Matrix Games Forums

Is this WAD, that level 1 and level 2 purchase prices are the same? If so, why?

we will have to decide before the next patch. I believe we need to increase it like the previous version.

It's a bug

You could argue the extra cost has gone into the research - and once the factories have retooled building the obsolete model would be no cheaper...but it is a bug!

We are going to correct that for next patch.

ORIGINAL: doomtrader

We are going to correct that for next patch.

Or maybe not:) Air and naval are expensive enough as it is and we did pay for researching.

It shouldn't be much if at all. Afterall how much more if anything to build a Sherman with a 75 or 76 gun:)

There is rather difference comparable to Pz IV and Pz V

ORIGINAL: HR2

ORIGINAL: doomtrader

We are going to correct that for next patch.

Or maybe not:) Air and naval are expensive enough as it is and we did pay for researching.

It shouldn't be much if at all. Afterall how much more if anything to build a Sherman with a 75 or 76 gun:)

I think it might cost more to build an Iowa class BB than a South Carolina BB. I think the ToW way of each level of land unit costs different is better. Some units have Panthers, and some have Mark III. Some infantry are line infantry of level III and some are just holding some back water at Level I.

One could make the arguement that the cost of a ship should reflect the Level of the ship. Building the Kaga or the Tahio? Lexington or Essex? Even though I think the Lexington was one of my favorites.

P-36 or P-51 or even a black widdow?

B-17 or a B-29?

Just a thought, but I think the cost differences should be reflected in ships as well.

What happens with naval upgrades - in ToW don't all the ships automatically promote? I might be imagining this!

All Ships are built at maximum level. I believe the current ships also get the benefit of the next level.

Why would you build a WWI era BB or Pre-Dreadnought?

ORIGINAL: 17russia

ORIGINAL: HR2

ORIGINAL: doomtrader

We are going to correct that for next patch.

Or maybe not:) Air and naval are expensive enough as it is and we did pay for researching.

It shouldn't be much if at all. Afterall how much more if anything to build a Sherman with a 75 or 76 gun:)

I think it might cost more to build an Iowa class BB than a South Carolina BB. I think the ToW way of each level of land unit costs different is better. Some units have Panthers, and some have Mark III. Some infantry are line infantry of level III and some are just holding some back water at Level I.

One could make the arguement that the cost of a ship should reflect the Level of the ship. Building the Kaga or the Tahio? Lexington or Essex? Even though I think the Lexington was one of my favorites.

P-36 or P-51 or even a black widdow?

B-17 or a B-29?

Just a thought, but I think the cost differences should be reflected in ships as well.

True, but the initital costs are expensive. I haven't been able to build much with the USA other than inf which are a priority early to garrison port moseby and other places the japanese like to invade with seemingly endless inf avail:)

ORIGINAL: Razz

All Ships are built at maximum level. I believe the current ships also get the benefit of the next level.

Why would you build a WWI era BB or Pre-Dreadnought?

Should existing ships upgrade to a new level at all? Should money have to be spent updrading them to the next level, in the some manner as the the repair function.

I would not want to construct a WWI era BB, but I would like the option to construct lower level PG or CV for convoying troops and back water patroll areas so leaving the option to construct any level of any ship type is just an Idea. Not all of the wartime ships Japan constructed were first rate for the technology Japan had at the time.

In a naval game it would also be cool to have the option to construct CVE, CVL & maybe BC units as well. Might as well make it a meatfest without making it too complicated.