And some updates take this experience from them and they naturally frustrate. Even me which ı always play 8-10 games at the same timespan can't attend more than 2 nowadays. Currently none for example.

      That's why ı try alliance challenges to make players busy as much as possible and advice them playing actively in pub games. But as you know, challenges are orphans of this game. They always came last. Fortunately they are present and make me and many of the players active.

      Anyway, back to the topic.

      I of course know that you are not doing this because of malice or sort, and want to have more competitive game but in practice it is not happening as planned. Each "new" does not brings about "good".

      About the updates...

      These revisions won't affect 4x games much, but in 1x games or alliance challenges some of the latest updates really make things undesirable ı believe.

      I wish ı had noted all but have not. These are the ones I remember.

      First, towed arty's power (range and hitting power) were decreased. I stopped producing it.
      Second, mob arty's resources increased.
      (Maybe third), related to second one, manpower problem occurred even with rect level 2 in first 8 days in elites.
      fourth, ASW which was powerful against ships became weaker (except subs of course)

      fifth, fighters' attack power against ships decreased
      sixth, attack chopper got advantage vs ships. (Well yes 3 attack point by attack chopper and 3.5 by asw but in any case attack was the best unit because of the type of units it aims) and now it is already gone.
      seventh, which is what makes me upset, is the infantry's visibility by radars. I personally changed the game strategy and started producing both awacs and radars but did not work well.

      It turned to a theraphy session
      Sorry about it.
    • @Alat Urka If this was CON in 2018 or 2019 I'd agree that the balancing changes were way too frequent, but I really don't think that claim can be made this year. The current frequency of balancing updates leaves enough time to absorb what has changed and put them into context imo. As for having to adapt to these changes, well...any MMO worth its salt evolves over time. Keeping up with them is part of the appeal if you ask me.
    • ThePanda wrote:

      @Alat Urka If this was CON in 2018 or 2019 I'd agree that the balancing changes were way too frequent, but I really don't think that claim can be made this year. The current frequency of balancing updates leaves enough time to absorb what has changed and put them into context imo. As for having to adapt to these changes, well...any MMO worth its salt evolves over time. Keeping up with them is part of the appeal if you ask me.
      Yes this is of course subjective evaluation :) But I am not alone feeling this, that's what I'm trying to point out. Otherwise ı might have preferred to not state anything here. Well at least I havent for a year.
    • Hey Alat - I hear you. This said, in a maturing game with maturing players there is always the tendency to look back or wish for good old days. I am an online gamer so I've been there myself.
      This said you need to account for the huge influx of new players as well. It's also natural for players to start seeing the minor flaws after having played a game for such a long time and that always skews the picture.
      We will surely continue developing and fixing and balancing the game for years to come - that's the plan. And Mobile will again drive in new players with new playstyles. It's inevitable.

      //G
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • Germanico wrote:

      Hey Alat - I hear you. This said, in a maturing game with maturing players there is always the tendency to look back or wish for good old days. I am an online gamer so I've been there myself.
      This said you need to account for the huge influx of new players as well. It's also natural for players to start seeing the minor flaws after having played a game for such a long time and that always skews the picture.
      We will surely continue developing and fixing and balancing the game for years to come - that's the plan. And Mobile will again drive in new players with new playstyles. It's inevitable.

      //G
      Of course there must be changes and updates, I did not mean fixing it once and for all. I'm just pointing out the fluctuations of building blocks. That would frustrate people but you already got my point :)

      And maybe you may create a pop-up (like the one appearring for gold buying) after updates and ask all if they like it (could be simple yes or no question). Might be more useful for you more than forum discussions which are commented only by some players.