Rejoice, people - unit production automation is finally here!
You can set a unit to auto-produce in city menu or country menu. Whenever you have available units, this unit will be built (provided you have enough money). City lists in the country menu and cities menu ('star' in the top toolbar) now show available units or auto-produced unit. Clicking on the unit icon will cancel the auto-production.
In other news, Marines now have the default att: 6 / def: 4. Master Of Stealth increases attack to 7. This makes Marines better in attack, but almost useless in defence - so use them carefully.
Also, numbers have been fixed for USA cities, taking into account metropolitan population. 5 new cities have been added, plus one in Brazil.
Version 0.962 (automation)
Comments
Comments: 50
Visited by: 198 users
|
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
I'm sorry guys but I really think you dropped the ball with marines. They are now completely useless without Master of stealth and with them it's not much better. It used to be one of my favorite strategies for the dynamic it added to the game but they're essentially useless now. Sure it can be argued that they slip in and capture countries but without any capability to defend it isn't a viable strategy. Also if this was based on the vote on the feedback forum I think it's a bit ridiculous because the poll was heavily biased towards further reducing marines without providing all the possible options.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Gigglin, it's called adaptation. You're using marines incorrectly if they don't work, you're using them like tanks. They aren't suppose to capture enemy territory, they're suppose to DISRUPT enemy territory. If you go in and capture their cities and immediately move on to the next, they're forced to pull back forces to recapture said cities and kill your marines. If you want a straight up fighting unit build tanks and infantry. Edit: Just a note for those who care, as a blitzkrieg user my tanks have the EXACT stats as MoS marines, 7/3. Yet I never lose against other players, sure I'll lose some battles, but I ultimately win the war. So please stop QQing about the stats as if it makes marines worthless, because there are those who use units with those same stats and do just fine. Also my tanks, while having the same stats, aren't invisible. Just remember that.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
I'm not saying they don't work I'm saying that it isn't a viable long term strategy. By the time you are deep in enemy territory capturing cities a player will usually have established a decent empire to build troops from. If I can't have my very large stack of marines defend itself from 7 tanks my troops will not survive, if I have a group of clearly visible infantry behind them it will both alert the other player to where I am going as well probably get attacked before it can reinforce my captured cities. I have played this game more than I probably should have and I have seen the way games progress and the usefulness of units. Honestly every strategy was viable if played intelligently before anything decided to get nerfed but now that simply isn't the case.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Gigglin maybe if there is a huge drop in marine useage which does not recover they will reconsider the change... Personaly I'm a bit worried about this change and confused. I guess people have totally different ideas how marines should work, it's a hard call to balance. Auto-produce should be a life saver.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
As I put in my edit, as a Blitzkrieg user my tanks have 7/3 yet I can take and hold cities just fine, this is without the added advantage of my units being invisible. Also as I pointed out your goal shouldn't be to take cities with marines, your goal should be to get your opponent off balance. Disrupt their economy and production capabilities by hitting his cities and force him to pull troops from other areas to retake those cities and chase down your marines. While he's busy doing this you move in with your tanks and infantry like every other player. Marines are a SUPPLEMENT to your army, they shouldn't BE your army.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
Dude, there is no "should" and "shouldn't" about how units should be played. The way the stats WERE, Marines were played excellently by players like Gigglin. Altering the stats changes the game (again) and we all have to decide how to play this new game. But by your 'logic', using Marines 'only to disrupt the enemy', this makes Master of Stealth useless; as how else are we supposed to take enemy cities? With Tanks and Battleships? Oh wait....no, they're nerfed in MOS. And Stealths and Submarines are priced such that they are at most an auxilliary unit, and not one with which to get the full frontal assualt. This nerfed M.O.S., though there still may be use for marines in Guerilla warfare. The point is, that some people didn't like the way people were winning with marines, and so decided we needed a game-changer, and to turn marines from a central unit into a diversion, well, mission accomplished!:thumbup:
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
That's just what I'm thinking. Theres so many players who don't use MoS and don't know how to play against it. I'll see how this nerf goes and then decide if I switch to another unit/strat, even though it's much fun to play the stealthy way.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Son, I am dissapoint how marines got a buff to their defense, oh well. Also Cluebie, there most certainly are "should's" and "shouldn'ts" that's the whole point of each unit serving a specific role. Infantry shouldn't be used for offense, and tanks shouldn't be used for defense. You can still use them that way, but you shouldn't since they wont be as effective. Marines shouldn't be stealth-tanks, you can use them that way if you so desire but they should be inferior to actual tanks if you do. Also as I have said oh so many times, I manage to win game after game with tanks that have 7/3 stats, if I can do that with normal tanks, you guys sure as fuck can do it with INVISIBLE units.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
I wonder what valve we should put on the ability of stealth, maybe that would help balance. At the moment it's a bit of a nonentity.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
It doesn't make any sense at all that you are calling what marines are "stealth tanks" when this upadte makes them almost exactly that. Tanks have a high attack and low defense which is exactly what marines are now, except they have a lower defense and the other units that would normally back it up are nerfed as well.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Yes it's important to look at the whole strategy not just marines. Maybe we need a new expensive unit that is even better at defence than inf, like mechanized infantry?
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
This update makes them less like stealth tanks, sure it gives them the same damage as a tank but 2 less armor. Tanks are primarily offense yet can still defend if necessary, this update originally had marines as being a purely offensive, Guerilla style unit that can hit hard and fast at exposed targets. I don't know specifics about MoS but I can't imagine the nerfs to infantry or tanks are THAT severe, prolly only like -1 in the stats, which isn't that huge. A unit with -1 can still do it's job. In the end aslong as marines can be good at both offense and defense, they wont be a unique unit. They'll simply replace infantry and tanks, and if you think that's a good thing then you clearly don't understand the game. Learn to use marines accordingly and you wouldn't be bitching. As I've said so many goddamned times, my tanks have 7/3 stats but that doesn't stop me from capturing and holding cities, the fact that your unit would be invisible means you should have even more success.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
So wait. Have you been launching all of this conjecture without ever actually playing the strategy? This is exactly the problem. People take issue with something they know nothing about and complain about it until it gets changed. It's absolutely ridiculous that you've resorted to cursing at other players about something you know nothing about.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
I don't know the details about the other units, but I do know the details about the marines, and that is what this is about. It's not about whether or not the stats on the other units are just, it's about whether or not the stats on the marines are. So don't try to pull a high and mighty card by saying I don't know what I'm talking about. I for one don't use infantry or marines, I use soley tanks. I don't defend my cities, I retake them. Again this is all with tanks that have 7/3 for stats. So I know from experience that it's more then possible to play and win using only a single unit with such stats. The fact that marines are fucking invisible? How you people can honestly be bitching about this is beyond me. I mean am I really just that awesome of a player? Because in all the games I play I never have any problems with other players despite my tank's stats. Is this really such a MASSIVE issue for everyone else? Am I some prodigy at this game? I honestly don't get how I can use a unit that's clearly visible, with those stats and win every game with relative ease. Yet everyone else seems to find it impossible despite their unit being fucking invisible. I mean either I'm a god at this game or you're all woefully incompetent. Or the third option, it's not THAT big of a deal and if you actually played with those stats you're quickly realize you're not at that big of a disadvantage. I think option number 3 is the most likely, but you all just immediately cry your eyes out because your precious stealth-tanks can't do everything anymore. P.S. And for the record I do take offense to the arrogance of the marine users. There are those who use units way weaker then your marines yet still come out on top, yet you guys DEMAND that your invisible unit be better then both infantry and tanks. If I can win my games with visible tanks that have 7/3 stats, then you marine users sure as all fuck can do the same with a unit that nobody can bloody see. P.S.S. Eh, I'm done arguing. I was pushing for this because I wanted the marines to be a unique unit, not a tank that's invisible. But ultimately it's not a big deal for me. Unlike others I have no problem beating marine users and infact always stomp the shit out of them. So if you guys wanna deprive yourselves of dynamic gameplay by spamming the same unit as a tank general, only with yours being invisible, go for it. I'll still kick your ass with my 7/3 tanks. Makes my victories all the sweeter anyways.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Hah. Just because YOU don't see a particular way a unit can be used to destroy you, doesn't mean that that's how you should use it.... You're like a chess pendant who's complaining when I mated him in 14 with my queen because "you should only attack with your bishops and knights in the opening" and queens shouldn't be used that way. If someone comes up with something that works....use it. If you can't come up with a counter-strategy, then check to make sure that NOBODY else can, before complaining about it
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
Alright let's keep this less personal.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
I apologize for letting my emotional response get the better of me. BTW- Automation is AWESOME. Shame you have to reissue the orders when the server goes down and you must reconnect though
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
The difference between your analogy and here is that you aren't using them in unique and interesting ways, and simply being a good strategist. You're abusing a broken game mechanic. If the marines were actually a unique unit with 7/3, and yet you still used them as a front-line unit and won, I wouldn't care. Because then they'd have the stats of a proper saboteur unit, you're simply badass enough to use them differently. But again that isn't the case, you're just abusing the fact that their stats make them an invisible tank instead of a proper stealth unit, that's not a unique strategy, that's not you just being a clever player, that's you abusing broken game mechanics, and using an overpowered unit to your advantage.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
I use my marines as defense when I have enough money to split between offensive troops and defensive marines. Having someone rush my capital with 20 tanks because he sees 5 infantry sitting there and not checking out the 100 marines stationed their for defence, I smile a little. In my opinion that is a unique strategy of the marines. Visible tanks are pointless in MoS, so MoS had slightly worse invisible tanks (marines) and invisible infantry (marines), to even worse hidden defense. Thankfully they dont have a defensive line that is useless for tanks anyways. On the other side of the update, I love the automation aspect and the increased cities. Ill adapt my playing style with the marines since people outvoted MoS users. I use to play perfect defence before MoS, so it is a big difference now.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Today I was trying MoS I think for a 1st time on a map, that I play 2nd time, still was able to win, of coase I was in right ally and fella we were fighting with was, I think, not on PD, but he was mainly with infantry. So Marines, as Attacking unit, is still very good, people, who want a decent def. use another tactics or change your game style. I mean what's wrong with you ppl, there is 1 fella here, who actually thinks, that having a unit with almost same def, as infantry, but with decent attack, not to mention stealth is hard enough, and this makes this unit "unique"
---- Very vicious moderator
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Well I just saw a player sneak in a stack of marines to take the capital of a united USA from Europe, no other battles than that at all just that one tatic, and the USA player had at least 10-15 sentry planes. Seems to me we have the same problem as we had before coming back... This type of game is just no fun, it cuts out all the fun plans, battles and points. But I do not see what other strategy marines can be used for other than this with a high attack. At least its easier now to retake cities after they do this.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
Who are you (or I, or anyone else for that matter) to imperiously state that the Game Mechanics are "broken" The game is what the game is. There are exploits to every game there is--add a three point line to basketball and you'll develop players who focus on learning how to shoot EXACTLY from that distance away from the basket--it's not a BETTER game, it wasn't BROKEN in the first place: you are just CHANGING IT. Frankly, my concern isn't about the marines much at all, it's about how a few people can 'decide' that they don't like how other people are beating them and claim that the game is 'broken'. Unless submarines are ending up in the Sahara desert or air transports have been reduced to 0 troop capacity, the game and its mechanics are not broken. You just don't LIKE them. Your opinion is valid; even if I disagree with it, but you can't claim that any one solution is the "correct" one and the rest are "wrong" That's just arrogance, "son"
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Well, for one - we are still in Beta, so changes can be very big, it's not "release" after all. Second is common sence, in this case people was not complaining they don't like marines. For almost all of those people there was a discussion, after this discussion majority "decides" for the best option. It's not bunch of "I can't do nothing with marines" people, in this case it easier to become a marine user, not to change it. It's balance issue. There should be not any units, that can be as good as best unit in other attacking strategy + 1 best unit in other defence strategy.... wonder unit all in one + awesome stealthness - BUY NOW!
---- Very vicious moderator
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Meh, again I'm done arguing with you. You're just another marine user QQing cuz his marines were made unique, instead of the "tanks that are invisible" they use to be. With or without this update I'd still win against marine users, so it really doesn't matter to me. I just wanted a unique unit out of the marines, which clearly the marine users don't. Also, I can imperiously state it's broken when it goes against one of the tenants laid forth by the game makers. It's been very clearly said that every unit must be unique, a "tank but stronger" isn't a valid unit. Well if a "tank but stronger" isn't valid because it's not unique enough, why the fuck is a "tank but invisible" acceptable? Going off those guidelines the marines aren't unique enough, and as such are broken. Unless you wanna try to tell me that having a tank that's invisible is unique enough, at which point I'd like to see duplicate units with better stats, since clearly such minor changes make a unit unique now days. Edit: Was too slow, that was for cluebie.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
You forgot to mention that he instantly took his capital back and that this attack had no consequences.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
I would agree with you 100% if this was the case, but it wasn't. Master of Stealth was still one of the least played strategies, because when you look at it from the outside it seems simple but it isn't. They may have had the same defense as infantry but they didn't get the same bonuses defending cities or against tanks. If marines were truly overpowered it would have been clear by the number of people playing with them but it was still about 1/8 of the people playing tank general. Then the people that vote in the poll and complain on the message boards have never played with marines and don't actually know what it is like, they only know that they lose to marines and think they're overpowered.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Did... did you SERIOUSLY just say that MoS was one of the least played strategies? Tank General 874 Perfect Defense 483 Naval Commander 197 Master Of Stealth 126 Imperialist 113 Guerrilla Warfare 70 Sky Menace 52 Blitzkrieg 7 Lucky Bastard 1 MoS is the fourth highest strategy, and note that all strategies above it are the free ones that come standard. So out of all the extra strategies MoS is the most used one. Why is that? Why is MoS the most used one? Cuz marines have been broken, and still some-what are (I still think 7/3 would be best) to a much lesser extent. So seriously dude, stop trying to play it out like MoS is some underpowered strategy nobody uses, because that is NOT the case.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
You forgot to mention that he took it back after 2 turns, I think. He then quit the game and you had another 100 marines ready in EU. In a average hold for 2 turns game you would have won and if you used those spare marines you certainly would have won. It's just to easy to do this and no fun to play against.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Heres a solution, make them more expensive, they want to be as strong as tank? Make them as expensive as tanks. Or give tank users a way to upgrade their tanks, but then again that would make stealth users cry wolf. I suggest making tank upgrades very expensive, so they can only be bought at a high cost.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Y'know, I'd like to point out that I think this new update BUFFED marines. Now they have the exact same damage as tanks and only one less defense. This is why I am just so sad that the 7/3 was buffed to 7/4, atleast with 7/3 the difference in defense was quite noticeable, but only one less defense isn't that noticeable in the long run. Also, I second tank upgrades, every other unit gets upgrades. And sure it's cuz they're weaker at the start, but once they get some upgrades it balances out more. Marines and infantry both have the same upgrades, so why don't tanks get them too? Tanks get the movement upgrade, the lucky upgrade, the lower-cost upgrade. I'd love that so much, and it'd actually give me something to spend my SP on. Since now that I got blitz, there's just no upgrades to get since I primarily use tanks.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
And it still was without consequences. He had all of North America, so why shouldn't he be able to deal with 100 marines? Why don't you just turn auto production to infantry in your capital? That's what I do in EVERY game. Just to be sure. At the end of a game I often have 200+ infantry in my cap and some marines, to counter attack, around it. That "rush the capital" strategy just doesn't work if you play carefull. And that's why I myself don't use it.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
So the other player has to make what 50? 100? 150? inf to be safe and set up defence lines, sentry planes and keep an army close by just incase you get past. While you have to do what, move from A to B and attack? You see no problem with this?
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Whenever I play, since I'm a 100% offense player (Blitz and all, shitty defense on every unit), I just make a dedicated stack of tanks near my capital and that's it. If my capital is ever taken the very next turn there's a giant doomstack of tanks taking it back. The whole marine-rushing-the-capital thing only really works on bad players, good players can easily counter. This wouldn't change whether the marines had 3 defense or 6, marines can't really hold cities anyways, atleast not against good players.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Automation is good, but can we make it either less automated or add an option to save X resources? I found that I automated too much and did not have money on reinforcement turns (oops). My proposal would be one button to execute all automation orders - that way I have a chance to build transports and other units I need before my horde of units are created automatically. Alternatively, if you can add a way to always save some resources so that automation will never use all your money.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
No I don't. That's what I'm doing every game, setting up huge defenses while expanding into my enemies. Sounds like a good game to me.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
His point was that the ammount of defenses required vastly outweighs the offensive capabilities needed. You can just pump out say, 50 marines while they have to get tons of infantry, tanks, put up defense lines and all of that. So while you can sit there and just make a bunch of marines and order them to attack his capital, he has buy tons of defense and offense (to retake the city should you manage to break his defenses), not mention all the money and reinforcements he spent on those defenses don't actually contribute unless he gets attacked, so for the entire game they just sit there when they could be put to use expanding or attacking.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
Thank you for providing feedback on the actual main subject of this update, instead of bitching about the stupid Marines  Creating a button that executes auto-produce orders sounds like a good idea, we will probably do that.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Considering all the bitching about the marines, on all sides, I'd say they're the main subject of this update. Even if not intended to be. <.<
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Automation is great!!!! I think the adjustment to marines will benefit game balance and USA should be more interesting to play. Thanks guys!
---- ~
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
The same thing happened to me, and so it canceled my automation orders. Fast forward to a few turns later I had several thousand again, and I noticed that it wasn't automating anymore even though I had the funds. I don't know whether it is supposed to permanently cancel automation orders (or if this is a bug), because just suspending them until you have cash again seems like less hassle for the player. I had to go re issue all the orders since they were canceled outright.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
Yes. all cancelling is permanent. Looks like we need a 'hold auto-produce' button or something.
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Did marines lose movement range? seems like I can't move between the same city pairs that I could before?
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
I too ran out of money due to automated building--but since I noticed it on the turn they were built I was able to visit each city and 'sell back' the troops i could do without and buy where I needed them. Btw if people don't like marines capping games simply switch to take entire countries or if you have the time for it total anhilation....
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Personally i think the only strategy auto is good for is defencive strategeis aka imperialist mabey pd
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
Auto is also good for the Balkans when you have a whole bunch of small countries producing 1 or 2 troops, that it'd be too long to visit each of the cities individually to produce the troops you want....
Loading...
Loading...
|
|
|
Loading...
Loading...
|
Hits total: 63109 | This month: 233
