Long time ago I was moderating and PBEM game which involved several units, save regular infantry, and it was similar to basic concept of this game. Units that could be included in this game are (no water units :-( ) artillery, tanks and aircrafts (fighters and possibly bombers).

Artillery (supporting role unit) - for each artillery unit one infantry unit receives double offensive (if attacking) or defensive (if defending) bonus - it may be 2 hits (with luck it may be 2 hits) or extended hit (regular 0.6 offensive, gives 2x 0.6 offensive, that means defending unit is eliminated - 1.2 points hit worth). Artillery units are worth as one army (when buying), but with following limitation in combat - when infantry attacks with artillery, first all infantry units are removed as casualties, then artillery. If all infantry units die in attack and artillery units remain, on attacked site moves only artillery. Similarly, in defense, if attacked, all infantry units are removed, but if any artillery piece remain, they count as zero value, therefore it should be important to keep artillery units with enough infantry stack, or they are worthless in defense. So, for instance, you attack with 5 infantry and 5 artillery, and defense has 8 units (basic defense rate is 0.7 - I said units as there may be artillery, too) - defense will take 5 infantry units, and will be annihilated. On target space land all remaining artillery unit BUT no infatry, so if defender move one single unit there, all artillery will be gone without fight.

Tanks - act as infantry with 2 hits and as 5 infantry units - but, with the price of 5 infantry units, and only unit with base move of 2. So, other side needs 5 full hits to eliminate this unit, however, this unit is taken as casualty after infantry, but before artillery, so a stack with infantry can guarantee longer life for this unit - this unit is not overpowered but also is not underpowered. Attack with artillery (2 artillery units support one tank) can make difference as there could be no casualties in attacks - especially in multi-attacks (blitzkrieg) it can make bold trusts in enemy back. Tanks should be only taken in bonuses where there is value more than 5 and/or if basic armies per turn is more than 5. Lesser numbers should not yield tanks even if total income is more than 5. Movement of tanks means that they can move and attack, or attack first province and can be included in second attack in adjacent province (if they survive first attack), or to just move twice.

Fighters and bombers - fighters should work as reconnaissance units, thus decreasing fog level, but also as interdiction, interceptors and bomber escort - all in the same time. Fighers decreases for in adjacent provinces, support attacks as artillery do, defend air space against enemy air units (fighters are first taken) and support bombers. They are worth 2 infantry units so they can be obtained everywhere where bonus is 2 or more. Also, they support bombers from their start province. If used alone - it is interdiction strike and can take (regarding their size) all units if there is "One Army Must Stand guard" set to zero or decrease to last unit (which can be artillery, for instance).
Bombers do strikes, like interdiction strike, but more than one province away. Without fighters they are easy prey for single defending fighter, so escorting them is a must. Attacker must plot the way to target, and if in first provinces all escorting fighters are gone, bombers alone come to turkey shot in next province and are gone if there is single fighter. Bomber is worth 5 units when buying (like tank), but targets tanks first, then artillery than infantry. Each is worth one hit (therefore tank become easy take without fighters on the sky)
All air units should have the following limitation - if they move they cannot participate in combat and they move AFTER all other moves/attacks. However, their attack should conduct the way infantry do, but with aircrafts, you can do 3 attack from same province - bomber w/wo escorts, interdiction with fighters and simultaneously with infantry and/or tanks and/or artillery - no unit can be used twice. Only bombers can do deep reconnaissance (deep in enemy territory). They are used in defense the same way as artillery - once infantry and tanks are gone, they are gone, too. They can move if starting and ending provinces (regardless of distance) are hold by owner at the end of the turn (or if they are transferred to ally), but if province is taken, the movement is aborted.

All these units should only be used in advanced scenarios.

The original creator of risk made a map got some dice some figure and the game was ready. Its been changed alredy. To find the way how many chenges wont change the base idea of the game is the job of Fizzer. Finally theese are optional settings u wont need to use them.

Capital, barack, etc also could be fine for map makers and custom game creators.

In my opinion from these special soldiers could be got for crads too, for example one spy on a huge map is good for nothing. When u callected the pieces of spy unit card u can take a spy to the map.

Id like 2 kind of generals too, one of them incrase the attack kill rate, other the defense, how many % should be an option for the host.

The bomb card also should be changed, now 50%, but it would be better if the host could decide how many percent will kill. The strength of the special units should be optional.

NUKE CARD

Actually a distinction between land units and waterborne units (ships) would be very interesting, and perhaps not too complex. It would allow for some types of maps and some very interesting emergent strategy.

For instance, you could have a special unit called a Transport Ship. It counts as 0-1 units by itself, but it can travel in territories designated as "water". It can "carry" (be combined with, travel with) any number of regular armies, and transport them across a sea to another area of the map.

This appeals to me, because of the depth of strategy* and the possible developments in map design.


*: If you've ever played the boardgame Diplomacy, you will understand. Despite its simplistic rules (in many ways much more basic than Warlight), strategic elements like a balance of fleets to armies can be important determiners in winning or losing. I've seen many a player lose a good game simply because they didn't build enough fleets, or too many.

This transport ship is too much, and waterborne creatures too, there are ships on the maps

My original idea was simply for two "types" of units - land and sea, as in Diplomacy - but I couldn't think of an easy way of making that work in Warlight.

I agree that my "ship" idea is a little removed from the spirit of Warlight. Still, some kind of definition - parts of the map which function differently - could be an interesting addition to the game.

ib think fleets are cool so what needs to be made Motars,ships,My card idea spend card pieces the way you want to, and one thing I havint seen is how those will be made I imagine sialer to cards?

if so I think what I said about cards should apply here

I enjoy many of these Card Ideas and Unit Ideas but lets be practical about this.
The Commander is a neat special unit it adds a certain aestetic to the game not seem before on warlight in any way shape or form, but its esential useless in combat and adds a sense of vulnerablitiy to the game if he dies you die, and as a Diplo player this is interesting. The commander adds no battle field advantage or income advantage, it only gives aestetic value and vulnerbility. What i would suggest be done with the commander is give a 10-30% attack and defence bonus as like "inspiring the troops" so you have an incentive to use him.

As for other Units and cards I think that the Artilery, Insurgent, and Tanks/Calvery are the most useful and easy to apply to the game, as well as being to most practical in a Diplo and FFA situation.
Artilery- lets you damage units 2-3 territories away but cannot take a territory without other armies.
Insurgent-lets you hide armies in one any territroy you own and is invisible to enemies once they take it and can be ordered to attack at any time(however this would be best in card form and not unit form)
Tanks/Calvery- can move/transfer 2-4 territories at a time(this is useful for blitzkreig attacks and exploiting a breakthrough hence the supreme tactical advantage)

Im ok with the Nuke card idea but it seems alot like the bomb card and i think it would just be easier to modify the Bomb card. But another idea i like is that you can spend card fragments which would make it more strategic on which cards you choose to spend Fragments on.
Also Sea units are NOT going to happen no matter how cool it would be because it would need to restructure all 700+ warlight maps and require map creators to add soo many extra special territories.

also i read Genghis's thread was cool and too many people were unnecessarily bashing him for voicing his opinion which if you dont like just ignore it there is no reason to bash him for it.

The Commander is a neat special unit it adds a certain aestetic to the game not seem before on warlight in any way shape or form, but its esential useless in combat and adds a sense of vulnerablitiy to the game if he dies you die, and as a Diplo player this is interesting. The commander adds no battle field advantage or income advantage, it only gives aestetic value and vulnerbility. What i would suggest be done with the commander is give a 10-30% attack and defence bonus as like "inspiring the troops" so you have an incentive to use him.

False. Commander drastically changes how games are played. While a commander against a commander is a tie by itself, commander is VERY helpful in combat.

This games demonstrates his power (read: someone is using his commander wrong.)
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=10255523

My point is: Despite his vulnerability, he is so powerful that he must be used in combat. Hiding him is a poor choice.

In the settings i doesn't give to commander any special attack advantages the reason that the purple won is because he went directly on the attack and funneled all his units on the attack where the other guy consolidated his bonus to try and agin an income advantage the commander only hastened his demise when he used it alone to attack the other guys commander.

Edited 1/10/2016 06:17:54

It's funny how some people only like things once they become mainstream or official. Jesus Christ

i honestly had thought about this for a while but i dont interact much in forums so i never said anything about it

i think make a base or something that give a territory some bonus income, for example i make a game where for example, Argentina take falklands and have for example 5 income or idk (the territory for the war is falklands and have bonus because of the base)

or you can use it on strategic points

or a colonial game, what's the point of have a colony where the players is your colony and you only have like 5 territories and you get 0 income for have it, you're just cutting your colony's income and well, you can just leave the colony because you aren't getting something for it.
so with the base in those 5 territories you have there you get 15 or 20 or 25 idk income for have your colony

it would be good if you can change the base's income.

that way have territories in a colony can be a good reason to keep it


and i think change the comander's power would be good (is 7 if i'm right in games with big income that's useless)

Someone mentioned uservoice earlier.

FIZZER DOES NOT CARE ABOUT WHAT WE THINK!!!

Nothing is ever on 'the roadmap', hence we always get poxy updates like this.

#HateOnFizzer

Okay, the update is alright, but is it not about time Fizzer started listening?

Edited 1/10/2016 10:43:15

Commander is usefull on small mapds, but on a big just risk, u must hide

FIZZER DOES NOT CARE ABOUT WHAT WE THINK!!!

I have an idea; he could unlock diplomacy options and/or let people unlock settings after they reached a specific milestone inside a game

I can't believe nobody thought of nukes. Costs X production, destroys Y armies on target area. X, Y and range to be discussed.

I belive the Fizzer does care to some extent on what the community thinks but alot of the things that are asked for are Difficult and time consuming to add to the game and might not be wildly popular among the community. However in my opinion the commander is useless as a numeral especialy in games with upgraded bonuses especial world Diplos where oftern the smallest bonuses are worth 10 so i go back to my original suggestion that the Commander give combat bonuses to the stack he is on or at least make it so hosts can change hom much he is worth.

But I think insurgents would be a cool card to use that way you could emply more strategy to the game. And the Artiliry Unit would be practical so you can commit to ranged attacks, and soften up stacks without losing a lot of your troops. the Tank/Calvery should be called Mobile units and as i expressed earlier it would be crucial to a blitzkreig strategy and would take away some of the advantages of income. An example of this is if you are playing a diplo game and you can utilize a breakthrough before your opponent could deploy tons of troops to stop you as well as be an alternative to Multi attack which can cause issues in Diplos in particular.

Another Card i would suggest is a morale card which could boost the "morale"of a stack of troops giving them increased combat effectiveness by 20 to 40%.