ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung
As to the issue of naval, U-Boat, simulation in this game. How many of our Axis players make the very painful decisions the historic Germans did. U-Boat production, naval production by the Germans was "painful". Weinberg points out how many tanks were not built with the production of a sub, not to mention the surface fleet which was still worked on so late in the war. How many of our Axis players build a navy when faced with the choice to build less tanks. Someone once characterized many players of this game as pushing tanks along the steppes. We are not a crew who hit the "Deploy new ship" button often. The Germans had subs because they made painful choices to plow PP into subs, something few of us do. This game has a mechanism to produce much more naval power for the Axis, but few choose to use it.
I pulled out this snippet from another thread because I didn't want to join into the overall and myriad issues addressed there. Good points made by all, actually, over there.
This snippet however brought to my mind this perhaps unremarkable thought: why can't the developers or a modder simply write down a list of all the subs, tank divisions, motorized divisions, infantry divisions, bombers, fighters, paratroopers, etc. that were historically produced by a given country, then extrapolate from that the number of PPs that should be available to that country?
Unremarkable, but obviously not done, so far. Because the tradeoffs are not there in the game right now, really. The German player, for instance, doesn't decide whether to produce 1 sub rather than 3, or 1 tank division or 1 air unit, he can only say, 'No tanks, no subs, no air units. Period.'
James, Michael or Chuck, you have all expressed the idea in one way or another, that for any given country, whether the US or Germany or England, the choices of what to produce should be painful. I add only: there should be a choice! Right now there's not.
