If we’re going to have options like that, then all options in a certain category don’t all have to be introduced in the same phase. The Simple Tech option can (and should IMO) be introduced in phase 1 while the Complex Tech option can be introduced in a latter phase.
For our main version of historic accuracy the list of NAs could be quite short. What could happen: Radar shouldn’t be restricted to UK and become a tech option…Lend-lease is going to be standard…Convoy raid would sort of displace U-boat interdiction…
But thats normal and realistic.
If we’re going to have options like that, then all options in a certain category don’t all have to be introduced in the same phase.
We’ll have to structure our phases well if we were to have multiple versions.
Or lets not get carried away and just focus on our dream historic version.
Trimmed down options are just something on the side IMO.
This is a list of all the options that I think we need along with when each of the options should be available IMO:
Tech rules:
National Advantages:
Expansion Units
Italy
I agree that we’ll be able to do away with many of the NAs since we’ve incorporated those NAs into the game for all nations to have available to them (like U-boat interdiction and radar, etc…). This will leave room for some other NAs that we can introduce (like cheap unit types for each nation).
I think that it’s important to have the total number of NAs for each side (not each nation) to be the same for balance purposes. I propose having 4 NAs for each Allied nation and having 6 NAs for each Axis nation. Also for balance purposes I think we need to make it so all the NAs are about equivalent in value (no more super good ones and worthless ones).
Ok ill go with this as well… its good and adequate for the job.
Great to see its planned out.
I actually like all NAs active.
Unless we find historic resource constraints otherwise or something.
Oh we don’t have to worry about making same no. of NAs.
Balance is not achieved via no. of NAs.
At this stage balance needs only be looked at loosely.
Because even if we tried to we won’t do a good job.
Its difficult to anticipate as AAR is no where as realistic/detailed/strategic/fun… 8-)
Some of these ideas are mine and some are not! The German 88’s are not mine and I do think that Fortress Europe prety much involves the 88’s! The 88’s in the NAs mentioned in this topic is imbalanced! It is a game braker! Any German player that would get that NA will most likely win the game, since a pile of such artillery with opening fire will kill anything, since casualties can not counter attack! :mrgreen:
I dont like the T-34 NA due to historical reasons, it was not better than a Sherman! But worse than a Panther or upgraded Panzer IV! German tanks cost 7 IPCs and have a combat capabillity of 4/4 were as an allied tank has a combat capability of 3/3 and cost 5 IPCs! What do you think?
@B.:
Any German player that would get that NA will most likely win the game, since a pile of such artillery with opening fire will kill anything, since casualties can not counter attack! :mrgreen:
For your information there is this other AAR varient “Enhanced” popular on AH forum.
(The varient is about balance and was pretty much created in an unstable and ad-hoc style.)
They found the opening fire didn’t save them that many return hits.
@B.:
I dont like the T-34 NA due to historical reasons, it was not better than a Sherman! But worse than a Panther or upgraded Panzer IV! German tanks cost 7 IPCs and have a combat capabillity of 4/4 were as an allied tank has a combat capability of 3/3 and cost 5 IPCs! What do you think?
Yes I’ve something alone the lines that you need 5 T-34s to kill a Panzer but Russia usually had 6. :-D
T-34 is just a massed unit and this is what we are trying to model at the moment.
For your information there is this other AAR varient “Enhanced” popular on AH forum.
(The variant is about balance and was pretty much created in an unstable and ad-hoc style.)
They found the opening fire didn’t save them that many return hits.
Well, I dont really get your message here “The varient is about balance and was pretty much created in an unstable and ad-hoc style”???
Why have Luftwaffe Dive-Bombers at the same time as Blitzkrieg! They are pretty much the same to me and by historical reasons!
@B.:
Well, I dont really get your message here “The varient is about balance and was pretty much created in an unstable and ad-hoc style”???
What I mean is the contrast. The “Enahanced” varient was not about historic accuracy but a goal of gameplay balance.
Just a useless piece of information. Its not important.
@B.:
Why have Luftwaffe Dive-Bombers at the same time as Blitzkrieg! They are pretty much the same to me and by historical reasons!
Yep I recall thats what we were leaning towards too.
Some of these ideas are mine and some are not! The German 88’s are not mine and I do think that Fortress Europe prety much involves the 88’s! The 88’s in the NAs mentioned in this topic is imbalanced! It is a game braker! Any German player that would get that NA will most likely win the game, since a pile of such artillery with opening fire will kill anything, since casualties can not counter attack!
I dont like the T-34 NA due to historical reasons, it was not better than a Sherman! But worse than a Panther or upgraded Panzer IV! German tanks cost 7 IPCs and have a combat capabillity of 4/4 were as an allied tank has a combat capability of 3/3 and cost 5 IPCs! What do you think?
MR. Andersson please fix everything you see as a problem…. and post it!
And guys we have to allow the other members to have some say on how the project comes out. After all our names and reputations are on the final project. Let Andersson have some “pull” on what he feels would be the best for the NA’s and such. After all he was one of the founding “fathers” for this idea… we will be better off with some of his flavor that he brings to the project. Give him that much.
I dont like the T-34 NA due to historical reasons, it was not better than a Sherman! But worse than a Panther or upgraded Panzer IV! German tanks cost 7 IPCs and have a combat capabillity of 4/4 were as an allied tank has a combat capability of 3/3 and cost 5 IPCs! What do you think?
IMHO the T34 was the best tank in the war! Better than the Sherman and Tiger. Note: That does not mean that 1 T34 could take out 1 Tiger. It means that if you factor in productivity as well as still including armor, and firepower, etc… than the T34 is better. It’s cost effectiveness was that high to make up for any lack of performance. IMO there should be a T34 NA, and it should reflect it’s productivity (like buy 2 for 8 ).
The t-34 was not the best tank in the world overall, it was the most efficiently produced in terms of what it could do on the battlefield. Note that it was a medium tank class and was no match for a heavy tank like the tiger 2 or ?
There is a show on the Military Channel where a panel of historians and military experts rate the best tanks of all time relative to their time periods. It’s called Top Ten or something.
They had 5 factors:
Firepower
Armor Protection
Mobility
Production Ease/Numbers
Fear factors
The rankings were something like:
10. M4 Sherman (US)
9. Merkava (Israel)
8. T54/55 (USSR)
7. Challenger (Great Britain)
6. MkIV Panzer (Germany)
5. Centurion (Great Britain)
4. WWI Tank (Great Britain)
3. Tiger WWII (Germany)
2. M1 Abrams (United States)
1. T34 (USSR)
Micheal wittman:
during operation “Zitadelle” (Kursk) he destroyed 30 tanks, mainly T-34/76s and KV Is, and 28 anti-tank guns and two batteries of artillery. He especially hated anti-tank guns, which were often camouflaged and difficult to spot. During the period of January 13-14th, Wittmann reported that they had destroyed their 88th enemy tank, and both he and Bobby Woll received the Knight’s Cross for their brave and outstanding tactics and gunnery. On January 16th, a large group of Russian tanks, including T34/85s and KV Is, attacked the Leibstandarte positions, and Wittmann and his crew had destroyed some sixteen additional T34/85s by the end of the day. He left the East Front with 119 destroyed enemy tanks on his name. He received the Ritterkreuz on 14 January 1944, the Oakleaf (Eichenlaub) to his Knight’s Cross on 30 January 1944, and was promoted to the rank of SS-Obersturmführer (1st lieutenant).
he did that with a tiger 1
That list is based on a criteria that would not produce accurate battlefield results. If each tank was placed into some kind of gladiator combat thing. The germans would come out on top 100 out of 100 events. The t-34 shots would never really harm a German tiger 1-2 . if a Sherman vs t-34 duel was possible id say the T-34 would win, but it would be close.
10. M4 Sherman (US)
9. Merkava (Israel)
8. T54/55 (USSR)
7. Challenger (Great Britain)
6. MkIV Panzer (Germany)
5. Centurion (Great Britain)
4. WWI Tank (Great Britain)
3. Tiger WWII (Germany)
2. M1 Abrams (United States)
1. T34 (USSR)
Note: that list is comparing some crazy things the M1 Abrams should be #1 hands down… how is it not better than a t34?
Let’s take your gladiator combat ring example again, but factor in cost effectiveness to show you why these experts choose T34’s as the best:
Germans get 100 million dollars to spend on tiger tanks.
Russians get 100 million dollars to spend on t34’s.
put them all onto the batlefield at once to fight it out until 1 side has no tanks.
who wins?
i never said t34’s should attack at 4 instead of 3 or anything like that. i said they should be cheaper.
@Imperious:
… If each tank was placed into some kind of gladiator combat thing. The germans would come out on top 100 out of 100 events. The t-34 shots would never really harm a German tiger 1-2 . if a Sherman vs t-34 duel was possible id say the T-34 would win, but it would be close.
Yep, Impy I agree with you here! German machines are and still (BMW, Porsche aso) are the best when it comes to performance! However the seamy side of the outstanding performance is the high cost of production! So theduke is also right! If a T-34 tank should be used in A&A:R I would say it should be a price advantage due to massproductionn A&A:E it is better off to raise defense to 3, due to the IPM effect that is a evident shortcoming for Russia in all A&A games! By the way, another important thing for tanks was radio communication. Russian tanks lacked radiocommunication (mostly), hence were not as effective as their combat capabillity allowed them to be!
Massproduction bonus for T 34:
Your tanks basic price is reduced to 4 IPCs for every unit purchased after the first two tank units.
Ok great but we still beed all the goodies for the other “cheaper unit” NA’s. good start!
