Matrix Games Forums

Hello,
For Germany, Combat engineers are better in the combat than Construction engineers and have the same costs in resources.
For Russia, Combat engineers are just a little less good in the combat than Construction engineers (defence value against armoured vehicles) and are more expensive.It doesn't make sense !

Engineers for Russia :

Enginers for Germany :

Interesting observation. There's another thing that's always puzzled me. Why does a Me 110, a twin engine "large" fighter, have less of an ammo loadout than a single engine Me 109 or Fw 190? I'd like to use the Me 110 but that 2 ammo loadout is a showstopper for me.

That would make sense for Me 110 in the bomber version, it is a cheaper version of Stuka. For the fighter version I have exactly the same feelings, 2 ammo is not enough.

I would imagine combat engineers should be better in attack as well as defense. Construction engineers can be an auxiliary unit and you need them only to build bridges or bunkers, or maybe destroy a bridge if you are on the defensive.

It takes years and years to build a good equipment file. Look at Panzer General II modders. 20 years of modding and still making improvements.

Hi folks,

we agree on both cases. Fighter BF110 needs more ammo and those engineers need better balance. Will be changed in 1.08.

Regards,

After the factors of fight and defence, there is another factor which allows to distinguish the combat from the construction engineers : the movement points.
Combat engineers have 5 movement points while the construction engineers have only 3 movement points. So to be able to move far, a means of transportation turns out to be necessary for the construction engineers. It is logical if they have to carry building materials.