Jump to content
World Warfare
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

Unchecked Balancing Issues


Oracle
 Share

Recommended Posts

Before I start my tyraid, I want to thank the designers, admins, and all others who painstakingly and incessantly strive to make this game better everyday they work. I appreciate you all and I look forward to the growth of this game. Sincere thanks given to you all. 

During the growth of the game, I collected the data without shouting how I dislike every change which has occurred. I see the necessity of certain changes. However, it should take no commander excessive time to destroy a city or building when utilizing the proper units in game. I love to employ a combination of airpower and airborne assets to destroy targets. While utilizing my units I find it takes me many hours to destroy one city. What the f$&k has happened? Did the balls of the units fall off? I definitely see the need to nerf units and buff structures, yet these changes seem a bit extreme. Everyone as piped up on the blueprint/skill tree/unlock system and I see their anguish because it shouldn't take so long to kill another player, especially if they are inactive. The sought after units, the ones which do good damage, require nothing short of divine intervention to unlock. We are stuck with sub-par units to complete unbelievable tasks. I've spent 10days just trying to eliminate vacant enemy bases which surround me, to little avail even with the assistance of Howitzers and B-25s (Mitchells), and I cannot eliminate them to assist my faction in the center where the real points lie.

WHY ARE BUILDINGS EASIER TO DESTROY WITH EARLY GAME UNITS THAN WITH MID-GAME UNITS?????

Isn't artillery a means for ground infantry to destroy large amounts of area? Why must I supply drop them 3,4,5 times just to destroy HALF of a base? Why must my Mitchell bombers conduct 4-5 bombing runs to only level HALF of a city? What is this nonsense?!?! Please remove your collective heads from the communal rear end. Please listen to the pleas of your fan base and fix the problems they mention as many of your loyal ones are considering abandoning ship. I love what this game can become. So much potential. Do not fall into the almost-great-game category. 

Sincerely, a fellow fan and commander. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2016/2/14 at 0:19 AM, Oracle said:

Before I start my tyraid, I want to thank the designers, admins, and all others who painstakingly and incessantly strive to make this game better everyday they work. I appreciate you all and I look forward to the growth of this game. Sincere thanks given to you all. 

During the growth of the game, I collected the data without shouting how I dislike every change which has occurred. I see the necessity of certain changes. However, it should take no commander excessive time to destroy a city or building when utilizing the proper units in game. I love to employ a combination of airpower and airborne assets to destroy targets. While utilizing my units I find it takes me many hours to destroy one city. What the f$&k has happened? Did the balls of the units fall off? I definitely see the need to nerf units and buff structures, yet these changes seem a bit extreme. Everyone as piped up on the blueprint/skill tree/unlock system and I see their anguish because it shouldn't take so long to kill another player, especially if they are inactive. The sought after units, the ones which do good damage, require nothing short of divine intervention to unlock. We are stuck with sub-par units to complete unbelievable tasks. I've spent 10days just trying to eliminate vacant enemy bases which surround me, to little avail even with the assistance of Howitzers and B-25s (Mitchells), and I cannot eliminate them to assist my faction in the center where the real points lie.

WHY ARE BUILDINGS EASIER TO DESTROY WITH EARLY GAME UNITS THAN WITH MID-GAME UNITS?????

Isn't artillery a means for ground infantry to destroy large amounts of area? Why must I supply drop them 3,4,5 times just to destroy HALF of a base? Why must my Mitchell bombers conduct 4-5 bombing runs to only level HALF of a city? What is this nonsense?!?! Please remove your collective heads from the communal rear end. Please listen to the pleas of your fan base and fix the problems they mention as many of your loyal ones are considering abandoning ship. I love what this game can become. So much potential. Do not fall into the almost-great-game category. 

Sincerely, a fellow fan and commander. 

Hey, things will be easier after you unlock some certain weapons. For example, Stug III Assault Gun is better at taking the buildings. So I suggest you to reorganize your troops and form them properly to let them perform  with their own strong points. What do you think? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2016 at 0:19 AM, Oracle said:

Before I start my tyraid, I want to thank the designers, admins, and all others who painstakingly and incessantly strive to make this game better everyday they work. I appreciate you all and I look forward to the growth of this game. Sincere thanks given to you all. 

During the growth of the game, I collected the data without shouting how I dislike every change which has occurred. I see the necessity of certain changes. However, it should take no commander excessive time to destroy a city or building when utilizing the proper units in game. I love to employ a combination of airpower and airborne assets to destroy targets. While utilizing my units I find it takes me many hours to destroy one city. What the f$&k has happened? Did the balls of the units fall off? I definitely see the need to nerf units and buff structures, yet these changes seem a bit extreme. Everyone as piped up on the blueprint/skill tree/unlock system and I see their anguish because it shouldn't take so long to kill another player, especially if they are inactive. The sought after units, the ones which do good damage, require nothing short of divine intervention to unlock. We are stuck with sub-par units to complete unbelievable tasks. I've spent 10days just trying to eliminate vacant enemy bases which surround me, to little avail even with the assistance of Howitzers and B-25s (Mitchells), and I cannot eliminate them to assist my faction in the center where the real points lie.

WHY ARE BUILDINGS EASIER TO DESTROY WITH EARLY GAME UNITS THAN WITH MID-GAME UNITS?????

Isn't artillery a means for ground infantry to destroy large amounts of area? Why must I supply drop them 3,4,5 times just to destroy HALF of a base? Why must my Mitchell bombers conduct 4-5 bombing runs to only level HALF of a city? What is this nonsense?!?! Please remove your collective heads from the communal rear end. Please listen to the pleas of your fan base and fix the problems they mention as many of your loyal ones are considering abandoning ship. I love what this game can become. So much potential. Do not fall into the almost-great-game category. 

Sincerely, a fellow fan and commander. 

Thank you Oracle, we will make changes. I don't like killing a city for hours either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jack said:

Hey, things will be easier after you unlock some certain weapons. For example, Stug III Assault Gun is better at taking the buildings. So I suggest you to reorganize your troops and form them properly to let them perform  with their own strong points. What do you think? 

First, I'd like to thank you for your suggestion. I have familiarized myself with the Stug III, which is why I made the statement, "why is it easier to destroy buildings with early game units than midgame units."  As I said before, I enjoy employing an AIRBORNE and AIRPOWER ASSETS in the destruction of my enemy.  As you are aware, I am unable to fly a STUG III in a light transport. Before you suggest I build a large transport, remember the trouble we are having to unlock higher tier units. Secondly, forcing all commanders to play the same exact same way detracts from what, I assess, is the true essence of the game. My point being, requiring myself, or other commanders, to utilize either the Stug III, Strategic Bomber, Rocket Truck, or Battleship to effectively render enemy cities destroyed is by far the most idiotic decision which could have been made by the development team in regards to waging Warfare. Now, merely suggesting I alter my playing style, which would be effective if the development team thoroughly considered the pros and cons of their combat units, is asking me to accept and conform to the unbalanced ways of the game. To that, I vehemently say "No." Why would any customer oriented company tell me to accept their broken product? Shouldn't said company be more concerned creating a better game using all relevant insight available to them? 

Last point I will leave you with is "the mission of field artillery is to destroy, neutralize, or suppress the enemy by cannon, rocket, and misslie fire..." Removing the the strength from units whose very purpose is to destroy enemy built up areas handcuffs commanders, which is not a good thing, mmkay. Thanks for your input. It has been taken into consideration. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Oracle said:

First, I'd like to thank you for your suggestion. I have familiarized myself with the Stug III, which is why I made the statement, "why is it easier to destroy buildings with early game units than midgame units."  As I said before, I enjoy employing an AIRBORNE and AIRPOWER ASSETS in the destruction of my enemy.  As you are aware, I am unable to fly a STUG III in a light transport. Before you suggest I build a large transport, remember the trouble we are having to unlock higher tier units. Secondly, forcing all commanders to play the same exact same way detracts from what, I assess, is the true essence of the game. My point being, requiring myself, or other commanders, to utilize either the Stug III, Strategic Bomber, Rocket Truck, or Battleship to effectively render enemy cities destroyed is by far the most idiotic decision which could have been made by the development team in regards to waging Warfare. Now, merely suggesting I alter my playing style, which would be effective if the development team thoroughly considered the pros and cons of their combat units, is asking me to accept and conform to the unbalanced ways of the game. To that, I vehemently say "No." Why would any customer oriented company tell me to accept their broken product? Shouldn't said company be more concerned creating a better game using all relevant insight available to them? 

Last point I will leave you with is "the mission of field artillery is to destroy, neutralize, or suppress the enemy by cannon, rocket, and misslie fire..." Removing the the strength from units whose very purpose is to destroy enemy built up areas handcuffs commanders, which is not a good thing, mmkay. Thanks for your input. It has been taken into consideration. 

Thanks for the consideration. I have to say your statement is convincing. I myself like it anyway. Have submitted it to the developers for reference. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to be able to destroy a 100k health city in 1-1.5 hours which was pretty decent mainly because in real life that is pretty dang close. But when it takes you 24 hours to get it half health then there is an issue. Also i like the league battles/ the cup battles but i feel like there isnt enough time. I am in a league battle right now and the highest league only has 480 points and we only have 1 day left. Finally i can kind of see where you were going with the troops tree but it went to far. I would like to be able to build troops without having to spend hours on end just researching it. I think you should be able to upgrade your units but you should not have to research them. P.s. You should have a daily rewards system such as:

day 1: 50 diamonds 

day 2: 100 diamonds

day 3: 150 diamonds

day 4: 200 diamonds

day 5: 250 diamonds and one free rank up for any troop of your choice.

And it just continues from there. Thank you for a good game i can get on when bored and please take my advice into consideration.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ilickpie said:

I used to be able to destroy a 100k health city in 1-1.5 hours which was pretty decent mainly because in real life that is pretty dang close. But when it takes you 24 hours to get it half health then there is an issue. Also i like the league battles/ the cup battles but i feel like there isnt enough time. I am in a league battle right now and the highest league only has 480 points and we only have 1 day left. Finally i can kind of see where you were going with the troops tree but it went to far. I would like to be able to build troops without having to spend hours on end just researching it. I think you should be able to upgrade your units but you should not have to research them. P.s. You should have a daily rewards system such as:

day 1: 50 diamonds 

day 2: 100 diamonds

day 3: 150 diamonds

day 4: 200 diamonds

day 5: 250 diamonds and one free rank up for any troop of your choice.

And it just continues from there. Thank you for a good game i can get on when bored and please take my advice into consideration.

Hey sir, I have forwarded your idea to the developers. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...