The aggressive fire does have ups and downs. I dislike that it will kill everything when you don't want it too. however, I like aspect of the aggressive fire being able to attack units/players that are invading. when a nation declares war on you through diplomacy your units do not fire until you are attacked. this helps with sneak attacks from neutral nations.
Couple of facts before I go further
Hnr- strategy based on activity only. No skills or knowledge needed. You use same troops , you can have them 100 time less, but you will still kill 100 times bigger enemy only due to activity. not possible in any other game I know.
90- 95% of players use only Hnr and have no idea how to play a game in a different way.
Hnr player can defeat any player he wants , even the best one, adding only some of gms to destroy airfields ( against plane) , lower enemy more ( gming province morale) and so on
hnr players with 0 skills can defeat biggest Gm spender only by sitting longer and attacking only when enemy is afk to earn his $ for GMs
there is also number of other tricks and strategies based only on activity and though this activity players stand no chance when opponent is active, they can decimate anyone when opponent is afk. Splitting troops from bombing run of afk players is simpel way to avoid force that is 10* stronger with simple move, that has nothing to do with strategy or skills, it is simple exploit due to holes in a codding.
couple of guys sitting on same account , managing it 25 hours per day using different way to do it.
in general bytro led to situation where activity is the only value important in their game while everything else is not important. because if you can show Hnr to day 1 player and he can take down anyone just by brainlessly sitting longer than opponent..... where does it leave space for strategy or skills? or even GMs
activity players never attack active players- they always attack afk players which results in lack of any skills from them plus better players begin fed up with bytro policy to support 0 skill players. even regular players who are killed like that are very disappointed in strategy in bytro games as there is no strategy at all. it is just sitting longer which is brainless. imagine playing chess and winning only when opponent sleeps on the other side...
Anyway - my point is- bytro cannot do anything to balance this. nothing with code, gameplay setup, game features. nothing to stop accounts which are active 25 hours per day. NOTHING AT ALL can be done to solve this so why not to kill that problem with one smooth move?
My solution is simple like it was simple for other games. every player has limited number of hours in a day -24 h. every account has limited number of hours 24h per day.
That way we will not have problem with cheater using all possible means to cheat TOS and Rules to get advantage over honest players.
At the same time cheaters will lose all advantage they had and we will not have any more problems with cheaters in a large scale.
another advantage is more accounts will stay longer in game and finally skills will be able to fight against activity. Same goes for Gms- they will be able to win against activity - which will generate more money for Bytro.
at the same time alliance games, which were plagued with vpns and rdcing will become valuable option for most of alliances.
there are many aspects one must consider
1 hnr is a real strategy in irl take that away how would a small nation defend itself? take away hnr and you just have number battles, also it just be fort defense on land and using meat shields again. it wouldn't be so bad to have a combat retreat feature that might work but its difficult to see without being able to test it. activity would be nice but its a hard work around to fix the issue.
2 Your solution you given to "solve they problem" 500 and 100 maps wouldn't be much time to build anything mid to late game. games like these types of games do not place time limitations they add drawbacks negative affects so players are lead to manage game time/resources.
in normal fighting conditions you need to spend about 5-10 mins within every hour. now having some drawbacks would be interesting but still it be unrealistic to implement and to relate to irl. the only thing i can see is to add some kind of communication net work feature which would delay orders and to have spies sabotage it. But then i would have to say that spies in general need to be reworked so that they hit at random times other than right at day change.
3 there is no fix for attacking afk players for a rts game unless there was a pause button. there are many players around the world with different times they play.
While memes are part of the thread's topic, they can be posted here.
From forum rules
f) So-called spamming or hazing, creating postings containing only smilies or individual words is prohibited. Basically a post should contribute to the topic and be self-explanatory.
While memes are ok in off-topic, however this is feedback thread one or two might not be bad but there is a line as where it will be viewed as spamming.
The idea of aircraft carriers/seaplanes was suggested long time ago in the old forums. The use of them were limited seeing only little action in ww1 where the true aircraft carriers were invented after ww1. it be interesting but i would find it a bit to much like playing a ww2 game/CoW than a ww1 game if they were added in.
However the best place to discuss new or missing features please post in the Missing Feature forum.
Thank you Ed. Im actually curious what you think about the new update though man.
concerning about the big changes.
---adding elite AI
well it does create more of a challenge however the elite AI isn't so much the best, they lack tactics, coronation with allies, to ally with a AI is hard even then not worth it as when you declare war most nations think negative about you. it does help with preventing holding AI capitals to use as morale buffs however due to how elite AI acts you be getting -25 war morale and can't protect all borders which will suck.
---Units cannot be traded anymore
this is something i disliked i wouldn't mind if it was relationship perspective only allowing Share map, RoW or coalition members. even then neutral nations should be able to, to be realistic.
---Trading resources via diplomatic trading is limited to coalition and team members
not good for lone players and how they go about this in non coalition or team games? i haven't experimented with loner gameplay in a while.
---After leaving a coalition players have to wait 3 days before they can join or create a new coalition
---After being kicked from a coalition players have to wait 1 day before they can join or create a new coalition they walk hand in hand, are those leaving/kicked have a protection time so they don't get killed by their former allies? i can see being kicked but leaving is up to the player. however still hurting them if they can't trade.
However things can change, is the change right away maybe idk, the devs have several games to work with so updates to fix issues might be slow. remember they release Supremacy 1 a few months ago so focus on other games will be slower.
All right a warning to all since i have seen this topic go off topic to what is intended along with rules breaks and getting toxic.
First off a list of rule breaks,
Insulting other forum users or the staff is prohibited. This already results from the rules of etiquette.
The naming or denunciation of users / players, whom (allegedly) exploit bugs or other inconsistencies, is not permitted, as this can lead to unjustified accusations
Denouncing of gms usage and those that buy gms is not permitted.
As things are going, please stay on topic as this is for game-play feedback for this update. Respectful and constructive criticism are always nice however if it goes off topic or it gets bad enough with toxic feedback the devs might not even look to see the feedback that would help improve the game. If this topic stays toxic then it might be closed and if it continues to other patch notes feedback then the devs might not even ask for feedback.
This has been suggested in the past however so far no implement into the game. adding a new navel unit would likely mean new balancing issues. for example subs are fairly week if they are found by themselves and are not that efficient in combat due to it being a melee unit. thus why it has stealth to make it usable. adding this unit isn't needed as you can build subs yourself or use infantry to act as meat-shields/finders for subs. to be realistic subs should be able to hit and run and not be in stuck in melee.
This has been suggested in the past sadly they did not implement them. maybe one day but zeppelins are in supremacy 1.
default mode if you ordered your range units to attack an enemy it will continue to attack unless ordered otherwise. if you moved the range units into range without ordering it to attack it will auto attack and will return fire if attacked by range units that are in its range. however if you hit a range unit when it used its attack tick it doesn't matter if you were able to return fire as they could pull back before your attack tick deals damage. its a bit complicated due to the damage timer.
the game admin does not moderate the game.
the reward/punish system is not a good idea as even the host can try to cheat too. the rep idea isn't great as it isn't much of a reward and just being active doesn't mean that the lad will remove the inactive players. remember when the admin goes AI (5-2 day inactivity period) a new host is auto selected.
from what Golden Frieeza has stated even after you lose your armies and land you can still return. with that players would exploit it, as a ally dies the game speeds up then revive the nation then the game slows back down. as i have stated before this feature is not practical. if you want to play a faster game there are speed events to play with faster speeds.
"available diplomatic options are of no use whatsoever"
you can still send messages whats in said message is up to the player to determine if its true or false. players use screenshots of spy reports, army locations and other game related info that might help in a war. but when doing this be mindful of privacy rules.
This you can do anyway. So using it as a counter-argument is naive.
nay it is not naive. if you know when someone will go inactive/gets booted from the round players that are invited usually take place seldom is it rare to see a random player join. having manual removal lessens the chances of replacement cheaters. it is known that the devs placed a join limit to games to prevent late game joiners on the grounds to give a player a unfair advantage. Also players didn't like the fact that their former ally being booted and replaced by a random player and attacks them from within due to the right of way.
well i'm not a dev i'm just a volunteer moderator.
I'm sure it could be a static number, like 5%, and perhaps a medic unit which moves really slow and looks like a tent with the + symbol that increases said number.
------- (Second edit: maybe this tent can reduce morale loss in provinces when you just capture them and you're freshly assembled army has to live in a gritty 25% morale province)-------
Secondly I think if the buildings themselves have upkeep and the wounded/prisoners wouldn't be a unit, just a number without morale, it wouldn't be a big hassle.
yeah but realistically if it was a unit then you might have the problem of "killing wounded/prisoner units". this isn't want the game wants to focus on. remember that buildings get damaged when a battle takes place in a prov. so camps/hospitals will be damaged to. (you might say script it so they don't get damaged but in battles things happen). it would be a nice fun little feature to have the little details. its just not needed.
Also another problem would be allies become enemies. the number of wars separating pows by each country. along with what happens when a country is gone... what happens to the pows. this suggested feature is complicated.
having a hospital building isn't far fetch for help increase morale, prison camps is just complicated, if it is a possibility the devs like the idea they would have it as a building but what would it do? decrease enemy morale faster in said prov? and those that have the building would it have a chance of "escape pows? revealing army locations, damaging morale,resources, buildings...
This system should be automatic!
>>Replace inactive player with AI in defensive position (will focus on building and guarding borders)
This is already into the game unless you mean when the player isn't logged in but yet not inactive yet. However the AI in the game isn't the greatest as it can be easily predicted.
This system should be automatic!
>>Clear the player from the game, freeing the spot for a new player to come and control his lands.
And thus freeing a spot for wolfpacking, multis and other players that might want to cheat. from this suggestion there isn't much protecting the player in which plans on coming back into the game. So this feature will probably never going to be implemented.
well just double clicking on a unit will select the type of unit on screen plus a little bit off screen. so really this feature is already in game.
What is your term for "defeated"? when a player loses all his land and armies? because a player could bring back another player by trading a prov or units. So in all this feature wouldn't be practical.
Well that is why there is the option for share map, share intelligence, spies, patrolling, and diplomacy. There is no need for another feature to reveal they enemy's position.
retreating has been proposed in the old forums. from old topics the reason has been no because retreating can introduce exploiting and the fact of when in enemy territory your units will still be caught and destroyed. so its not a reliable feature to have.