In my group we generally skip the tech development. To my opinion too it is unbalancing the game for one player. It feels more like a fair fight to play without the tech development.
Heavy Tanks - a new technology
-
Well Kaladesh, heavy tanks cost some 30 IPCs on average and another 50 IPCs to buy 10 tanks thats some 80 IPCs! Germany starts with some, Iknow that! However it is expensive, if US develop heavy bombers they would force Germany to develop Jets! And Us also may provide russia with some lend lease fighters or develop heavy tanks in Ásia some where in China, that would be a nasty bitch to fight for Japan! Those US heavy tanks could also be used to reinforce Russia (no lend lease)! My suggestion is that you try this variant and tell me what you think. I do belive in that you will find this tech balanced! :wink:
-
Um…whoever said that a Tiger could stop an entire armored division…I hope they aren’t serious…Because that’s a rather ludicrous thing to assert.
-
Um…whoever said that a Tiger could stop an entire armored division…I hope they aren’t serious…Because that’s a rather ludicrous thing to assert.
I have no time these days to explain in detail, but I try to give you something to think of!
If a Royal Tiger defends in a position were only a frontal attack would be able No Sherman would knock it out, not even in a close range! And if a Royal Tiger get the first tanks in a “convoy” o(armored division) on a road it would most certainly stop the convoy for a while until airsupport arrive!!! There are historical examples of this, but due to lack of time I need to come back for details on this later on.
-
i will try it … promised ;-)
to erwin rommel:
tank against tank tigers where superior to most other tanks, if positioned right, they where able to destroy nearly every tank at a range, before they might be able to destroy the tiger, sometimes even at a range at which some tanks won’t even reach the tiger.
The king tiger (not royal tiger ;-) ) was even more powerful and as mr. andersson stated, there was no tank that was able to destroy it from the front (at any range) and there was no tank that may come close enough to make a hurting shot from the side (that was weakest) or the back.
On the other hand those tigers weren’t to speedy and airforce was devastating to all tanks.
more than that the allied were affraid of the tigers, sometimes even that much, that a tiger might engage a battle against an overwhelming superior force (in numbers) without even being shot at, since the allied feared it that much, that they didn’t want to engage.
the allied had the rumour that it would need 5 shermans to destroy one tiger, and that from those 5 shermans only 1 would return. (notice … tiger not king tiger)for some time the allied where afraid that much, that they saw a tiger even in a lot of panzer IV (which on range looked a bit alike) so a lot more tigers were reported, than there actually were. there was even a command, that prohibited to report the sighting of a tiger so not to frighten the oqn troops.
-
Maybe that’s partly true, but how fast is a King Tiger? Not fast. And it depends on the Crew and how experienced they are. A T-34 with a Veteran crew would beat a King Tiger with an Experienced or Green crew any day.
-
Maybe that’s partly true, but how fast is a King Tiger? Not fast. And it depends on the Crew and how experienced they are. A T-34 with a Veteran crew would beat a King Tiger with an Experienced or Green crew any day.
Hey Rommel, do you feel well? :-?
-
HERE ARE SOME IDEAS!! :D
Mechanized Inf: at the begginning of movement pair up 1 inf with each tank(if you choose) the paired up inf now has a move of 2 as long as it travels the same route as the tank.
also you seemed to be having troble on a rule that make heavy tanks reasonable yet worth it, how about this;
tanks attack value is reduced to 2 but each tank rolls 2dice 8)any replies……comments…please…
-
HERE ARE SOME IDEAS!! :D
Mechanized Inf: at the begginning of movement pair up 1 inf with each tank(if you choose) the paired up inf now has a move of 2 as long as it travels the same route as the tank.
also you seemed to be having troble on a rule that make heavy tanks reasonable yet worth it, how about this;
tanks attack value is reduced to 2 but each tank rolls 2dice 8)any replies……comments…please…
Well Commissar_Adam, you should take a look at my threads! Panzergrenadiers is exactly the same as your Mech. Inf.!!!
Your heavy tank variant is interesting, but too weak! A heavy tank tech should also make a bigger punch in defense as well as ofense! Even if the use of 2 dice instead of one is interesting, it is not better than the opening fire (maybe first round only)! My thoughts! Have no time to take it further.
-
Hello,
tanks were for offence in the “old” game (3 on attack, 2 on defence) and, of course, mobility. In Revised they made it 3/3. That was a great idea and changed a lot towards buying more tanks and less infantry. So the “logical” improvment would be a 4/3 Heavy-Tank, i.e. 4 on offfence (and not on defence)! The proposals of “every second or third” are too complicated imho and making a unit more expensive if you just have spend lots of money for the tech is not “logical” either imho! Nor should you pay more for new tanks (with tech) than for the old ones (without tech)!
But it like the general idea to replace “combined bombardment” with heavy tanks. Actually I proposed that earlier in the AH forum, but Larry Harries didn`t want to take over this idea when changing the LHTR into version 2!
-
Well Kaladesh, have you tried the opening fire variant yet? :D I find it balanced and use it every time!
Suggested Topics
