When is Q in Units being fixed?

Andy

Is there an ETA on this fix? If you check "Firebase Phoenix" on Fearless Blue. I just made a unit all weapons and ammo before hand where over 340Q, when i assembled the unit they dropped 50 Points ending at 290. This is starting to get hard to deal with, EXP since when C3 warring the computer can just "Poof" 400Q or higher on demand. This bug is a real pain in the butt, since in higher war levels it really increases costs and losses making C3 warring less profitable.

I have to agree with supersoldier.
I don't think its fair to build/purchase weapons/ammo ato Q350 only to have that level decrease when making units or dismantling units. Doesn't seem very fair to me.
It's just making it harder for anyone to play the war game because it's too dang expensive for most people.
Also, the Q of defense at war levels higher than 6 are pretty rediculous and way out there compared to how long it takes to upgrade units.

I simply do not understand the rationale behind the Q drop when you make a unit. I have had the same experience as my aforementioned distinguished colleagues. But what Im wondering is, is if this is intentional or is it really a bug? Either way I'm curious to find out the answer!

I second all the above Andy.

It's expensive to build HQ.
It's expensive to buy HQ.
It's expensive to upgrade HQ.
It's time consuming.
It's a pain to figure out how, when, where and why, ammo and equipment gets degraded.

Once the quality is paid for, just let it be.

Dont dismantles units return their weapons at an increased Q? I think they do. I have ints in stock from dismantled wings that are 400Q when the max you could buy or upgrade to was 350. So that would kind of make up for some of it.

And I'm sure the GM posted this answer some time back. But, whatever...I haven't gone to the high war levels, I would think they should be much harder to achieve. Some are kind of making the assumption that you should be able to fight at top WLs just for profit, I dont know if that is really the design.

It's not something the GMs intend to fix. It's deliberate on their part. Here's an excerpt from a reply to an email I sent them recently, questioning exactly that:

"There is indeed a loss of quality when weapons are moved from country stock to military units. The reason is documented in the document "Quality of Military Units and Weapons".

The documentation states that quality is divided by factor 2 but we have already reduced this to 1.3. We will futher reduce this factor in the future."

The reason given in the documentation is:

"... the quality range of weapons is far too high compared with the standard quality of 100 that is used by the war engine."

Why did they recently increase the allowed-quality from 250 to 350, if they think it's "far too high"?

I have no idea. It makes no sense to me ...

"... the quality range of weapons is far too high compared with the standard quality of 100 that is used by the war engine."

Ya 500Q weapons and ammo makes TOTAL sence in C3 wars. Lets just POOF weapons and ammo into a nation in 5sec what takes a REAL player a MINIMUM 1Month to get

(based you buy 350Q weapons)
Making the unit drops it to 290Q
500(max Q) - 290(Current Q)= 210upgrades

You can only do 1upgrade per month = 210game months
210 months / 6 months per day= 35REAL DAYS

Wheres Andy id love to hear his take on this issue, Normally hes pretty prompt to counter my aurgements

well, don't jump up and down, but i think it is a good change, and it actually adds allot of depth to the war game. if you stop and think about the effects... i mean play war with your self in your head... if you did this... and the bad guy did this... and throw in the fact that every dismantle/recreate, is costing you money... and effectiveness.

so, a prepaired offense, or defense will have a decided advantage over a fresh set up. meaning that econ, and being able to afford to be set up, will play a larger role. also, C3 warring, will take a hit, as it can take RL months to set up a countries defense... which adds a dimension that i think is cool. it more closely intertwines the realation between econ, and military. especially since the easiest way to level up, is to include defense.

although, with this forced decline in Q, C3s really should be bumped down, while keeping the cash the same. i mean, the draw to high WLs, virtua

i mean, wasn't it on the list of complaints about the war game, back in the day. that it was too easy to build up for a month-ish, and take down something some one spent years building?

now we have another layer of that. unfortunately, it still requires you to actually think about it, spend money, and do something. lol

so if you set up, say BF wings, max upgrade them, to 350, then end up in a war... the other guy, has a huge pile of ints in his inventory, max q, but when he sets them up, they are now 265 or what ever, clearly, the guy that spent time getting ready, will have an advantage. but the cost to build enough O or D to over whelm multiple enemies, or entrenched players, is staggering. so those that are better at econ, provided that they actually set up, will have a clear advantage.

which was one of the thing the majority wanted, in the big war game discussion, a couple years ago. i guess you guys got what you w

It would be OK if the max you could buy was 350Q and then you set up 350Q units. But its not OK to buy 350Q weapons and ammo and have the units end up 290Q.

To satisfy your good idea about preparedness being a benefit then allow those wings to be upgraded another 50 points beyond the maximum buying Q AFTER they are set up. Similar to the way it is on FB.

In this scenario there is no loss of Q for the simple fact of assembling a unit, therefore no waste of money. However if you are prepared and have them set up for a period of time then you are able to upgrade a few more points. The idea is a good one, just more logical implementation is whats needed.

well, the message has been popping up for years,

"All effort to train the unit will be lost!
Are you sure you want to dismantle Pinehill ?"

so thats what happens now. but i'm with with you serp. it silly to buy something that declines in value by just setting it up!! i'd prefer to see the weapons return to their original q when dismantled, and loose any upgrades, rather than the other way around. like it is now.

This needs to be fixed if i make and upgrade a unit i can understand of loss of Q but to move a tank from the factory to a unit in a base means i lose a TON of Q is dumb...

Really is this something we can expect to be fixed?

(wonders where andy is)

bump

Ryan,

I have Andrew on a shopping expedition in the States. You be patient!!!! SCOWL!! You know that Lorelei needs are top priority in Simcountry!!! (He's buying me some pink shoes!!!) :P

I guess i can understand that...


Is he done yet?

Wendyloo and I ran into him the other day in chat, Ryan. I think he will be back today or tomorrow. :P

You need to come to chat more often!!! I went and I am either getting shiny new pink shoes or pink tanks!!!

Is there any word on this? I just learned the hard way about this issue. Why the drop in quality? It makes no sense.

I made a mistake in setting up 1 of my units. I gave a unit the wrong kind of ammo. Went back, dismantled and rebuilt with proper ammo. When I dismantled quality was 240. Remade the unit and the quality had dropped too 219. Why should I suffer for a simple mistake like this?

Not only am I loosing money on the quality drop. Next time I go to use them there losses will more severe. A double hit.

Any plans on this Andy?