Gentlemen, the Commonwealth anti-armor rating of its infantry sections is WRONG.
Starting from 01/1943 Commonwealth infantry sections (African, Brit, Indian,AIF, KNIL etc) attain a ridiculously high anti-armor rating of 75. This rating equals that of combat engineers.
Looking at Tracker, we find device Bren Section (PIAT) (id 1010), with anti-armor rating of 75. Thus, we can deduce that its anti-armor rating represents PIAT spigot mortars. Also, notice that device Vickers Section (id 1017) also has anti-armor rating of 75, hinting at its inherent PIAT device, even though the very PIAT tag is missing from device description.
Notice that Commonwealth infantry section follow US infantry section in their incremental upgrade of anti-soft rating throughout the war. For example AIF infantry section changes from 20 to 22, and from 22 to 23 anti-soft rating. Whoever was putting that data into the Editor clearly updated anti-soft ratings with each infantry section iteration, while left their 75 anti-armor rating as the LAST anti-armor rating for those devices.
Notice that US Rifle squads ( devices 1101-1104) get both incemental anti-armor and anti-soft rating updates. Notice also that US infantry divisonal TOEs lacks separate anti-armor devices like Commonwealth's Bren and Vickers PIAT sections. Thus, the designers abstracted US Bazookas into US rifle squads' anti-armor rating, which gets incremental upticks each year.
Now, since Commonwealth TOEs put PIATs into sepearate device, its infantry section cannot have PIATS at the same time. The PIATs are moved from inf sections into Bren and Vickers PIAT sections by the designers. Brit divisional TOEs have 50-75 such PIAT sections depending on the year of the war, with Coronet 45 div TOE having 75 PIAT sections.
Thus, Commonwealth inf section anti-armor rating should be lower. What should it be then, you ask? Since the person putting the data into the Editor carefully changed anti-soft rating for each inf section iteration and left the anti-armor ratings untouched, we deduce the rating was to remain constant throughout the war.
Digit "7" can be sometimes misread from shorthanded digit "2". Thus, the only logical Commonwealth infantry rating for the entire war should be 25 instead of 75. It logically follows Jap Inf squad upgrade to 25 anti-armor rating starting 01/1943.
Changing the rating from 75 to 25 shall finally result in a more static and realistic Burma front, and balance the land war there, with the Commowealth divisons having the upper hand by having Bren and Vickers PIAT devices, which have no equal in Jap divisional TOEs.
Without this change, Jap players in Burma face around 420 "combat engineer" devices in each Commonwealth division (325 infantry sections, 50 PIATs, 36 combat eng squads) instead of just 80 (combat eng +PIATs). Also, if unchanged, Commonwealth divisions beat the Marine divisions in their shock attack capabilities. You should be taking Iwo Jima and Tarawa with AIF divisions instead of the Marines.
Prove me wrong.
< Message edited by Yaab -- 1/4/2021 7:35:44 AM >