American Infantry to cheap!
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
American Infantry to cheap!
Okay is it just me or is American infantry just way better than German infantry. Ive played alot of Italy games lately, and have yet to have had my German units do well in a fire-fight with American infantry. The main problem I have with this is that the German infantry are as expensive if not more expensive than the American infantry. That is what I have a problem with. Even when supported my flak 20s one of my favorite weapons the americans seem to get the better of the german infantry. I have used German paras alot alos and even they arent as good as the supposedly less experienced american infantry. I have no problem with american vehicles other than they seem to be fairly resistant to pak 40s. American infantry are much better equiped than German infantry, and they have 12 man squads which gives them more chances to hit with. Thus it is my PO that the American infantry should be more expensive point wise than german infantry. Also american infantry seem to regroup much quicker than German infantry even when pounded quite abit.
I don't know, I think it's about right, you have to see the idea from the perspective of war time America, No exspense was saved, anythin not nailed down was converted into war goods for troops, America had a fresh reserve of infantry flowing into the war at a constant rate. Germany on the other hand was hitting the bottom, the war had been going on for sometime now and those veterans of early years were slowly dwindling away.
German supply was limited while American factories were chewing up everything in site.
So with all those factors yeah I agree German Infantry should be good, and I've seen them that way, but I can see why American Infantry are decently priced. Persoanlly the Infantry Combat Scenario I'm working on against two friends has me being pitt by a vastly superior American Infantry adn Tank Force as a German Delaying Force and I'm using Standard Inf at a 2-1 ratio and I'm cutting them apart.
Each side and for that matter each type have their unique qualties that when used right we'll supress Americans huge numbers and incerease the fighting ability, tactics combined by the idea of what you unit can witstand and can't will win you any game.
MrWhite
The Infantry guy, you gotta love French SAS hehe
German supply was limited while American factories were chewing up everything in site.
So with all those factors yeah I agree German Infantry should be good, and I've seen them that way, but I can see why American Infantry are decently priced. Persoanlly the Infantry Combat Scenario I'm working on against two friends has me being pitt by a vastly superior American Infantry adn Tank Force as a German Delaying Force and I'm using Standard Inf at a 2-1 ratio and I'm cutting them apart.
Each side and for that matter each type have their unique qualties that when used right we'll supress Americans huge numbers and incerease the fighting ability, tactics combined by the idea of what you unit can witstand and can't will win you any game.
MrWhite
The Infantry guy, you gotta love French SAS hehe
Im not agrueing that Americans shouldnt be as equiped as they are or about their quality. What Im complaining about is the cost in points. The points are meant to be a balacing factor to the game, and I think for the combat abilities of the American Infantry they should cost more points to use. This is strictly a game balance issue that Im addressing. Also most games you play will be meeting engagements so you dont have the luxury of siting down in the best terrain and letting them come to you. Time limits and Vhexes kinda force you to advance. Ive played several assaults online and do agree it is much easier to assault or defend because then your force has a definitive mission. Just talking purely about game balance and pointing mainly.
The only reason american infantry would be less experienced than the german infantry is if you didn't count escorting 100,000 of surrendering germans to the rear as combat experience ... Why do people keep thinging the The Infantry on the side that won ..on the side that killed or captured ten times what they lost in manpower and won the war are somehow less proficent than the very army they beat hands down in North Africa and Sicily... I don't get it ... When i play Italy i use elements of the 36th Infantry Division and attached forces ..occasionaly i will throw in some Units that fought along side of them like the 504th ... The 36th lost about 25,000-28,000 troops from all causes during the War, while capturing or killing over 275,000 germans ... if the game engine is to accurately model of the ways things happened...then it should reflect such superior performance on the part of U S Troops ... If it is supposed to accurately model the numerical superiority of the manpower the various powers could bring to the table, then amewrican Infantry should be much much cheaper and much better equiped than the oposition.. if realism is involved in the Italian campaign German airborne would be busy capturing unoccupied islands off the Italian coast and rescuing Musollini in 43 and securing Italian Garrisons, not on the field of battle ... American airborne and rangers should be sneaking around and jumping into combat like the did at Salerno ..
I am talking 43 here yes in 44 German airborne fought as combat troops in Italy but if you look at the combat campaigns of German airborne they were busy in 43.. the Panthers were in Russia and the Tigers were very very rare ....so while i support realistic forces as a rule, i think the best policy is to let the germans buy any ahistorical forces especially Tanks and elite troops whenever they want them regardless of where they might have been really used and make the allies buy handicapped units ,,, that way the Germans can actually have air units in Italy and the russian front at the same time panthers in Italy and Kursk at the same time and FJ wrapping up Italian assests and fighting the Allies all at the same time ... and then they can complain that US jeeps are to tough, arty is to strong ,infantry is to cheap, and that the Allies win too often with a clear conscience and a deep and profound understanding of History
I am talking 43 here yes in 44 German airborne fought as combat troops in Italy but if you look at the combat campaigns of German airborne they were busy in 43.. the Panthers were in Russia and the Tigers were very very rare ....so while i support realistic forces as a rule, i think the best policy is to let the germans buy any ahistorical forces especially Tanks and elite troops whenever they want them regardless of where they might have been really used and make the allies buy handicapped units ,,, that way the Germans can actually have air units in Italy and the russian front at the same time panthers in Italy and Kursk at the same time and FJ wrapping up Italian assests and fighting the Allies all at the same time ... and then they can complain that US jeeps are to tough, arty is to strong ,infantry is to cheap, and that the Allies win too often with a clear conscience and a deep and profound understanding of History
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
Well, the Poles who went up against the Fallschirmjager at Cassino and elsewhere later on the Gothic Line would probably disagree with your last statement, but your point is well made. American infantry should be relatively cheap, with lots of organic firepower. Playing the German, one should expect to be outnumbered-only way to simulate that in game terms is to lower unit costs of the enemy, so more of them show up on the game map. Gets back to tactics: plan how to kill/suppress enough of them to achieve your objectives...If it is supposed to accurately model the numerical superiority of the manpower the various powers could bring to the table, then amewrican Infantry should be much much cheaper and much better equiped than the oposition.. if realism is involved in the Italian campaign German airborne would be busy capturing unoccupied islands off the Italian coast and rescuing Musollini in 43 and securing Italian Garrisons, not on the field of battle ... American airborne and rangers should be sneaking around and jumping into combat like the did at Salerno ..
"...these go up to eleven."
Nigel Tufnel
Nigel Tufnel
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
The first post points out rather well part of the point I made rcently dealing with rifle units, that is, that people regard all rifles/LMGs alike. Chaos45 points out the added men to the US, but what he hasn't looked into is that US HE effects to their rifles and BARs are probably superior to the German stuff. I know the BARs are very good. Better HE effect can overcome lower soldier ratings.
Exactly, in the ned your vicotry can always be categorized by tactics. Tactics can win or lose the field of battle. I know I havne't ben playing for very long, but I've playeed over 20 MP games and I can't even think how many single games.
Hell I've played the same map twice as the Japs agaisnt two of my friends, and both times I came out smeeling, like a rose, by using new tatics for the map. You amy have the worst army in the world, outnumbered and out gunned but if yuo use the tools given you right, you can work miracles.
MrWhite
Hell I've played the same map twice as the Japs agaisnt two of my friends, and both times I came out smeeling, like a rose, by using new tatics for the map. You amy have the worst army in the world, outnumbered and out gunned but if yuo use the tools given you right, you can work miracles.
MrWhite
Cassino was in '44 the general quality of german forces in Italy when the Italians surrendered and the Allies invaded Itally proper were not the best ..the best were licking wounds from kursk and trying to refit with scarce supplies ..what first line troops the germans had in Italy were involved with preventing Italian assests from being used aginst them or being turned over to the allies ... what troops were used for actual combat did the best they could but they were not the best.. and were never expected to defend Italy alone much less with Free and Proud Italians revolting and rioting against them .. after the Panzer Armie Africa surrendered in disgrace what first rate troops did the germans have in the Med area ??? It is bad enough that the game already gives the Germans panzerfaust 60's which they didn't have in 43 .. and that almost every game I play against the Germans in Italy have Panthers or Tigers ..I even had one die hard HISTORICAL player tell me he wanted a HISTORICAL game and wouldn't buy Tigers so he bought all Panthers ROFL ... I have had others jimmy the historical setting so the germans have airpower for gods sake ...actually set it so the Germans had MORE air than the Allies with 7 aircraft carriers sitting off the coast supporting the Allies not to mention the air asssts in North Africa ... ya gotta love it ... Folks all it takes is a simple web search and when you are getting results that corespond to what actually happened .. what do you expect the game has gone a long way to dumb down allied capabilities to give the Germans a chance it gives Germans access to weapons earlier than they should have ( like the Faust60's ) them while denying Allies access to weapons they historically used to great effect ( admitted reduction in arty effect so it doesn't give the allies the advantages in that category they should have , no access at all in the Med to naval air for the allies unless you are playing on a beach map .. when in fact naval bombardment and naval air played a major role in most of Sept and October... Imagine U S F4U Corsairs with 5 inch rockets in the Med ..Yeap they were there operating from Carriers ) ... what more do you guys want ?? can you imagine how the Germans would complain if the Allies were actually allowed by the game to use All the stuff they had instaed of just the common stuff ..or concervsely if the German player was actually restricted to what weapons and equipment they actaully had ...
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
maybe if we just didn't let the americans have M-1 Garands and M-1 Carbines and Thompsons and M-3's and bazookas and BAR's and made them use bolt action something's from WW1 and handgrenades like everybody else ... oh and american radios we need to do something about that because you know those Heroic Germans just had so many GW42's auto rifles and they were so reliable .. and a supply system that could actually feed a MG 42 for the same lenght of time as US MG's and maybe we just ought to let the Germans have as many M-2 50cals as they want ( the German POW's mailed them home )
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
I am betting that the rarity factor doesn't touch any German Tank i got 5 bucks that says the Germans continue to have full access to any tank they want restricted only by date of manifacture .. and arty is what is rare and i strongly doubt that any german arty is considered rare ...by the game
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
Okay I just read some of the posts hitting the topic I launched here. I dont believe the Americans should lose any of their equipment or exp and morale ratings. This game isnt meant to be the real war, otherwise why play the Axis. Its meant to show how is the better player on an even a playing field as possible. Ammo the paras actually parachuted into combat in Sicily fighting over an airfield woth brit paras. Dont remeber the sight but I was looking for info on actual unit histories in italy and found one on the 1st para. They fought in Sicily along with the Hermann Goreing Panzer Division. It alos states because of the immediate need to engage the invasion forces they did parachute into combat on a couple occasions in Sicily so youa re corrected.
Yes I understand the Americans equipment is better, that is my complaint since they have better equipment and larger squads they should cost more than the german squads which isnt how it is now. Right now most German infantry units cost more yet have alot less combat potential compared to the american squads. THis is a game balance issue not a historical issue guys.
Yes I understand the Americans equipment is better, that is my complaint since they have better equipment and larger squads they should cost more than the german squads which isnt how it is now. Right now most German infantry units cost more yet have alot less combat potential compared to the american squads. THis is a game balance issue not a historical issue guys.
Ammosgt, just exactly what is it we supposedly don't allow the Americans to have?! I'm very curious, as I advocated the T95 GMC, which I might add NEVER saw combat, so what's the problem now?! Also, you lost your bet big time!! Why don't you wait and see how things are before dismissing them? I have seen the rarity, guess what Tigers and Panthers are in red, give it a rest will you, we're trying our best.
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
AmmoSgt: I haven't read all of your additions to this thread, but let me just say that you generalize too much and as such largely defeat your points. You mentioned something along the lines of the 36th losing 28,000 while inflicting 275,000, allegedly.
The situation in this game, I venture to guess, is not the situation that the 36th faced. In other words, maybe the 36th inflicted 50-100,000 real fighting casualties, but how many surrendered without the 36th "fighting" them? I know you want to compare such stats to it taking 5 Shermans to destroy every 1 Tiger/Panther, but it's not the same thing. The Sherman deal is about "fighting" a fighting opponent, while what the 36th captured/destroyed may in very large part deal with an opponent who was not fighting. The thing you should be looking at, is if the enemy is fighting, then just what was he capable of?
The game attempts to address the problem of how likely a poor enemy is able to actually fire their weapons via lower morale at various times, but if that weapon actually fired, it was none the worst for however the strategic situation developed, unless of course we're talking about limiting ammo more seriously for those largely in retreat.
Part of the problem with your angle, is that the Sherman ordeal was a tactical one, the level of this game, while you're talking strategic. Sure, there's plenty of times where the strategic is reflected in the tactical, such as a 3/4 strength US division meeting a 1/4 strength German division, or worse, but that still doesn't make the individual rifle HE effect, nor the armor of any Tiger any the less a tactical problem.
BTW, Ammo, there was more than one lousy US division that the Germans surrendered to. If it has been just the 36th, the Gerries would have laughed their heads off. If the 36th accounted for 275,000 Germans, then surely we could plaster all 700,000+ losses at Kiev to a single German division and make them look like super-super men.
The situation in this game, I venture to guess, is not the situation that the 36th faced. In other words, maybe the 36th inflicted 50-100,000 real fighting casualties, but how many surrendered without the 36th "fighting" them? I know you want to compare such stats to it taking 5 Shermans to destroy every 1 Tiger/Panther, but it's not the same thing. The Sherman deal is about "fighting" a fighting opponent, while what the 36th captured/destroyed may in very large part deal with an opponent who was not fighting. The thing you should be looking at, is if the enemy is fighting, then just what was he capable of?
The game attempts to address the problem of how likely a poor enemy is able to actually fire their weapons via lower morale at various times, but if that weapon actually fired, it was none the worst for however the strategic situation developed, unless of course we're talking about limiting ammo more seriously for those largely in retreat.
Part of the problem with your angle, is that the Sherman ordeal was a tactical one, the level of this game, while you're talking strategic. Sure, there's plenty of times where the strategic is reflected in the tactical, such as a 3/4 strength US division meeting a 1/4 strength German division, or worse, but that still doesn't make the individual rifle HE effect, nor the armor of any Tiger any the less a tactical problem.
BTW, Ammo, there was more than one lousy US division that the Germans surrendered to. If it has been just the 36th, the Gerries would have laughed their heads off. If the 36th accounted for 275,000 Germans, then surely we could plaster all 700,000+ losses at Kiev to a single German division and make them look like super-super men.
Okay I decided to go and get numerical stats on the infantry to prove my point.
Here it is: all 1943
German Base 70morale 70experience 70leadership
American Base 70morale 70experience 65leadership
Doesnt look like a big difference to me.
Costs:
German regular 10 man squad=26pts no panzerfaust
American Regular 12 man squad=22pts
American 12 man w/bazooka=25pts
Para
German 10 man=28pts with K98s and no fausts
American 12man=22pts come on?
German 10man=33pts with autorifles and fausts
American 12man=25 with Bazooka
Looks real balance to me huh. I dont think so the costs should be reversed. At the worst equal not less than. The numbers pretty much prove my point I do believe.
Here it is: all 1943
German Base 70morale 70experience 70leadership
American Base 70morale 70experience 65leadership
Doesnt look like a big difference to me.
Costs:
German regular 10 man squad=26pts no panzerfaust
American Regular 12 man squad=22pts
American 12 man w/bazooka=25pts
Para
German 10 man=28pts with K98s and no fausts
American 12man=22pts come on?
German 10man=33pts with autorifles and fausts
American 12man=25 with Bazooka
Looks real balance to me huh. I dont think so the costs should be reversed. At the worst equal not less than. The numbers pretty much prove my point I do believe.
Here is what I know, my two cents. An excellent book called The Battle of the Hurtgen Forest.( The untold story of a disatrous campaign). This book was written by a fella named Charles Whiting and I don't know his nationality.
He mentions a couple of interesting facts that are not that well known. One is by the Fall of 1944 there were over 20,000 deserters in the U.S army hidding in Paris. This is an army that was winning. Can you imagine what the stats would be if they were not winnng. Another stat not so important was the U.S army was losing an equivelent of a battalion of infantry a day to STD's.
I guess the very first post was making a point that maybe they (U.S infantry were coming back too fast) or maybe should have not been able to rally at all.
If you want an excellent read try the book that I have been refering to.
He mentions a couple of interesting facts that are not that well known. One is by the Fall of 1944 there were over 20,000 deserters in the U.S army hidding in Paris. This is an army that was winning. Can you imagine what the stats would be if they were not winnng. Another stat not so important was the U.S army was losing an equivelent of a battalion of infantry a day to STD's.
I guess the very first post was making a point that maybe they (U.S infantry were coming back too fast) or maybe should have not been able to rally at all.
If you want an excellent read try the book that I have been refering to.
Choas the Invasion of Italy was in sept sicily was in july ..and most the survivng germans surrendered
Warhorse if 5 bucks is all it takes.. I got 5 bucks that the US does not have any aircraft in '43 that are armed with rockets to take on tanks with and I'll send a seperate check for 5 bucks made out to you ( come on you can make it ten real easy ) when i send in my order for 5.0.. How about aknowledge elite US Infantry Rifle squads so the 100th Bn and the 332nd can be modeled in the Italian Campaign .. they fought along side the 36th until they were actually incorportated in it .. you know " Go for Broke" as they say .... Naval fire support without beach maps.. those guns reach inland.. and were used.. maybe after August 44 when the US started using VT fuses the US Arty could reflect the upgrade ?? US 57mm AT guns which happen to have a HE rating , have only AP ammo and are treated like brit 6 lbers , US M30 75mm having AT capablity instead of just HE ammo ( thats a real bummer) When the indirect fire version has AP (the M3 75mm ) Airborne M2 60mm should have smoke not just HE , those ultra expensive M2 x3 60mm fire exactly the same number of rounds as a single M2 , fixing that would be nice, M20's added instead of just M8 scout cars in 43 would be nice M8's HMC SP 75's having indirect fire would be nice.. M3 Stuarts and M5 Stuarts priced better in relationship to M4's so that folks don't feel like suckers for buying them ... and again .. given the fact that i don't go around starting these threads .. and just as i predicted when the jeep thread came up .. no hassle to folks wanting dumbed down jeeps .. just calm reassurance that it would be fixed as i predicted and here I am again getting asked to cool it .. on yet another thread opened 26 hours after the germans complaints about jeeps is announced as corrected .. Maybe if the Allies won one I would go away ...
Warhorse if 5 bucks is all it takes.. I got 5 bucks that the US does not have any aircraft in '43 that are armed with rockets to take on tanks with and I'll send a seperate check for 5 bucks made out to you ( come on you can make it ten real easy ) when i send in my order for 5.0.. How about aknowledge elite US Infantry Rifle squads so the 100th Bn and the 332nd can be modeled in the Italian Campaign .. they fought along side the 36th until they were actually incorportated in it .. you know " Go for Broke" as they say .... Naval fire support without beach maps.. those guns reach inland.. and were used.. maybe after August 44 when the US started using VT fuses the US Arty could reflect the upgrade ?? US 57mm AT guns which happen to have a HE rating , have only AP ammo and are treated like brit 6 lbers , US M30 75mm having AT capablity instead of just HE ammo ( thats a real bummer) When the indirect fire version has AP (the M3 75mm ) Airborne M2 60mm should have smoke not just HE , those ultra expensive M2 x3 60mm fire exactly the same number of rounds as a single M2 , fixing that would be nice, M20's added instead of just M8 scout cars in 43 would be nice M8's HMC SP 75's having indirect fire would be nice.. M3 Stuarts and M5 Stuarts priced better in relationship to M4's so that folks don't feel like suckers for buying them ... and again .. given the fact that i don't go around starting these threads .. and just as i predicted when the jeep thread came up .. no hassle to folks wanting dumbed down jeeps .. just calm reassurance that it would be fixed as i predicted and here I am again getting asked to cool it .. on yet another thread opened 26 hours after the germans complaints about jeeps is announced as corrected .. Maybe if the Allies won one I would go away ...
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
-
David Heath
- Posts: 2529
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 5:00 pm
I think if you take any ONE point of anything you can turn it around or say this is wrong. This is what is being done here. No one has talked about the national ratings. The German are slow to break but hard to rally once they do. The US break much faster but also rally quicker. There are also a ton of other things to balance just this one point. In any case this is really a dum debat at this point. The new version is on its way and many many things have been changed.
P.S. AmmoSgt do you always make such loser bets.
One of the main reasons we developed the Rarity factor system was to stop the total Tigers Only crap. We also made it an option so you can turn off and on. Don't like it don't used it. Have a little faith and you maybe just a little surprised.
P.S. AmmoSgt do you always make such loser bets.
One of the main reasons we developed the Rarity factor system was to stop the total Tigers Only crap. We also made it an option so you can turn off and on. Don't like it don't used it. Have a little faith and you maybe just a little surprised.Jack good points .. that all should be factored in especially the STD's since the americans had penicilin ..and the germans didn't ..hehehheeee .. and yes can you imagine after north africa, and Kursk , and all how many deserters the germans had .. maybe the higher surrender rate among Germans should give the ones that didn't a morale boost .." we few , we merry few, we band of brothers " kinda thing ..or something .. maybe news of massive bombing raids of germany makes the front seem safer and makes happier german troops ..
my OOB shows a base cost of a US rifle squad available in 43 with Bazooka at 34 points( the Allies actually had bazookas) and airborne similarly equiped at 37 points while line german infantry base cost at 28 with german FJ w/ fausts at 32 but thats according to the OOB look it up .. while we are here lets discuss panzer fausts the 30 ( which stands for a range of 30 meters ) started production in aug 43 ( total august production was 6800) the 60 which ( again the range is ony 60 meters max not 2 hexes 100mm) wasn't produced until mid 44 my sources say august 44 and yet the germans have them in 43 italy .. talk about balancing the game ..geeze... but i will just be told not to make trouble .. the germans need equipment almost a year ahead of time for balance .. i know , i know ...
my OOB shows a base cost of a US rifle squad available in 43 with Bazooka at 34 points( the Allies actually had bazookas) and airborne similarly equiped at 37 points while line german infantry base cost at 28 with german FJ w/ fausts at 32 but thats according to the OOB look it up .. while we are here lets discuss panzer fausts the 30 ( which stands for a range of 30 meters ) started production in aug 43 ( total august production was 6800) the 60 which ( again the range is ony 60 meters max not 2 hexes 100mm) wasn't produced until mid 44 my sources say august 44 and yet the germans have them in 43 italy .. talk about balancing the game ..geeze... but i will just be told not to make trouble .. the germans need equipment almost a year ahead of time for balance .. i know , i know ...
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which