Matrix Games Forums

A look through the keyhole #10!The Age of Shadows on Distant Worlds starts now!Paypal System UpdateDistant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!Armageddon invasion starts in 2014Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Powerful Panzers

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Time of Fury >> Powerful Panzers Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Powerful Panzers - 1/7/2012 9:04:57 PM   
doomtrader


Posts: 5237
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline 		Yep, those who visits the forum from time to time probably seen a thread about how powerful those German tanks are.
In other thread (http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2997479) we are deliberating, would it be wise to reduce speed of gathering experience by the units.

Except my proposition to just reduce the amount of XP gained by the units after each combat from 3 to 1 XP, we have got following proposition until now:
1. change the methodology of counting to:
quote:

hould be a percentage.. 100 - current = X ... that figure, lower exp results in larger .. multiplied by .1 thus 50 experience unit would gain
100 - 50= 50 multiplied by .1 = 5 gained.. but a 90 would only get 1 100-90=10 multiplied by .1 = 1


2. Introduce the XP cap.

3. Implement slow decrease of XP with every passing turn

4. Allow to gain experience only once per turn


All above are worth to consider.

But what about pure reducing of the Armored Units basic strength for about 30% ?

What do you think about that?

_____________________________

All the latest news about Wastelands Games.

Facebook
Post #: 1
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/7/2012 10:16:57 PM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 2944
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: doomtrader


But what about pure reducing of the Armored Units basic strength for about 30% ?

What do you think about that?


Assuming that basic strengths of units are in some way reflective of historical strengths, relative to each other, then that would not be good.

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 2
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/7/2012 11:22:32 PM   
oldspec4

 

Posts: 650
Joined: 11/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner


quote:

ORIGINAL: doomtrader


But what about pure reducing of the Armored Units basic strength for about 30% ?

What do you think about that?


Assuming that basic strengths of units are in some way reflective of historical strengths, relative to each other, then that would not be good.


I agree...unless I'm missing something here, I don't think the basic historical strength is the issue but rather the unhistorical increase in strength based on experience effects.

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 3
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/8/2012 12:54:58 AM   
RandomAttack


Posts: 129
Joined: 7/23/2009
From: Arizona
Status: offline 		I too agree. Personally, I still favor an XP cap. SImple & easy to implement.

(in reply to oldspec4)
Post #: 4
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/8/2012 1:28:45 AM   
Razz


Posts: 2499
Joined: 10/21/2007
From: CaLiForNia
Status: offline 		Experience is already capped at 100%. Can't go higher.

I don't think it's an experience problem. The Germans over all have too high of an effectivity to start with and then it gets larger and larger.

When you play other countries you don't have that problem with experience. It's just that the effectiveness is too high to start with as Germany.

However if you wanted to play with experience, number 1 looks as a good option.


(in reply to RandomAttack)
Post #: 5
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/8/2012 1:32:02 AM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 2944
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RandomAttack

I too agree. Personally, I still favor an XP cap. SImple & easy to implement.


I agree, like a 20 or 30% cap, with no more than a 1 experience gain per turn of combat. These mega units are a new phenomena in the RtV, ToW, ToF series. We don't need them.

(in reply to RandomAttack)
Post #: 6
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/8/2012 1:57:10 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8345
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		agreed, whatever the methedology, a 35-55 power unit of any type vs "strong " enemy corps in the 9-15 range ends up a slaughter

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 7
Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 3:26:15 AM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 1994
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

agreed, whatever the methedology, a 35-55 power unit of any type vs "strong " enemy corps in the 9-15 range ends up a slaughter


Are there any historical precedents to draw on? Was there ever a superbly-equipped, exquisitely-trained, incredibly-motivated armor corp that blew apart a better-than-average front-line defending corp in a single week? Maybe there is justification for a 50 point unit in the attackers arsenal but I agree that it should be the exception rather than the rule.

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 8
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 4:02:30 AM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 832
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline 		The real problem is that as your strength goes up...the easier it is to gain exp. I have been fighting a brutal air war with the british, and my exp cannot go up on my fighters, as I lose the exp when I reinforce. A natural brake.

There is no brake on the armour.

_____________________________

To the right General Patton, to the left the British Army, to the rear our own artillery, and besides all that its raining. And the only good thing to say about the weather: it keeps our air corps from blowing us all to Hell because its too lousy to fly.

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 9
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 5:16:31 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 597
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline 		Depends. Some of the German armoured formations were pretty damn good ... but, I believe, one important aspect of the problem has not yet been recognised ...

German armour did not operate alone when it was maximally effective ... even in the Blitzkrieg phase of Fall Gelb and Barbarossa it was intened to operate in conjunction with advancing infantry ... which would do most of the actual fighting even if it was seen to be mainly "mopping up" ...

When operating in post-Blitz periods ... after 1941, largely, the Panzers operated even more closely with the Infantry ...

Maybe the Panzers should only get experience when operating close to Infantry ... or, since that probably isn't possible, maybe they should get a much reduced experience bonus applied when attacking without Infantry.

Thus, at the beginning of an offensive, you could easily organise things so that armour attacks in conjunction with infantry initially ... but the breakthrough attacks wouldn't get the same benefit. And every turn after, as the Armour gets further and further ahead of the supporting infantry, it becomes more and more fragile ... which would, amongst other things, reflect reality much more closely.

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 10
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 5:29:40 AM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 1994
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: aspqrz
Maybe the Panzers should only get experience when operating close to Infantry ...


How then do you handle experience for Panzergrenadier ?


_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 11
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 6:34:50 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8345
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		the corps represents armor and infantry look at the troop numbers..
but we are trying to look at the hystory... one drawback is the game allows us to change things.. granted in great abstraction.. but If I research tanks.. my armor quality goes up...
remember its a game...
I was thinking about this thread as in a recent game france fell and I have armor gobling up little french units, I actually thought my unit might gain streangth right before my eyes as I wolfed down a meal of tiny inf... small satisfaction after my oponent  killed two panzer divisions! lol

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 12
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 6:38:00 AM   
battlevonwar

 

Posts: 176
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline 		Not sure what higher levels of Infantry Tech would or should do... Think they should also improve their anti-tank capabilities.

From ATG Rifles and Simple Sappers to handheld bazookas...To simple tactics like Molotov Cocktails on the driver's head. :P

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 13
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 7:57:41 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 597
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline 		Panzergrenadier and Panzer, at this level, are really the same. One has more tanks and less mechanised infantry, the other the other way around.

Historically, of course, there were Panzer Corps that had no Panzer or Panzergrenadier units and were all Infantry, and Infantry Corps that had tanks ... things got confused during the Russian Campaign, especially in 1943-45.

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 14
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 8:00:55 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 597
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy
the corps represents armor and infantry look at the troop numbers..


Yes, and if you look in the data files, that seems to be hard coded and have absolutely no game effect at all as far as I can tell.

AFAICT the only thing that has a game effect is the units actual Strength Points. Losses are a percentage of the nominal database strength, regardless. Infantry is infantry, armour is armour, mechanised is a mix of armour and mechanised infantry ... numbers of infantry, guns and tanks are irrelevant, purely colour.

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 15
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 10:13:32 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1471
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: battlevonwar
Not sure what higher levels of Infantry Tech would or should do... Think they should also improve their anti-tank capabilities.

From ATG Rifles and Simple Sappers to handheld bazookas...To simple tactics like Molotov Cocktails on the driver's head. :P


Early in the war the average infantry unit had little to fight tanks with, hence the 'tank fright', especially in France 1940, when even the report of tanks could cause a panic. The German AAA '88' had to be pressed into service as a stopgap, because the normal infantry anti-tank weapons were so poor, but later in the war the weapons available to the infantry could match anything carried by the tanks.

Additionaly, later infantry units received capable individual weapons, such as the bazooka, panzer faust, etc., such that it was the tanks that became frightened to move without infantry support.

Therefore, whatever is added in infantry anti-tank capabilities should be progressive, improving as the game develops, or does tech level and/or doctrine cover this.


_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 16
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 4:38:52 PM   
RandomAttack


Posts: 129
Joined: 7/23/2009
From: Arizona
Status: offline 		We're all focusing on XP, but since the real culprit is overall EFFECIENCY (for which XP is but one component), how about an (experimental) efficiency cap?? Is there one already and how could one change it (IIR from the manual, eff. has NO limits)? If we can find an appropriate effeciency cap, we could THEN perhaps fiddle with the individual efficiency components so that there wouldn't need to be an overt efficiency cap...

I still have a problem with the basic construct that if your unit strength is "10" based on hardware, numbers & basic processes, that it can become "30" (or more) through doctrine, XP, etc. That just seems to give way too much credit to these factors (cumulatively).

Change all "efficiency" to "effectiveness" -- sorry...

< Message edited by RandomAttack -- 1/8/2012 4:45:44 PM >

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 17
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 5:04:41 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8345
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		well.. the Germans ran over the French and English, using  beter tactics against more men and more TANKS and also more heavily armored and guned. They held teh edge in planes, but the real wow was the tactics and "blitz" employed.. so, I think 10 is a poor choice becasue it looks like 100%, but well lead and trained troops with superior tactics will beat better armed. or worse armed, troops.. again in 41 the red army lost stupid high numbers in part due to don't dig in  mindset...
So, what should be the factors making up the strength of formations ? Unity of comand?
Panzer Lehr fighting essentially to the death, under 1000 men in france and remaining  effective verses US divisions taking far less and being combat ineffective.. now everyone has there example, but this game shines in its simple use of combined arms.. trust me, those German tanks aren't going anywhere against dug in troops without air support.. IN THIS GAME..
So what is important???

(in reply to RandomAttack)
Post #: 18
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/8/2012 5:49:34 PM   
jjdenver

 

Posts: 1227
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline 		Overall I think the game is broken until you reduce the power of individual units.

I have stopped playing the game completely due to 2 reasons:

1) The Soviet units are reduced to 1% effectiveness when war starts with Germany. This allows Germany to drive through the Caucaus oilfields completely within a few months of campaigning. It doesn't matter at all what sort of defense the Soviets put up along their advance because the German 15+ strength units are completely unstoppable. This is ahistorical in so many ways (supply chain, Soviet defense was actually much better than this, etc). It makes the realism of Babarossa a joke.

2) Individual units are way too strong. The 20 strength German units vs less than 1 strength Soviet units causes the German to be unstoppable by any defense even in fortified lines.....but far worse is that the Germans are barely attrited by the Soviet defenders. Their losses are extremely small. Historically for the Germans to drive their panzer beyond Smolensk they took huge losses and by the time they reached Moscow there were panzer divisions with less than 15 operational tanks and infantry regiments reduced to less than 100 effectives. This isn't modeled at all in the game because it is very easy to add replacements to units quickly in Russia and also because the very over-powered German units take very small losses in the game.

I hope you can fix this stuff because really I can't play the game as it is.

Cheers

< Message edited by jjdenver -- 1/8/2012 5:50:43 PM >

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1735661

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 19
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 6:09:13 PM   
RandomAttack


Posts: 129
Joined: 7/23/2009
From: Arizona
Status: offline 		Freeboy, I'm making no argument against a substantial impact, only that it's not x3, x4 , or potentially infinite. And I'm not disputing or wanting to change the basic combat values already determined. I think much of what you cite (intangibles) is covered in the land warfare doctirne advantage--and THAT is not part of the "basic strength" I was talking about, it's a modifier, and it's POWERFUL (and rightly so). After that, I think the cumulative effects of positive modifiers should be capped. Yes, you can die gloriously fighting until the last man (for ANY side)-- but you're just as dead. I don't dispute your Panzer Lehr example of dedication, but if they were down to 1000 men they shouldn't have a strength of "20" in this game just because they are in supply, have a great leader, great doctrine, lots of experience, and their one remaining tank in running condition is a King Tiger...

jjdenver: I agree. This also gets to my fundamental point about effectiveness. All the work gone into calculating the "base" combat value is completely overshadowed when you do something like making a unit "1% effective", OR "300% effective". The base values seem reasonable to me, they are just getting skewed by huge amounts.

< Message edited by RandomAttack -- 1/8/2012 6:20:52 PM >

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 20
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 7:10:56 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8345
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		right, Random, understand.. so again, what should make up a proper unit? Perhaps air units are too fragile and infantry should be able to dig in.. but fortified or dug in units should then not be able to rout without a penelty.. in other words, tough to push out, but if they fail they are punished.. would make armor attacks against in place for several turn defenders impossible..

(in reply to RandomAttack)
Post #: 21
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 7:38:49 PM   
Razz


Posts: 2499
Joined: 10/21/2007
From: CaLiForNia
Status: offline 		The Soviet effectiveness drop is just temporary.

The AI can survive it just like a human.

Perhaps you should open up a thread about this and people can give snap shot in time of how the Soviet forces are doing.

It's not as bad as you think.

Should the penalty be reduced? That's what the thread would be about.

Remember when the effectiveness of German units drop the Soviets will do better after the patch.

So what you see now will improve a little.

< Message edited by Razz -- 1/8/2012 7:40:25 PM >

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 22
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 7:39:59 PM   
doomtrader


Posts: 5237
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline 		Units are digging in when idle.

_____________________________

All the latest news about Wastelands Games.

Facebook

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 23
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 7:52:42 PM   
RandomAttack


Posts: 129
Joined: 7/23/2009
From: Arizona
Status: offline

quote:

right, Random, understand.. so again, what should make up a proper unit?


I really am not arguing for a change in basic values at this point-- just a cap on effectiveness to see if it reduces the "Powerful Panzers" to a reasonable level without "breaking" something else. If it DOES have that result, then to consider tweaking the various COMPONENTS of effectiveness to get a similar result vice the cap. I would do it myself just to experiment, but I don't see a way to implement a cap in the consts file (I could just be missing it).

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 24
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 9:10:53 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8345
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		the tank on tank seems ok... and I plan to test my red defenses soon as  my player oponenet  redies for barbarrossa.. I understand the effectivness issue.. played both sides.. I was pusshing hard in a prior servor game concentrating armor in the south... its tough to stop the Germans in 41, completely hisorical.. its what happens from the mud of fall to summer 42... we will see

(in reply to RandomAttack)
Post #: 25
RE: Historical justification for Death Star Panzer Corps? - 1/8/2012 9:38:53 PM   
battlevonwar

 

Posts: 176
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline 		Yes, I would love to see that Infantry keep toe to toe against Tanks later as the game progresses. (some type of script, evolution, doctrine would be nice to keep infantry competitive) I am about to start a Barbarossa Scenario vs a Real Human. It's going to be different and I know after he watched what my Panzers did that mass infantry is mass graves. Early in the game(which is okay)
P.S. a few 88s with their range, uncontested in open terrain are deadly.

P.S.S. Infantry so far are speedbumps and garrisons

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 26
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/8/2012 9:54:39 PM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 1994
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jjdenver
I have stopped playing the game completely due to 2 reasons:

1) The Soviet units are reduced to 1% effectiveness when war starts with Germany. This allows Germany to drive through the Caucaus oilfields completely within a few months of campaigning. It doesn't matter at all what sort of defense the Soviets put up along their advance because the German 15+ strength units are completely unstoppable. This is ahistorical in so many ways (supply chain, Soviet defense was actually much better than this, etc). It makes the realism of Babarossa a joke.

I hope you can fix this stuff because really I can't play the game as it is.

Cheers


I agree that the USSR can't stand and fight toe-to-toe in 1941 but there are other ways to skin the cat. I posted an example of a swarm defence for the USSR which I've used successfully against the Axis three times. When you use this strategy then any 1941 Panzer advance on the Caucaus oilfields becomes self-correcting - they can't advance when they're dead

I'm sure other players have their other defence strategies for the USSR that work equally well.


_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to jjdenver)
Post #: 27
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/8/2012 11:01:13 PM   
oldspec4

 

Posts: 650
Joined: 11/1/2004
Status: offline 		Playing as the Russians, I had a defense in depth of approx. three lines before the German invasion. I actually did ok trading space for time through 1941.

Until the panzer monsters showed up in mid-1942, I had level three infantry technology and was counter attacking in various areas; and regaining territory.

Hard to fight the 50+ strength german armor though after July '42 .

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 28
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/9/2012 12:41:57 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1471
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft
quote:

ORIGINAL: jjdenver
I have stopped playing the game completely due to 2 reasons:

1) The Soviet units are reduced to 1% effectiveness when war starts with Germany. This allows Germany to drive through the Caucaus oilfields completely within a few months of campaigning. It doesn't matter at all what sort of defense the Soviets put up along their advance because the German 15+ strength units are completely unstoppable. This is ahistorical in so many ways (supply chain, Soviet defense was actually much better than this, etc). It makes the realism of Babarossa a joke.

I hope you can fix this stuff because really I can't play the game as it is.

Cheers


I agree that the USSR can't stand and fight toe-to-toe in 1941 but there are other ways to skin the cat. I posted an example of a swarm defence for the USSR which I've used successfully against the Axis three times. When you use this strategy then any 1941 Panzer advance on the Caucaus oilfields becomes self-correcting - they can't advance when they're dead

I'm sure other players have their other defence strategies for the USSR that work equally well.


Is part of the problem that rail lines in captured territory become usable too soon. I have had to use a self imposed restriction on using captured rail, otherwise I would sometimes have no trouble in rail moving units right up behind the armoured spearheads, deep in Russia.

I was moving my advancing units along the rail lines to clear them, but that just caused rail damage, if you move beside the rail hexes, provided there are no enemy ZOCs near the hexes containing the rail lines, they will convert to your control with little damage. Especially in the USSR all rail hexes should be damaged, whenever hex ownership changes, because the rail gauge has to be changed before rail can be used by the new owner.

Even in Western Europe I think the captured rail hexes become usable too soon, they don't all have to suffer damage, but there should be a chance of damage on change of ownership, not just because there has been combat, or movement through the hex. This represents not just physical damage to the rails, but that all the rail workers have left and fighting front-line units don't usually run trains. There should be more of a delay in getting support engineers forward and reinstating rails, representing not just the physical repair, but staffing the system.

The Allies had powerful armoured units in France in 1944 and ran out of supply at the German border, they were mainly reliant on road supply, as the rail system had been destroyed by Allied airpower. It took a long time to get the rail system working again. The Germans had powerful armoured units which were also partially reliant on road supply, because of the time it took to convert Soviet rail.

Perhaps a more realistic rail repair timetable would reduce the effect of too powerful armoured units, not because they should be less powerful, but because they are supplied and supported too quickly and can unrealistically retain their power..


_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 29
RE: Powerful Panzers - 1/9/2012 6:49:03 PM   
JLPOWELL


Posts: 373
Joined: 5/5/2011
From: Pacific Time Zone
Status: offline 		I didn't start out intending this to so critical but the closer I looked the worse this looks.
Effectively this isn't experience its German experience. It favors attackers ONLY and that's pretty unbalanced. In addition experience is, as implemented, way overrated and if it were up to me I would just drop it as it detracts more than it adds.
To fix IMO:
- Put a cap on it 25% effectiveness max 10% or 20% more likely
- Not diluted when replacements are made surviving this allows defenders to accumulate some and makes actually wiping out a unit more important (encouraging envelopment’s etc) and offsets the effect of the cap somewhat if implemented BTW this would more realistically emulate experience as actually gained surviving veterans stiffen units a bit but don't
- Slow it down perhaps to about 1/4 for attacking units
- Optionally - Rather than effectiveness once units reach a certain level of experience (the cap probably) give then an extra AP (again this may be a play balance problem but operational skill in manouvre is a more realistic effect of experience)

You don't see any 'Tyrannosaurus Tank' Corps in the later game scenario orders of battle so why allow players to make these ridiculous units in campaign games? Rough calculations indicate it is possible to get 60+ point units just redeploy a pair of those bad boys to France and punt any invasion to the moon. Of course the US would probably drop A-Bombs on them so maybe they are not completely invincible (Is there any other way to kill one of these particularly if there is another one or two around?). The difference is the US actually built A-Bombs where as these monster tank units belong in a Japanese SciFi movie perhaps Godzilla vs 10th SS Panzer.

_____________________________

"Don’t you think that if I were wrong, I’d know it?"

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Time of Fury >> Powerful Panzers Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.645