Page 1 of 1
Units and Uses
Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 7:44 pm
by battlevonwar
AA: Seems a little expensive without upgrades to use extensively for the UK/Germany?
AntiTank: Hmm, very OP when attacked
Artillery: Also very OP when attacked (both field artillery pieces were trialed multiple times in Scenarios mind you)
I wonder the field pieces act a little too much like massive powered garrisons or is this a good thing to have and how do you use them? If at all? Since they're more toward entrenchment warfare.
Fighters, Tactical, Medium and Heavy Air:
I noticed how tacs and Meds are lowered down a bit on their actual damage dealing leaving room for other weapons to be used. They're expensive to use. Will this or has this prompted people to use them less for land ground attack/naval attack?
Subs vs Surface Fleets:
Wow, Subs are very powerful at least at first and Surface Fleets though required must be together. Carriers as of yet seem a little frail alone. They take damage okay but they don't deal impressive damage. Anyone find uses for these? I went after a U-Boat with a Carrier fleet but not extensively and didn't find where it was OP and unique.
Land * Tank * Mech Infantry * Corp * Army * Garrison * = staple diet for all militarys' .. hard to weigh the best but they are all pretty self explanatory ...
Haven't even brushed through all the possible technologies and how they impact the above. I was checking Hard Attacks and Soft Attacks though it's quite hmm, daunting to see what can be done with an Army.
I also noted Technologies have limits on them(where is in earlier SCs you could have say level 5 Infantry Weapons for Germany/UK in 1941 you cannot do that here)
Please chime if in, if just to be random and share thoughts and ideas. I like to learn from my own and other's experiences.
RE: Units and Uses
Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:13 pm
by DeriKuk
I'm not sure that the scale justifies the mythical formations that show up as Anti-Tank units. If it were up to me, the AT capabilities would be incorporated in defensive qualities of other land combat units through the technology of Anti-Tank Warfare.
RE: Units and Uses
Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 1:16 am
by FF_1079
ORIGINAL: battlevonwar
AA: Seems a little expensive without upgrades to use extensively for the UK/Germany?
AntiTank: Hmm, very OP when attacked
Artillery: Also very OP when attacked (both field artillery pieces were trialed multiple times in Scenarios mind you)
I wonder the field pieces act a little too much like massive powered garrisons or is this a good thing to have and how do you use them? If at all? Since they're more toward entrenchment warfare.
Fighters, Tactical, Medium and Heavy Air:
I noticed how tacs and Meds are lowered down a bit on their actual damage dealing leaving room for other weapons to be used. They're expensive to use. Will this or has this prompted people to use them less for land ground attack/naval attack?
Subs vs Surface Fleets:
Wow, Subs are very powerful at least at first and Surface Fleets though required must be together. Carriers as of yet seem a little frail alone. They take damage okay but they don't deal impressive damage. Anyone find uses for these? I went after a U-Boat with a Carrier fleet but not extensively and didn't find where it was OP and unique.
Land * Tank * Mech Infantry * Corp * Army * Garrison * = staple diet for all militarys' .. hard to weigh the best but they are all pretty self explanatory ...
Haven't even brushed through all the possible technologies and how they impact the above. I was checking Hard Attacks and Soft Attacks though it's quite hmm, daunting to see what can be done with an Army.
I also noted Technologies have limits on them(where is in earlier SCs you could have say level 5 Infantry Weapons for Germany/UK in 1941 you cannot do that here)
Please chime if in, if just to be random and share thoughts and ideas. I like to learn from my own and other's experiences.
I use Mediums on cities and tactical on units ( particularly Armor or Mech ) in the open. Why? Mediums don't take as high a loss bombing a fortified position and do a good job of lowering supply/entrenchment on those units. Tactical bombers take higher losses going against cities, but lower against units in open terrain and do much higher damage via unit strength. Of course, this is independent of Air Interdiction by the enemy fighters, or your escorts - but it works as a general rule in my experience.
Subs are strong until you develop sufficient ASW levels for your DD's, then they get wrecked by even enemy CL's that have high ASW. The higher the Sub warfare level, the better they are at diving away and not taking damage from enemy subs and ASW strikes by carriers.
Carriers have a limited usefulness in this theater, because historically they were limited in their usefulness. Unlike IJN and US air units that were quite powerful in naval combat, the Brit carrier planes where underwhelming and even feeble against land based planes.
Armor and Mech get two attacks versus one if you have armored warfare level 1. Mech infantry is far better against defending cities than Armored units. Corps are more flexible, Armys are better at prepared assaults.
RE: Units and Uses
Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:00 am
by battlevonwar
I could relate to your point of view. AA*AntiTank*Artillery of all types was associated with existing units. Lots of tactical units in a Strategic game. Though an argument for can be made for AntiAir*Shore Batteries* can be made. For instance AntiTank acts more like a solely devoted AntiTank Army. We shall see how this impacts the game.
ORIGINAL: hjalmar99
I'm not sure that the scale justifies the mythical formations that show up as Anti-Tank units. If it were up to me, the AT capabilities would be incorporated in defensive qualities of other land combat units through the technology of Anti-Tank Warfare.
RE: Units and Uses
Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:03 am
by battlevonwar
FF_1079,
interesting take on different uses for air power and mechanized/armored units. Two strike capability is really powerful and for air, being as frugal as possible is a good decision unless bottlenecked as they're expensive is something I've found out quick.
RE: Units and Uses
Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:26 pm
by James Taylor
For the sake of the operational size SC scenarios I think it's appropriate to have the smaller units, say battalion size.
For the strategic scale I always felt like attachments to the larger formations was the way to go. You have your basic units infantry and armor for land, fighters and bombers for air, surface and subs for naval.
Taking these generic units and attaching the more specialized weapon systems to them alters their combat characteristics. At purchase you could also choose to provide inherent mobility or by giving them an attachment of a "motor pool" you could give them additional APs.
All of these attachments should be removable and subject to re-attachment through HQ control, each HQ controlling a certain number of attachments through its command abilities. Historically, different HQs had the ability to use specific attachments more effectively than others, like Guderain's affinity for tanks.
So in this manner you could build a more specific armed force to your liking.