What should be the next thing we work on?

"Clans" will be permanent player alliances, with own forums, chat channels and stats. Also, clan vs clan games.

Population casualties will affect unit production, income and SP.

Stealth detection will make it possible to detect invisible units.

We have enough upgrades at the moment, they are already so expensive that buying them will take us a looong time.

Stealth detection would just make stealth units even weaker.(Of course... I'm used to low starting fund games, so managing money is a big deal) They are expensive and not the strongest attackers. Exposing stealth units just needs a wall of units.

I'm not entirely sure how population casualties would effect gameplay, but I feel like it would just make high population cities even more important since they could keep on trucking after multiple attacks whereas smaller pop cities just die out and become useless.

An interesting change would be decreasing realism a bit to increase balance. Currently, the only places in the world that matter are Europe, Korea/China/Japan & the USA. Without securing at least one of those areas, you don't stand a chance.(And for small starting fund games, Europe is the only viable option since the neutral units there are so weak compared to China/Japan/USA.

Is it possible that stats of countries can change depending on the map you choose? For instance, playing Europe might be similar to right now, but Europe could be different when playing with the whole world.

We started with the intention to make the game very realistic number-wise, but quickly realized that realistic numbers don't make for a very good balance... So we've already tweaked quite a lot to make smaller countries more useful, and will continue to tweak. Though I still believe that having such an uneven landscape is one of the things that makes the game interesting.

I agree with Ivan, and it means you can actually find somewhere to start out in very low fund games. I'm quite happy with the current balance in this respect.

I'm yet to vote, as I'm not sure what Saving/Loading would be. Could you clarify please?

Popultaion casualites could be fun, but only if they rise while not in combat. That way certain cities which are frankly worthless will become, well, of worth.

I think Clans would be good with more people, but since there arn't that many regular players (especially those who arn't American) I think it wouldn't do much good at this time.

That's my opinion, atleast.

Stealth detection is legit - sure they are less powerful but a cadre of marines can still take a city and its pretty annoying.

Im not a big fan of save/load - its too difficult to get all the same people around at the same time to continue the game, and its sucks/unfair to continue without everyone

...Why do people want more upgrades when most players haven't even SEEN all the ones we currently have.

-_-

Or what would be the benefit of saving/loading a game at this moment? You'd have to start one with people you can make apointments with, pause it, agree on a time to continue, and all be there or be square when it continues.

Population casualties still isn't really clear to me.

Stealth detection can certainly be nice, but would have to be expensive (in builing and/or maintainance).

Clans add a social and a coöperative play component to the game, which is are the main attraction points in games (next to upgrading your character/army, being superior in PvP, and some others). It'll surely make the game more interesting to a broader public (increasing the amount of players).

Kirjutas Blah64, 28.11.2010 at 14:07

...Why do people want more upgrades when most players haven't even SEEN all the ones we currently have.

-_-

Lol... - maybe they are thinking it means new units and stuff, which, I agree would be neat.

I think the focus should be more on the refining of things in play right now. There is still a balance issue when it comes to selecting countries. Massive expansion is easy with several countries (we all know which ones they are).
What I would like to see is more defined realism in terms of naval warfare. It doesn't matter how many troops & transports you have, they should be easily defeated by a sub or battle cruiser.
Also, there should be some sort of penalty in terms of logistics as you gather more countries and the sizes they are. Maybe a penalty on total number of recruits you can have per turn, or some sort of revolt counter which inhibits your abilities to expand to far too fast.

Realism is a very gray line. As time advances, people will figure out the best methods for attack and defense. There will be guides. A more understood stance will be developed over time. This is a beta. Which means to me, Stability, Stability, Balance. Extras come later when they have been given the chance to be thought out.
-end

With the saving and loading feature would probaby only work for people who know each other. personaly if i didnt know everyone was most likely to rejoin i wouldnt vote to save but instead keep playing and let those who didnt want to drop

I say some sort of stealth detection. Perhaps some sort of bomb that reveals all hidden units inside the radius of the explosion for 1-3 turns. Then again you need some sort of restriction in order to keep people from abusing it. Like being very expensive (500+) and maybe only have three at the same time. This way people can't spam them in the middle of a war without a huge loss in their economy. Instead people would use the bombs if they already know the location of the marines or the stealth planes and want to take them out. Maybe make them stationary to cities as well.

Clans sounds like something really nice but I think you still should have the option to battle each other, perhaps I missunderstood what is meant with "permanent player alliances". But besides that I am certainly for the idea. As already stated in this thread it adds a lot to the community which is sole most important thing to games. At least it is to me.

I Thinkk upgrades as tweeking the game, Here is a suggestion add Oil,Metal and food to the game. so those weeker countrys are needed.

Ummmmm a plea to the admins: pleassse don't make the game more complicated than how it is now... Also, with the clan thing: why aren't coalitions like how you want clans to be like?

Kirjutas Psychostick, 12.03.2011 at 16:35

Ummmmm a plea to the admins: pleassse don't make the game more complicated than how it is now... Also, with the clan thing: why aren't coalitions like how you want clans to be like?

We're not planning to overcomplicate things, don't worry. Not sure what you mean about coalitions... Btw, this is a very old poll, made way before coalitions/clans were implemented.

...i dunno, but when I started Wargaming back when a company called GDW was out and had hex-grid maps with literally 1ks worth of pieces...yeah really oldskool...lol...but games were based on "TheatreOfOperations"...like 2ndFleet/6thFleet..GulfWar...so maybe you could put up an option for specific regions of war..like Europe&NorthAmerica or maybe just PacificOceanRegions or NATO regions or SE Asia...options for regional conflicts/war..or recreate old conflicts/warzones: Vietnam/WWII/Iran-Iraq....with the option of "additional cities" to hold&conquer for x # of turns[or whatever]...the sky's the limit with THIS game...WORD.

Another thing to think about maybe would be say there are 4 people in a game, 3 are allied with each other and that 1 is all alone =( there should be an option saying "do you wish to end alliances and keep playing the game" or natural thing which is the game ends and evryone who is allianced wins

Kirjutas ShadovvFlame, 14.04.2011 at 12:20

Another thing to think about maybe would be say there are 4 people in a game, 3 are allied with each other and that 1 is all alone =( there should be an option saying "do you wish to end alliances and keep playing the game" or natural thing which is the game ends and evryone who is allianced wins

I'm not sure I follow you.

So if one player controls all of asia, europe, and the americas, and africa, and three players together control the entire country of australia, those three can ally together and win?

Why are we still commenting in this thread? let it die already.

Well...hmmm ive voting Passwords Protection cause you dont know when he (hacker) can break to your account.

Also i have a crazy idea about "Upgrades"...lets say u can build different bases like Barracks and increase your Infantry much higher (at number) but not quicker about (ex. 1 turn quicker).
Same thing about Tanks, Naval and Air.
But those stuffs need to cost right ?
To be more fair the game.

Kirjutas Julian_e93, 03.12.2011 at 14:23

Well...hmmm ive voting Passwords Protection cause you dont know when he (hacker) can break to your account.

Err, mate... he was talking about private games where you need to put in a password to join. This is an ancient news update, obviously private games have already been implemented! Premium only.

Kirjutas Julian_e93, 03.12.2011 at 14:23

Also i have a crazy idea about "Upgrades"...lets say u can build different bases like Barracks and increase your Infantry much higher (at number) but not quicker about (ex. 1 turn quicker).
Same thing about Tanks, Naval and Air.
But those stuffs need to cost right ?
To be more fair the game.

You are not the first one! Click here.

My vote is for population casualties, add some more realism to the game.

Kirjutas Wildchild92, 23.06.2012 at 00:18

My vote is for population casualties, add some more realism to the game.

Thats a good idea but it'd be annoying as fuck when you can barely get any reinforcements when your being gangbanged.

Yeah i think pop casualties should be allowed to be ticked off, because i would never play it, i tend to fight world games against 3+ people allied against me while i'm alone, so yeah, losing troops isn't something i really want. also, it will just end up creating a neutral barrier between certain countries, making it easier for faster strats like sm to get the advantage, i mean they can just pop casualty your front line, take the cities ad then if you take them back you won't have enough time before his next wave.