teutonkopf Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I think Radio Command & Control should be added as an upgradeable research technology. Each unit type would have it as an upgradeable attribute that would increase the unit's effectiveness. Radio Command & Control allowed under-armored, under-gunned german tanks to fair well against heavier soviet tanks which was a game-changer in the Battle of Russia. It allowed german close air support to be more effective which was a game-changer in the Blitzkrieg. It allowed german bombers to be more effective at night bombing (see my Night Warfare post) which was a game-changer in the Blitz. It allowed british fighters to be more effective at interception which was a game changer in the Battle of Britain. It increased the effectiveness of american artillery at mass concentration of fire which was a game-changer in North Africa and Europe. In each of these examples those units' higher radio command and control capability made them superior to their counterparts among the other major powers and gave them a distinct advantage. It could also be upgradeable for HQ units and they would finally have an upgradeable tech. As such, it would further increase the effectiveness of units as a representation of better combined arms coordination. German panzers and stukas used their UHF radios for well-coordinated attacks which was a game-changer in the Battle of France. v/r, Teutonkopf Fuhrer Teutonicus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 I think Radio Command & Control should be added as an upgradeable research technology. Each unit type would have it as an upgradeable attribute that would increase the unit's effectiveness. Radio Command & Control allowed under-armored, under-gunned german tanks to fair well against heavier soviet tanks which was a game-changer in the Battle of Russia. It allowed german close air support to be more effective which was a game-changer in the Blitzkrieg. It allowed german bombers to be more effective at night bombing (see my Night Warfare post) which was a game-changer in the Blitz. It allowed british fighters to be more effective at interception which was a game changer in the Battle of Britain. It increased the effectiveness of american artillery at mass concentration of fire which was a game-changer in North Africa and Europe. In each of these examples those units' higher radio command and control capability made them superior to their counterparts among the other major powers and gave them a distinct advantage. It could also be upgradeable for HQ units and they would finally have an upgradeable tech. As such, it would further increase the effectiveness of units as a representation of better combined arms coordination. German panzers and stukas used their UHF radios for well-coordinated attacks which was a game-changer in the Battle of France. v/r, Teutonkopf Fuhrer Teutonicus @Fuhrer --- I'm with you dude. Hey, are you one of those Teutonic Knight dudes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teutonkopf Posted October 23, 2009 Author Share Posted October 23, 2009 @Rambo: tk stands for Teutonkopf. My signature is a pun for Totenkopf, Furor Teutonicus (Death's Head, Teutonic Fury), but mine means "German Head, German Leader" (Teutonkopf, Fuhrer Teutonicus). I made that up. But hey, tk is also a pun for Teutonic Knight -- whatta you know! That'll work! Yeah, Yeah, I meant to do that... That's the ticket! v/r, tk fuhrer-T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carverrt Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 Teutonkopf, Interesting idea. But, how about if Radio C2 were a technology that Headquarters units could upgrade. Same idea you have, just upgrade the Headquarters unit as radio communications between ground, air and the commander would improve an army’s capability. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 Always thought "control" would be an interesting feature. Units might not want to "obey" as always commanded. @TheFuhrer --- Welcome to the party, you're making great suggestions. Would you consider yourself a Bunta? -Legend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teutonkopf Posted October 23, 2009 Author Share Posted October 23, 2009 @Rambo: I've never heard the term Bunta before. I did a websearch and the term seems to have several connotations. Can't say I'm sure what you're talking about... v/r, tk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 @Rambo: I've never heard the term Bunta before. I did a websearch and the term seems to have several connotations. Can't say I'm sure what you're talking about... v/r, tk The interent does not hold all of life's answers Bunta is the word for a German worshipper. What does v/r mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teutonkopf Posted October 23, 2009 Author Share Posted October 23, 2009 I am a history buff. WWII is probably my strongest area. Germany is probably my strongest area within the genre. (America is really my strongest area, but I don't count that since I'm an American and that is a given.) Due to the disturbing nature of the some of the images found on the buntaland website's main page, I'd have to reject any association with "Bunta". v/r = very respectfully. v/r, tk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 @tk --- Cool, you are self declaring & rejecting the ways of Bunta, of your own free will. You have passed the test. Which games & scenarios of SC are you playing? -Legend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teutonkopf Posted October 24, 2009 Author Share Posted October 24, 2009 I've played PDE: Storm of Steel, and Shattered Alliance so far... v/r, tk-ft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 Glad to have you aboard son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSS Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 Death Head I can actually semi see your agrument here, you are talking about a ubiversal tactical application that covers ALL units involved in the war VS an extremely small chrome application. This idea has merits but would be interesting to see if you can apply stratiegicaly, I do not mean to rag you in post I disagree with you on, it is there is a unbridgeable gap between Tactical and Stratiecic. I will gladly cheerleader any innovative Modding the makes for a more diverse and interesting provided we keep it in scale perportinal to the scale of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts