BioWizard Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Upgrading tanks in real life is providing them better weaponry, plating, maneuverability, communications and others. However, in SC2, two strenght 10 LVL5 tanks both with high morale/readiness/supply and no entrenchment attacking each other will everytime come very close to destroy each other out. To me, that seems illogic. Upgrading a tank division should not only be providing them with increased canon caliber/more heavy shells. As it is right now, those level 5 tanks are punching hard and waiting to be punched right back just like lined up rows of american infantry and british infantry waitng in line to be shot at during the USA independence war. I see two solutions for this issue. Heavy tank LVL1-3-5 could be increasing their attack value while LVL2 and 4 could increase their defense value. Another possibility could be adding a tank defense technology. While we're at it, why not a corps/army defense tech? There is no such thing as better armor for a plain soldier but an infantry defense tech could be called "guerilla tactics" as soldiers hide better or start street by street fighting as those fierce russian did in Stalingrad. I know all this could be affecting a lot game balance but what do you guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Hummmmm, B..."Wizard" is it? Ever here of aircraft and antitank weapons? They're both in the game. I won't mention Artillery, which masquerades as Rockets, but they've also been known to be effective. Try them first and then clean up with your level 5 tanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John DiFool the 2nd Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 The point whizzed right above SM's head methinks... I at least am aware of that BM and pointed it out in the recent thread on the Battle for Russia. Tank combat is bloody at all levels but esp. as you go up the tech ladder. Armor tech (as a subsidiary of tank tech) should count for something in there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scook Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Actually, I find when more advanced tanks hit the board and go against each other, that is some pretty realistic action. Later in the war as schwepunkt tactics became refined, artillery and aircraft led ahead of tank attacks vs other tanks to never make it a fair fight. The counter attacks from both German and Soviet without support were extremely bloody affairs for both sides. To put it into modern tanks, if you were to have 2 modern companies of M1-A1 tanks go against each other in heads up action, barring suprise factors, maybe 3-5 tanks from each side would be lucky to be moving after the engagement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyazinth von Strachwitz Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Just a bit off topic, I know... What really annoys me sometimes: I have a german Tank group level 5/2 fighting a russian tank group level 3/1 or 3/0.. although I have HQ support and they don`t have, morale and so on is better on my side, experience levels are equal and entrechment levels are zero, the losses are almost even.. I cannot really see the inner logic behind it.. [ July 19, 2006, 03:04 AM: Message edited by: Hyazinth von Strachwitz ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Ranger Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 the mobility factor has no effect.. and what does almost even mean? that they take 2 pts more damage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BioWizard Posted July 19, 2006 Author Share Posted July 19, 2006 To SeaMonkey: Yes, I heard about aircraft decreasing morale/readiness. But it is not a issue here if the topic is about talking about the outcome of two lvl5 tanks with equal readiness/morale/supply. Of course, in game, i would first soften the ennemy with air support before taking them down. However, if we push the logic as to think that the best armors we could find at the end of WWII were lvl5, the tanks in the 70s were lvl8 and the abrams M1A1 are LVL15. Still, there's never been a fighting between two divisions of M1A1, but the outcome of such a fight using a SC2 type of calculation would be that every single tank is busted. At the very least, one tank should survive such a confrontation. Also, if we were simulating in SC2 a fight between this super fighting machine that the M1s are against a puny Sherman WWII type, the SC2 engine would still inflict damage to the M1s because heavy tank technology affects at the moment only their attack value. Of course, the sherman would be turned to dust in the process... But, in real life,there is no way the M1s (thick armor whose composition is Top Secret covered with highly reactive exploding plates/ uranium shells with its 120 mm cannon) would suffer a scratch against them. Why, because the SC2 engine does not improve their defense value. As I recall, Panthers could survive many direct hits from sherman's without being rendered inoperational. That is called better armor, better defense value... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Go buy CMBB. Load up "A Clash of Titans". See how many JS-3's and King Tigers you have left at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 OK BW, fair enough, but this game isn't about defense, IMO. Seems to me its about the effectiveness of attack and the follow up and positioning for a continuation of the attack, ie the name "Blitzkrieg". Upgrades in tanks also include heavier caliber weapons and more efficient types of ammo for penetration. It just seems to get bloodier and bloodier, the killing gets so effective. If we start getting into defensive measures of the ground units we could again end up with the static characteristics of the original SC. Not saying it can't be accomplished, but it will have to be approached with scrutiny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I think the Armor got thicker so the Tank could go further and last longer so it could kill more. I cannot argue the killing power improvement of Level5 Tanks. What would survive a Jugernaught? Really? Nothing was meant to. The only that survived tankwise, was when the tank cut down infantry, ATGs, and other weapondry that wasn't as suited as it was to the role it was in. Initially that was the case. Though the Russians and German perfected Tank Tactics and later so did the Americanas...The British not so bad themselves in N.Africa... It was a war of attrittion Tanks, and in the end the Germans had none and no fuel.. Air should add a tech! Anti-Tank for Air instead of Infantry. Who the hell needs antitank for infantry, I want 5 level 3 antitank Fighters with 5 bars, knocking off 3 tanks per turn ALONE that's realism folks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts