Posts by Edwylm

    Overall yes the planes are unbalanced and are broken at times.


    fighters are not that great against ground forces and in irl fighters were used to strafe ground units. but the main problem is that planes do not take/deal normal damage. example 1 fighter could kill 5 fighters without getting damaged. one could say this is realistic others would say no.


    There was an option for players to vote in the past about adding in Call of War plane mechanics into S1914. but the community shot that down.

    as with split stacks is a bit tricky, there is a 4 min window that you are able to change target right after a split stack. there was a suggestion about having code that would identify a split stack so planes couldn't re-target better units in the area.


    all units have a hidden range there is splash damage that is about 5pixels same as with the melee range.


    overall it might be best just to come with different mechanics than trying to fix the current. its very confusing units in the game. i did suggest have AA guns to help fight against the op planes.

    I don't see what you are cheering for however it is unlikely that they will add this feature. S1914 already has its hands full with the revamp.

    It be a nice addition but i can't see it coming in the near future. This suggestion has already be asked before on the old forums many a time. Since then it has never been added. Its even possible that they will never add such a feature.

    This is quite a complicated addition it be a massive diplomacy overhaul.

    1st .one has to set trade routes and what determines the trade route. most games have predetermine trade routes so are players able to create pathways or will it be auto generated.


    2nd. blockades which has been suggested in the past. without how to work the pathway one can not simply blockade plus along with which units are able to do a blockade. will it be captured or destroyed shipments.


    3rd. on doesn't need the cost of money for transport look at railroads. one could use other resources as consumption. with this the harbor will need changes from increase production to that of trade unless its a fish resource which would increase that production. overall you don't need to have a trade harbor just a regular harbor.


    4th tariffs are a complicated matter. governments are the ones to determine how much of a tariff. this could be simple to add it in with the trade and be like the stock market.

    I can see this being more engaging for players and possible to help prevent abuse from trade as it would be slower. But with the addition of this the entire map, diplomacy, and balancing will need to change. the biggest problem is balancing.

    Incorrect maps have directly affect to strategy of the game.


    remember that the game is just a game it can not live up to 100% realistic standards. one problem is that units have predetermined pathways and thus limited to map strategy.

    another is to also have to edit the range of each unit from example 50km for artillery would have to be reduced down to about 9kms. All of these would make the game last much longer than what it currently is.


    games can get around realism to fit what is needed. this doesn't affect strategy for the game as you are dealing with the game. the only affect of the "incorrect map" is that it is not realistic.

    Zeppelins were limited and used as a long range bombers and scouts. they were never used to transport infantry. they only had the history of transporting civilians before and after war.

    A similar suggestion was posted a long time ago about armor cars being able to transport infantry faster. The same reason applies to such a case.

    However the time frame around ww1 is that there were no planes big enough to transport units besides zeppelins but even than they were not used that way. It was more effective at the time to use rail roads and ships as air travel was still experiment based.