Diversity of effective units

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Diversity of effective units

      Hello all,

      Love that the game has various units and muliple approaches to tactics. There is only one problem - more then 50% of those units rarely or never see play. I am looking at you rocket fighter and strat bomber in particular, but also tank destroyers and (advanced) infantry units rarely see play. Which I find a shame, because diversity keeps the game fresh.


      Some suggestions on my part towards the devs - because I know you guys do tweaking. The sub got the deserved nerf bat for example.

      Nerfs

      1: the tac bombers.

      The tac bomber situation is getting a bit silly. They are basically the arties of S1914 now. Yes, they can be countered, but only moderately if tac bombers are the main focus of a players strategy along with 1 certain other unit. Options to think about:

      - Have them 'take' damage first when in a stack, or a higher % of damage distribution, say 75% of all damage done to an airplane stack goes to tacs and/or
      - weaker defense against all other units or
      - slightly lower attack values (say 0,5 value per level) or
      - make them more expensive to either research, build, upkeep or all 3

      2: Next up, the light tank

      While the LT is fine on its own, its the combination with the tac bombers that makes it so deadly. The disadvantage in cities is pointless if a city is leveled by the tacs

      Suggestions I have few of - because I dont think there is something wrong with the unit. Perhaps reduce speed somewhat (so ACs get more useful as well) or reduce HP by 5 points. What to nerf (or not) depends on whether you will hit the tac bomber with the nerf bat.

      3: Rockets.

      Need they be discussed? Keep them strategic - increase infra damage considerably, but decrease unit damage to 'nearly useless against units'. They basically are a better strategic bomber - one use or not

      Buffs:

      1: Strategic bombers

      More damage against units - I am willing to bet no infantry garrison likes 3000 kg bombs on their barracks. Say 0,5 point per level? Maybe 0,8?

      2: Mech infantry

      Simple solution to make them interesting - make them infantry class. Late game units, they should be able to shine against MTs and HTs

      3: Motorized infantry

      Just a tiiiiiny buff compared to regular infantry in stats. Say 2,5 HP and 0,25 damage per level.

      4: Tank destroyers

      Buff attack value (defense value is fine) so its at least as strong as a medium tank. Reduce values against infantry and planes - making it the specialist unit it ought to be - punishing opponents who choose a solo tank strategy

      5: Rocket fighter

      Last but not least. I havent built a single one of those, ever. And I am not alone in this Im willing to bet. Buff their stats a LOT (say 18/18) and/or increase range (yes, not very historical, I know) and/or have multiple levels and/or make them able to shoot down lvl2+ rockets.

      Edit

      6: How could I forget the railgun?

      Simple solution, give them a big AA buff - as it can be imagined they would have several AA units on top of the train that carries the gun. Say 2 AA points. Multiple levels also a solution?

      end Edit

      I dont know if this is read or passed along by/to the devs, but look at it as my non-monetary way to contribute to an excellent game, of which there isnt a single multiplayer wargame that has its equal. If there is, I havent found it.

      The other units are fine, such as fighters, arties (vast improvement over S1914!, they have the role they should have) and ATs. Naval is pretty balanced now as well in my view.

      The reason I wrote this Game of Thrones sized rant, is that I believe with changes like this players will see a more diverse battlefield, instead of only building 4-5 types of units (being figs/tacs, LTs and here and there some arties or infs). Maybe you can actually win with an infantry strategy for a change!

      The post was edited 1 time, last by miech ().

    • I use both Infantry and Strat bomber very often, so I tend not to agree with your first postulations. Yes rocket fighter sucks, everyone knows that. And yes, TD is not good as an offensive weapon, which I think, historically is correct - since it was slow and heavy.

      1) Tac bombers. Many players complain about the strength. It might be a little too powerful, but not that much.

      They are already one of the most expensive units in the game. Yes, they are superior, but against a stack that has a decent amount of AA AND Infantry (cannot stress this enough) then the planes start losing HP fast. Also, if that player has enough fighters, it will be able to counter just fine.

      I simply don't agree, I just think there are many "bad players" out there, that don't know how to use planes or are simply not active enough to counter against a decent player that use planes.

      2) Light tank is fast and maybe too strong. A slight HP nerf or attack points nerf could be relevant. Though I think it's pretty easy to counter with a variety of units. If you are on the defensive you have the opportunity of faster speed...

      3) Motor infantry. Already decent against non-infantry specialized armor and standard infantry. I don't think they need to be changed much, but a little HP upgrade would be fine.

      4) Mechanized Infantry. Need to stay armor class, since it gives them an edge against planes and other infantry (except AT). They are still powerful against armor (sort of). And they are sooo fast.
      Sincerely, wildL
      EN Mod
      Report a problem

    • I think it mostly sounds very well and good, bit iffy on the RINT shooting down lvl 2 rockets though and TB aren't that OP.

      wildL SPQR wrote:

      And yes, TD is not good as an offensive weapon, which I think, historically is correct - since it was slow and heavy.
      One of/the fastest tank every created was an American tank destroyer. The things could be pretty nippy, just German ones were really slow. Soviet ones generally traveled at 40-55 km/h at max speed, with the slowest one being 37 km/h, which was the ISU-152.
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:



    • I'm new to the forums but a heavy plane user in game. The tac bombers are okay. I use them to clear the way for ground units(as they should) and therefore spend less on ground units, because I invest heavier in air power. However, if someone has decent AA(be it mobile or fixed), then my tac air is not necessarily the most advantageous offensive strategy for me to follow. When I run into a decent/good/heavy AA player, I of course adjust my tactics.

      To the original OP's post, I say leave the rocket fighters as they are. If you do much more to them, then the historic "value" becomes null imo.

      P.S. And yes, I use infantry.
      Someone once asked, 'What is the difference between me and Saddam Hussein?' The answer is, 'I have a conscience and he doesn't.'- Norman Schwarzkopf

      - Boomer Sooner :!: :!: - :thumbup:
    • I have to agree with most of the observations presented by @miech. And that is unfortunate. For me. I agree because I noticed some of the things he has wrote. Unfortunate because I utilize most of the stuff he noticed and ignore most of the units just like he said. And in the current state of the game, I don't think I am doing it wrong. I fear that there is now a chance that tactical bombers get nerfed in some way, which could be problematic, at least for me. However, I don't think they are overpowered. Interceptors kill them easily, so I still have hope that there will be no nerfing considering that.
    • I Agree. I wouldn't "NERF" the Tac bombers in regards to land units. Just because some players want to use a different strategy than LOTS of air power, doesn't mean the units are weighted wrong. It could be the style of play is different. Nothing wrong with this.

      In short, in my humble opinion, it comes down to this: If you don't want to get bombed, be prepared to defend against it. Also, in attacking with bombers, I should be ready to accept those losses against an AA equipped opponent. On both sides though, the players should be willing to adapt strategy to what they are faced with, not what they wish to see. That's not how you win the war.

      I also use Naval power more than others I think. Does this mean the ships have an advantage to them?
      Someone once asked, 'What is the difference between me and Saddam Hussein?' The answer is, 'I have a conscience and he doesn't.'- Norman Schwarzkopf

      - Boomer Sooner :!: :!: - :thumbup:
    • wildL SPQR wrote:

      @Quasi-duck About TD's - I did not know that. However, I doubt it was used much offensively?
      Nope, TD's were used offensively. The tactic for the USSR was that they could have a bigger gun on an older chassis while they figured out how to get the gun on a bigger turret ring on an old tank chassis design. E.g. the T-34 -> SU-85 -> T-34/85. So they just stuck the gun in a mantlet.

      For the Americans, the TD was made to combat enemy armour, tanks were for infantry support. This meant that TD had to be fast, mobile, and have a proper turret to quickly turn to combat enemy troops that ambush. To achieve this, TD had to have light armour.

      For the Germans, well, their TD had no turret so they were cheap as chips and were basically guns mounted on older tanks or even tractors (Panzerjaegar I, Marder series). The Germans were low on money so they had to think smart.
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:



    • A good stack of Mech Infatry, Tank destroyers and Mobile AA can defeat all enemy's they find on the battlefield pretty much and move at speed. But beware of nukes and arty. So no one tactic is a win all situation, there is always a counter to be had, same with units in that all units can be countered and counter other units

      Forum Gang Divine Entity :00000156:

      Taking over the Forum 1 post at a time.
    • I agree with most of the points that Czar makes here.

      It really is a game of cost-efficiency - on rare occasions the game drags out and end-game units become "a new factor" that can really change the game, but at it's core only a few units are worthwhile. (Planes, LT, DD)

      The thing about "the other units" is that once a game goes long and you have 100's of industrial centers you can begin to spam units that will make your defensive points impenetrable; at that point you only need a couple of handful of industrial centers to spam your offensive units (near the frontlines) and the others can focus on defensive units/low upkeep units such as AA, AT, Infantry and LT stacks and place them in your forts and coasts. Also, in the end it doesn't really matter if you have -1000 food/hr because your resource production will be insane.

      Forts are a great means to add some depth in the defense in the early game and can help you hold your positions against a LT/Plane spammer.
      Sincerely, wildL
      EN Mod
      Report a problem