Tanks!

[Pocus]

What do you guys think of tanks in the game, more specifically their power and how they alter the game balance, compared to Artillery?
As they strong enough, or would they if Artillery was not the game changer? Or are they innately too weak, even if Artillery was rebalanced?

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: Pocus

What do you guys think of tanks in the game, more specifically their power and how they alter the game balance, compared to Artillery?
As they strong enough, or would they if Artillery was not the game changer? Or are they innately too weak, even if Artillery was rebalanced?

Very strong enough. I am facing my first one against Old Crow in 1917 and I have nothing to stop it...

[stockwellpete]

I would say they are OK but artillery is way overpowered at the moment (too many shells basically). So to adjust artillery would be to make tanks stronger without changing them at all.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Very strong enough. I am facing my first one against Old Crow in 1917 and I have nothing to stop it...

Ground attack aircraft and mass artillery combined with high grade Infantry will do the trick against Tanks.

That's why I speed dialed research on my aircraft tech for France and The UK so I could finally contest your incredible German Airforce. My God, those Red Barons of yours were Monsters to fight for most of the War in the air....so I had to create my own Monster to counter you on the land, and protect it...with air Monsters of my own haha

[Bavre]

While tanks here have quite good stats the situation in the game itself kind of nerves them. They are vulnerable to arty and pretty much everyone maxes out arty asap, since it is just so all around powerful. Tanks usually debut during the lategame on the western front with little room to manoeuvre and all the cannons in the world already on the field, ready to turn them into swiss cheese.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Bavre

While tanks here have quite good stats the situation in the game itself kind of nerves them. They are vulnerable to arty and pretty much everyone maxes out arty asap, since it is just so all around powerful. Tanks usually debut during the lategame on the western front with little room to manoeuvre and all the cannons in the world already on the field, ready to turn them into swiss cheese.

You are absolutely right about the Tanks. In my recent match with Tanaka..I had to weave and roll my French behemoth up to the lines around Nancy..in the rain and snow..and find a gap between his Artillery coverage. Then it went to work clearing these dug in Huns so I could get close enough to Metz to bombard and assault that fortress with Infantry. I had to pull the Tank off the line, for it was battered and in the way....but having it helped me to end the War against a very stubborn opponent.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

I would say they are OK but artillery is way overpowered at the moment (too many shells basically). So to adjust artillery would be to make tanks stronger without changing them at all.

I think pulling one chit for Shell research would do the trick on top of the one chit pull on Artillery that was done with the recent patch.

Tanks are strong, but they are vulnerable as has been noted else where on this thread. Anyway...very few if any Tanks will show up on the map..and if they do, they can't be everywhere at once. I think they are handled perfectly as it stands.

[BillRunacre]

I'm wondering whether it might not be just better to cap artillery experience at 1, as there is a limit to how good the gunners can get, while leaving industry capable of being able to ramp up production if it is invested in.

I also worry that the tempo might change too much if Gas/Shell Production research is allowed less chits in it, as once everyone starts getting higher Trench tech, there is an element of sitting and waiting for tech to counter the Trenches, which of course there should be, but too much waiting is less fun.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

I'm wondering whether it might not be just better to cap artillery experience at 1, as there is a limit to how good the gunners can get, while leaving industry capable of being able to ramp up production if it is invested in.

I also worry that the tempo might change too much if Gas/Shell Production research is allowed less chits in it, as once everyone starts getting higher Trench tech, there is an element of sitting and waiting for tech to counter the Trenches, which of course there should be, but too much waiting is less fun.

You know...that would probably do the trick actually...and the tempo might be changed adversely now that you mentioned that. I personally don't mind the shells as they are..and I at least don't waste them when I got them. The problem all along as been the uber lethality of the artillery its self..especially when its in the 12 to 13 pt range with that experience that's easy to gain.

One thing for sure, the artillery research nerf by taking one chit away seems to have helped. Tanaka and I waited for months till the latest patch came on line to do a match, and while artillery played an important part for both sides...it didn't dominate the game or the outcome...like they have done in a lot of matches I have been in, in the past.

I know this is a thread about tanks, but it segued to artillery..and what they can do to those new beasts of mayhem, especially in conjunction with ground attack aircraft and elite infantry.

[Pocus]

I would still allow more tanks, more than 2. Either 3, with 3 tech levels at double cost for the corresponding warfare and one per level, or 4, with one per level and no change in the research.*

I would suggest shell/gas is made of 2 levels, each giving 0.5 shell. Only the 2nd would give +1 shell. Then some code editing from Hubert, where artillery is initially restricted to elite-11, with shell/gas level 1 and level 2 raising this to 12 and 13.


*: and if Hubert can de-hardcode how many units are provided per tech level also, can be useful for scenarios [:)]

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

I'm wondering whether it might not be just better to cap artillery experience at 1, as there is a limit to how good the gunners can get, while leaving industry capable of being able to ramp up production if it is invested in.

I also worry that the tempo might change too much if Gas/Shell Production research is allowed less chits in it, as once everyone starts getting higher Trench tech, there is an element of sitting and waiting for tech to counter the Trenches, which of course there should be, but too much waiting is less fun.

You know...that would probably do the trick actually...and the tempo might be changed adversely now that you mentioned that. I personally don't mind the shells as they are..and I at least don't waste them when I got them. The problem all along as been the uber lethality of the artillery its self..especially when its in the 12 to 13 pt range with that experience that's easy to gain.

One thing for sure, the artillery research nerf by taking one chit away seems to have helped. Tanaka and I waited for months till the latest patch came on line to do a match, and while artillery played an important part for both sides...it didn't dominate the game or the outcome...like they have done in a lot of matches I have been in, in the past.

I know this is a thread about tanks, but it segued to artillery..and what they can do to those new beasts of mayhem, especially in conjunction with ground attack aircraft and elite infantry.

Er I would not say artillery did not dominate haha. I would agree with a shell change. Someone help me out here though. Why is artillery in this game so different than in WIE/WAW?

[Espejo]

Are there any plans to still update the game. I would like to see as well a change in power of the artillery. It could be as easy to reduce max number of shells

[stockwellpete]

ORIGINAL: Espejo

Are there any plans to still update the game. I would like to see as well a change in power of the artillery. It could be as easy to reduce max number of shells

Yes, I am sure there will be a new patch along sometime fairly soon. There are a lot of discussions about various things.

[The Land]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Er I would not say artillery did not dominate haha. I would agree with a shell change. Someone help me out here though. Why is artillery in this game so different than in WIE/WAW?

Do you mean... what is different, or why is it different?

2nd World War artillery have max 3 shells but can do 2 de-entrenchment per shell. Entrenchment levels are much lower, most open hexes have max entrenchment 2. Artillery is also less important compared to air units in ww2 as air units can also do de-entrenchment (especially when teched up).

All of this is the difference between a game based on static and semi-open warfare with occasional maneuver, and a game based on mobile warfare with the occasional siege.

[Hubert Cater]

ORIGINAL: Pocus
*: and if Hubert can de-hardcode how many units are provided per tech level also, can be useful for scenarios [:)]

Yes, for the per unit upgrade levels this is not an option, but for doctrinal research categories like Armored Warfare, you can set a build limit increase there via the 'Automatic Increments' screen in the Editor.

Maybe this helps?

[BillRunacre]

ORIGINAL: Espejo

Are there any plans to still update the game. I would like to see as well a change in power of the artillery. It could be as easy to reduce max number of shells

As well as reducing their maximum experience from (currently) 2 to 1, the other idea that I raised here a few weeks back, was to reduce the base maximum shells limit to 5, and then have it rise by 1 per level of Logistics research.

So where at the moment all Artillery can automatically accumulate 10 shells over enough time, instead this would only be possible with a bit more research than at present.

It's not set in stone yet as I am enjoying following the discussions, and as you can see, occasionally joining in too. [:)]

[Pocus]

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

ORIGINAL: Pocus
*: and if Hubert can de-hardcode how many units are provided per tech level also, can be useful for scenarios [:)]

Yes, for the per unit upgrade levels this is not an option, but for doctrinal research categories like Armored Warfare, you can set a build limit increase there via the 'Automatic Increments' screen in the Editor.

Maybe this helps?

Aaaah, yes. I did not get that Automatic Increment was about doctrines, I thought it was about somehow applying automatically something, so I did not look much into it.

Oddly, MaxEntrench does not progress for infantry corps with the Trench Warfare doctrine?

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: The Land

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Er I would not say artillery did not dominate haha. I would agree with a shell change. Someone help me out here though. Why is artillery in this game so different than in WIE/WAW?

Do you mean... what is different, or why is it different?

2nd World War artillery have max 3 shells but can do 2 de-entrenchment per shell. Entrenchment levels are much lower, most open hexes have max entrenchment 2. Artillery is also less important compared to air units in ww2 as air units can also do de-entrenchment (especially when teched up).

All of this is the difference between a game based on static and semi-open warfare with occasional maneuver, and a game based on mobile warfare with the occasional siege.

Both actually. Entrenchment levels are lower in which game? Artillery seems very balanced in the other games so I wonder why artillery does not work the same in this game. Yes air units are more important in WW2 but why should that change how artillery works? Why so many more shells??? It's not like artillery was better or stronger in WW1 than WW2...

I'd also like to know historically were there more whole corps wipe outs in WW1 over WW2? Because that is how the WW1 game works. You shell a unit 5-10 times, wipe it out, next turn rinse and repeat. Because history does not reflect that:

WW1: Estimated military deaths 10 million.

WW2: Estimated military deaths 25 million.

It just seems more about artillery warfare and less about trench warfare...

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


I'd also like to know historically were there more whole corps wipe outs in WW1 over WW2? Because that is how the WW1 game works. You shell a unit 5-10 times, wipe it out, next turn rinse and repeat. Because history does not reflect that:

That type of thing never happen in our last match, not once, by me. I'm too stingy with shells to do that..and its a waste. What I was doing was firing away until your defender was detrenched..then I'd check the combat predictor, and lob a few more on the hapless defender to get his morale down to grey...than commence with my infantry attacks.

Now, thats the kind of rinse and repeat I do.

[Hubert Cater]

Oddly, MaxEntrench does not progress for infantry corps with the Trench Warfare doctrine?

The doctrine is not currently set on a per unit basis, although in theory I guess we could do it this way. Rather it is an across the board increase for all units using a trench which I'm now looking at is hard coded.