Posts by Walrus_3d 1914

    We'd have to evaluate the actual usefullness though as the situations in which relocating a harbour afterwards would be of great benefit are rather scare in my mind.

    Turkey is the country that first comes to mind, or Egypt and the island nations in the pacific. Other nations to a lesser extent. When I first build the harbor, my focus is internal, for reinforcement and travel directly between my provinces. Later in the game, the focus is on external threats, and being able to rapidly deploy infantry for invasions. Three to five hours of travel to mitigate an improper harbor placement can be meaningful.

    The main limiting factor is the lack of space on mobile screens so simply porting the desktop version might not be possible.

    I was thinking more along the lines of the data already existing, since it's on the desktop. Adding a "build queue" window to the provinces tab would also advertise High Command pretty effectively. 😉

    First, I understand this only applies to mobile players with High Command, but I think it's a simple fix I'm asking for.


    Background: There is no "build queue" screen in the mobile UI.

    The closest you can get to it is:

    Tap Provinces >> Tap Buildings >> Tap EVERY SINGLE PROVINCE >> Tap Construction


    The following screen shows your province construction with every selected province, and shows a "build queue" list, with which units and buildings are in the queue for later.

    It doesn't specify which queued builds are for which provinces, so when you have, say, 20 queued fortresses, there's no way to tell which ones will build first. Also, when adding to or viewing the queue for a specific province, there is no way to know, without repeating the above process, how many items are in the build queue for your province, or in which order that province's items will be constructed.


    Suggestion one: Add province names to the build queue when multiple provinces are selected for Mobile. This would resolve the primary annoyance.

    Suggestion two: Add a screen to the "Provinces" tab, after Overview and Buildings, Build Queue. I wouldn't have asked for this, except it apparently exists already on PC. (1% PC user here)

    Suggestion three: When a building is added to the queue via the province construction tab, have the system message tell you how many items are ahead of that build in the overall queue.

    Suggestion four: Have the province build queue reflect the item's overall queue position. It's relevant to know if the fortress I just scheduled to build has seventeen things ahead of it.


    Obviously Suggestion Two would be the best option for the players, but any of these would improve the situation as we have it now.


    Thanks for your time!

    I think being able to rebuild a harbour in a different location is an excellent idea. Realism would require that it takes as long to "move" a harbour as it did to construct it in the first place, so there should be an option to shift harbour locations with a 3-day build, since it's the only building in the game whose location in the province is relevant to its function, and, especially on mobile, there is a high potential for accidentally selecting the wrong initial location. This mechanic already exists for moving your capital: you just construct a new one somewhere else.


    I'm not in favor of razing a province; I agree that it would extend match times and probably cause more problems than the realism it enables would make up for. Consider if you've ever accidentally hit the "cancel" button on a unit in construction. Now Imagine accidentally deleting a building you'd intended to pause. The Horror.

    I'm not sure I understand what the post, or the first comment, are saying.


    Are you saying that an aircraft, within an enemy patrol zone, that has just been retasked, will inflict damage on the patrol without taking damage from the patrol?


    Generally, if you retask your aircraft within 3-30 seconds of contacting the enemy, does your aircraft not take damage?

    There is no link to the manual from any part of the mobile platform.


    There is no direct link to the manual from the Forum on mobile.


    You can't cut and paste links to the manual in chat on mobile.


    There is no link to the manual from the home screen on mobile.


    Please give the manual its own category in the Forum, or link to it directly from the "more" button in-game, or link to it directly from the home screen in mobile, or allow cut and paste in chat on mobile.


    Any of these would work, all of them would be excellent.


    Thanks.

    I'm just here to bump the topic. I've spent more inadvertent gold than intentional gold, just in this screen alone. The fact that there is no recourse to return the GM to the player makes it all the more relevant that the single largest transaction in GM should include a confirmation step.

    I think the most reasonable implementation of "factory repair" of units would be to actually remove that unit from play for the amount of time it would take to rebuild that percentage of condition for that unit. For instance, if my factory can build a ship in 4 days, so 25% of a ship in one day, then my existing ship at 75% condition should take one full day to repair, as long as I'm not building anything else with that factory. If I have a factory and 50% of a tank, I should be able to build that tank up to 100% in half the time, instead of having to build a whole new tank from scratch. I believe that ends up still being a faster rate of repair than the normal repairs in the field. Also, I could have the option to only repair a certain percentage of the unit, much like building 25% of an aerodrome, canceling the construction, and being able to use it as an active runway.


    With all that said, I'd also like the option to stop construction of a new unit, say at 50% or 75%, and to just be able to use it at that condition level, rather than waiting the full construction time. Could lead to some interesting defensive actions in extremis.

    I like the option better of spying on your allies while defending them from other nations' spies. Let me put two spies in an ally's territory, and I'm not only protecting my interests from the enemy, but protecting myself from my allies.


    It would also alleviate some of the concerns if your ally takes a territory in which you have an active spy, if that spy had the option to become a defensive spy rather than being a potential problem further on. If your ally takes a territory, and then five days later puts their own defensive spy in there, which then reveals your offensive spy...


    I think the game should default to your spies being defensive in allied territory, with the option to make them offensive if needed.

    There have been suggestions about being able to head to a different target within a certain angle without heading back.

    READ BEFORE POSTING: Biglist and Guide

    Your response doesn't address my post. I'm not talking about changing an existing attack order, I'm talking about adding a movement order without realizing it will reverse an existing movement order, and the inability to assign an attack target to an aircraft that it can engage after landing at its next airfield.

    I like the first suggestion.


    The alternative one is not realistic to WWI technology tho.

    I'm not sure I phrased it in a clear way. Right now, if I want to advance an artillery unit by a particular path and then attack an enemy unit, I have to guess where the best attack position will be, and add it as an extra movement order instead of an attack order. The attack order would potentially clear out the existing move order and change the path to the target. (The problem is similar for aircraft, in that I can either move a bomber to the desired airfield and then give it an attack order after it's landed, or I can give it an attack order that it will attempt to execute from the first airfield in range.)


    It's completely within WWI technology that an artillery's orders would be "advance along this path and then engage this target", or that an aircraft's order would be "transit to this forward airfield and then commence attacking this nearby target".


    An "add attack target" button would solve both problems and simplify complex operations.

    Issue: giving an aircraft an attack order once it is airborne can result in it backtracking to the previous airfield, instead of continuing to its current objective and then continuing on as intended. Sometimes this results in hours of wasted flight time.


    Suggestion: if a move or attack order would cause an aircraft to backtrack, add a confirmation step, similar to the warning about entering neutral territory, prior to negating the travel already completed.


    Alternative suggestion: for ranged and air units, add an "add attack target", so that movement orders can be preserved while adding follow-on attack targets.

    I like the idea of rings to give distances, (although the maps are already cluttered with the unit banners) for veteran players we all know to use movement time of any unit inf or mechanical unit to measure the distances, but the distance from airfields is a long time issue . (distance can always be measured with unit movement time)

    Distance measured with movement time is along roads, which is less accurate when trying to gauge artillery or aircraft ranges. It also requires having a unit available, and time to plot the path and calculate the time/distance.


    I think having a measuring tool would assist new players and speed up decision making for veteran players.

    Actually, now I think about it, it could be a simple Game Setting like where we can turn on city names, or show resources. Make it a simple ON / OFF showing a radius circle for a number of items like Fighters, Bombers, RGs, Arty, basically anything that has a range.

    That was what I was initially suggesting. An overlay view that you could turn on and off in settings. Basically when you have the view turned on, selecting the city would bring up the range rings when the province is highlighted.

    In Mobile, when you select

    Diplomacy

    Messages

    Start New Message,

    the interface shows you a list of all countries and their last dates of activity.


    On PC, when you select the same, it does not.


    My concern is that this gives an intelligence advantage to mobile users, since they will have more warning that a player is active but idle, or is about to go inactive, on a particular map.


    Suggestion: Either add this information to the PC interface, or remove it from the Mobile interface.


    Thanks for your time.

    Suggestion:


    Add an overlay, available in the settings/views, or in the province info itself,

    which applies range rings to the province view when it is selected. For obvious

    reasons, those rings could be at 40, 50, 75, 150, 225, and 350 km.

    (Range of Cruisers, Artillery, Battleships, Railguns, Fighters, and Bombers).

    At a minimum, they should be at 225 and 350 km.

    Discussion:


    Given that fighters and bombers each have a known range, it would be very helpful

    to be able to see that range visually -- prior to constructing aerodromes or producing

    aircraft -- in order to ensure that you are able to transit your newly produced aircraft,

    as efficiently as possible, to the corners of your (or enemy) territory.


    Currently, the only way to accurately set distances between airfields is, having produced

    an aircraft, to use its range ring to build new aerodromes within the range, which takes a

    minimum of six hours' construction and is horrendously inefficient.


    My initial thought was a simple ruler, which would allow you to draw straight-line

    distances, but range rings would be optimal, since we're almost never concerned

    about distances in only one direction at a time.


    I don't know if there is already some similar capability on PC, but if there is,

    then I'm asking for it to be applied to Mobile.

    Thanks for your time.