We will be implementing new Theater of War Victory conditions. From now a faction can win the Theater of War by securing 27 territories or having two capitals in its possession. These victory conditions will be applied to both the PS3 and the Xbox 360. The new rules are effective immediately for both consoles.

Whoa: what? OR 2 capitals??

IMHO, it'd be much better to be 27 territories AND 2 Capitals. It seems to me you've gone from Extremely hard to win a World War, to very easy, all you've got to do is concentrate on 1 enemy.

It would be good if all 3 factions were equally skilled and/or numbered, but this is just gonna make the gulf between SGB and JSF having all the numbers, with EFEC being left out in the cold (PS3 players anyway) that much wider...

It's a great change IMO. Wars will still go on for a while, especially with see-sawing over choke points. But no capital fell quickly (on PS3) in war 1...although mainly due to the fact that the ToW refused to let SGB attack Paris, even though we had it mostly surrounded except for one territory...

Glad to see changes happening around here.

This was absolutely necessary!! Thanks.

now all you got to do is fix when people leave you dont get the units promoted and the cr what we won

All of this is due to community feedback. Without your posts the developers won't know what needs to be sorted.

Please make sure you give your feedback on the new ToW changes all!

quote:

Originally posted by Raide:
All of this is due to community feedback. Without your posts the developers won't know what needs to be sorted.

Please make sure you give your feedback on the new ToW changes all!

I think this is a great change to the conditions. Also I've been looking at the primary frontline further and lately it's been starting to make more and more sense. Not sure if I like it yet, but I understand it better now. The conditions = short and fun wars =D.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokerOfMull:
IMHO, it'd be much better to be 27 territories AND 2 Capitals. It seems to me you've gone from Extremely hard to win a World War, to very easy, all you've got to do is concentrate on 1 enemy.

And how do you only concentrate on 1 enemy?

IMHO, the new victory conditions are reasonable.

so I take it that once you take a enemy capitol, it's over? No having to defend DC for 10 turns in a row after capturing it? No insurgencies at all?

3 turns to not lose your capital, you lose all those with supports it's unlikely you'll win an insurgency without supports.

do u have to take all the territories of a nation before u can attack its capital?

so now they are removing another gameplay element...just like all the other things they promised but didnt deliver. great job ubi. just keep killing your game. i mean its not like itll cost you money or that itll **** off all the people who waited 2+ years for it.

I agree with the new changes. These wars go on for far too long. Especially considering with the PF rule, which needs to be take out.

Definitely a good change. Anything to speed the wars up. Rapid war, switch factions, do it all over again.

I like the change. The last war on PS3 was insane and I'm glad it's finally over, even though I think the wrong side got the win.
All in all, I think this change will be good. Speed up the ToW phases and still keep the game mechanics going. Besides, Pal is right. Insurgencies are pointless if you can't even win with the supports.

I think this is a horrible idea!

Look at the 360 War. JSF is pushing into Russia, if they win the front this turn (and it looks like they will) They will be on Moscow, and they could win the War even though it is obvious they are lossing. And what can EFEC do they will be stuck at Arribida/Oke and Reagan for the rest or the game EVERY Game! This way it seems that one of the factions can just be left out the whole war.

With 30 territories SPZ would have to break the Arribida/OKE stand off to win.

And with 3 capitals one faction wouldn't be left out.

Change it too "27 AND 2 capitals" or "30 OR 3 capitals"

Actually I think is should be all three would be a good idea. Victiory conditions could be...

1) 30 territories (your obiviously winning)
2) 3 Capitals (your obiviously winning)
3) 27 territories and 2 Capitals (Your winning but you can't quite get that last capital or last terriory)

I think this would be fair and FUN!

quote:

Originally posted by Artacool:
Look at the 360 War. JSF is pushing into Russia, if they win the front this turn (and it looks like they will) They will be on Moscow, and they could win the War even though it is obvious they are lossing.

I don't see anything wrong with that. They lucked into the right circumstance and then won the key victories they needed. (They still needed to win 3 victories at Moscow... if they can do that, I say give them the victory, and start a new war)

quote:

And what can EFEC do they will be stuck at Arribida/Oke and Reagan for the rest or the game EVERY Game! This way it seems that one of the factions can just be left out the whole war.

EFEC lucked into a bad situation. Why not start a new war and hope that the situation is better? Or do you want to keep playing Arrabida/Okefenokee until that deadlock breaks? A new war might break that deadlock, depending on the starting battles (which seems to be a little bit different each time). For example, if the ToW chooses to have Reagan attack Glen Albyn at the beginning of a war, then all you have to do is defend Glen Albyn to take Reagan... Then you get the fun of defending Reagan instead of attacking it

quote:

Originally posted by dislyxec:
depending on the starting battles (which seems to be a little bit different each time). For example, if the ToW chooses to have Reagan attack Glen Albyn at the beginning of a war, then all you have to do is defend Glen Albyn to take Reagan... Then you get the fun of defending Reagan instead of attacking it

I'm JSF...

And I don't think the War should be decided by who "lucked" into the right position.

I also suggested they change the rule about a faction getting a base across an ocean for defending a pointless territory.

PS if you or anyone else has a problem with my post please PM me instead of filling up the topic with useless bickering, when it should be filded with nothing but suggestion and/or questions for the DEVS.

quote:

Originally posted by Tolarius2007:
so now they are removing another gameplay element...just like all the other things they promised but didnt deliver. great job ubi. just keep killing your game. i mean its not like itll cost you money or that itll **** off all the people who waited 2+ years for it.

the ps3 war went on for 70 turns, and no one got the victory conditions in the end. it was a last goal wins situation. anything to speed up the wars is a good thing for the game, not a bad thing.