Commonwealth upgrades

[Fartknock3r]

I think US and Uk should share their tech. But if this were to happen then it would have to be playtested. Canada should also share the same tech.

[Scook]

I can live with British minors (Canada, Australia, New Zeland, and India only) getting tech upgrades and leaving the rest well enough alone. Axis minor should be the whipping boys on the Eastern Front, even if it is only a play balance step.

[Scook]

I can live with British minors (Canada, Australia, New Zeland, and India only) getting tech upgrades and leaving the rest well enough alone. Axis minor should be the whipping boys on the Eastern Front, even if it is only a play balance step.

[Scook]

ya know, I was just thinking about tech also.....

since there are only 3 levels for Inf upgrades, and I imagine it goes 5%, 4%, 3%, it should really go 5%, 3%, 1%. That should make IW3 quite a bit harder to get. That should also let the Aliies catch up early to IW1, and IW3 overall will happen later (yes, luck exists, my friend as Russia had IW3 before I invaded in 1941. Not a game breaker, but made it a whole lot tougher).

[Scook]

ya know, I was just thinking about tech also.....

since there are only 3 levels for Inf upgrades, and I imagine it goes 5%, 4%, 3%, it should really go 5%, 3%, 1%. That should make IW3 quite a bit harder to get. That should also let the Aliies catch up early to IW1, and IW3 overall will happen later (yes, luck exists, my friend as Russia had IW3 before I invaded in 1941. Not a game breaker, but made it a whole lot tougher).

[Rolend]

I will say it again CW troops should have the exact same tech as the English. As for sharing between US and England well maybe some kind of % as not all techs on both sides were shared. As for the Axies, yea making the minors anything more then cannon fodder would not be very historical, besides it takes a lot more to use a new weapon then just the weapon, it takes training and the Axies minnor troops had very little of that.

[Rolend]

I will say it again CW troops should have the exact same tech as the English. As for sharing between US and England well maybe some kind of % as not all techs on both sides were shared. As for the Axies, yea making the minors anything more then cannon fodder would not be very historical, besides it takes a lot more to use a new weapon then just the weapon, it takes training and the Axies minnor troops had very little of that.

[Exel]

Originally posted by dicedtomato:

Giving a lot of German tech to Axis Allies is a bad idea for a couple of reasons:

1. Ahistorical. A few German Lend-Lease Stugs and Me-109s are insignificant on SC2's strategic level. If Germany reaches IW3 in 1942, then the whole Romanian Army should not be upgraded to IW2. Remember that the Axis Allies were allied in name only. They frequently hated and distrusted each other.

2. The last thing the Axis need is more help. The last thing Russia needs is a half-dozen Axis Allied units that are higher tech than the Red Army.

German arms exports to its peers was considerable. It may have not been a huge portion of its production, but it sure was significant considering the size of the receiving forces. The number of minor units isn't so big that it would tip the balance off to any direction, and the funds for the upgrades would still have to come from German MPPs. I just don't see why the minor units should be inherently weaker than those of the majors. It is written history that German anti-tank weapons in Finnish hands horrified the Soviet tankers in 1944 much like Molotov cocktails had in 1939. Bf109s formed the bulk of Finnish Air Force in 1941-45 and the same was true with PzKpfw III and IV for the Rumanian armor. Romania built indigenous fighters, the IAR-80, which equalled early Bf109s.

Then of course we can remember that neither Romania or Finland has tank groups and only Romania has an air fleet. It would not be disproportionate to allow Finns and Rumanians to benefit from -1 Axis techs.

[Exel]

Originally posted by dicedtomato:

Giving a lot of German tech to Axis Allies is a bad idea for a couple of reasons:

1. Ahistorical. A few German Lend-Lease Stugs and Me-109s are insignificant on SC2's strategic level. If Germany reaches IW3 in 1942, then the whole Romanian Army should not be upgraded to IW2. Remember that the Axis Allies were allied in name only. They frequently hated and distrusted each other.

2. The last thing the Axis need is more help. The last thing Russia needs is a half-dozen Axis Allied units that are higher tech than the Red Army.

German arms exports to its peers was considerable. It may have not been a huge portion of its production, but it sure was significant considering the size of the receiving forces. The number of minor units isn't so big that it would tip the balance off to any direction, and the funds for the upgrades would still have to come from German MPPs. I just don't see why the minor units should be inherently weaker than those of the majors. It is written history that German anti-tank weapons in Finnish hands horrified the Soviet tankers in 1944 much like Molotov cocktails had in 1939. Bf109s formed the bulk of Finnish Air Force in 1941-45 and the same was true with PzKpfw III and IV for the Rumanian armor. Romania built indigenous fighters, the IAR-80, which equalled early Bf109s.

Then of course we can remember that neither Romania or Finland has tank groups and only Romania has an air fleet. It would not be disproportionate to allow Finns and Rumanians to benefit from -1 Axis techs.

[Sombra]

I like Exel idea as I would like to see a mixed front of minor and mayor units working together in Rusia.

[Sombra]

I like Exel idea as I would like to see a mixed front of minor and mayor units working together in Rusia.

[SeaMonkey]

I have to say I agree that CW participants should include UK tech levels.

Now for Axis partners, I believe they should somehow run behind the German levels to some extent, this should include a catchup equation for Italy also, though not to the extent of the USA / UK one.

What I'm proposing is in addition to the normal catchup tech algorithm currently in place for opponents' tech levels.

For USA and UK this additional variable multiplier should allow for short interims between different levels of tech for these two sides. I know this would allow them to work in tandem on obtaining different levels, but it may be just what the gameplay needs to tweak the balance.

The same, at a lessor extent, could also apply to Italy as Germany's "tech partner", but could never achieve the same level(always at least one behind) of the Axis tech leader.

My suggestion for the remaining Axis minors is that they be allowed a tech level two behind the Axis tech leader.

[SeaMonkey]

I have to say I agree that CW participants should include UK tech levels.

Now for Axis partners, I believe they should somehow run behind the German levels to some extent, this should include a catchup equation for Italy also, though not to the extent of the USA / UK one.

What I'm proposing is in addition to the normal catchup tech algorithm currently in place for opponents' tech levels.

For USA and UK this additional variable multiplier should allow for short interims between different levels of tech for these two sides. I know this would allow them to work in tandem on obtaining different levels, but it may be just what the gameplay needs to tweak the balance.

The same, at a lessor extent, could also apply to Italy as Germany's "tech partner", but could never achieve the same level(always at least one behind) of the Axis tech leader.

My suggestion for the remaining Axis minors is that they be allowed a tech level two behind the Axis tech leader.

[Maverik]

SeaMonkey has a point but I don’t think that the American and British allies were quite as cooperative as you might think. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIH_syndrome for a good explanation of the Not Invented Here (NIH) syndrome. Read the section on the Harrier to see how complicated it can be for allies to work together and share.

Everyone knows about the British special tanks or Hobart’s Funnies. If I remember right they were offered to the Americans but as they were NIH not used.

But in saying that, there should be some sort of cooperation bonus in research for the allies. Although as SeaMonkey says this might to the allies working in tandem on technology but I think it would fit. After all the British bombed Germany at night because the bombers had less armament and the Americans with their B17 and 24’s which had better defensive firepower bombed by day.

Axis minors were equipment with obsolete german equipment so I think 2 tech levels behind would be good, but perhaps at a slightly higher cost to reflect training, maintenance etc.

[Maverik]

SeaMonkey has a point but I don’t think that the American and British allies were quite as cooperative as you might think. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIH_syndrome for a good explanation of the Not Invented Here (NIH) syndrome. Read the section on the Harrier to see how complicated it can be for allies to work together and share.

Everyone knows about the British special tanks or Hobart’s Funnies. If I remember right they were offered to the Americans but as they were NIH not used.

But in saying that, there should be some sort of cooperation bonus in research for the allies. Although as SeaMonkey says this might to the allies working in tandem on technology but I think it would fit. After all the British bombed Germany at night because the bombers had less armament and the Americans with their B17 and 24’s which had better defensive firepower bombed by day.

Axis minors were equipment with obsolete german equipment so I think 2 tech levels behind would be good, but perhaps at a slightly higher cost to reflect training, maintenance etc.

[SeaMonkey]

Thanks Mav, your still dangerous, but you can be my wingman anytime.

And your right, there will never be complete, unabashed cooperation, but during wartime, things are a bit different and the roadblocks to info-share fall rapidly, especially when the consequences are dire.

[SeaMonkey]

Thanks Mav, your still dangerous, but you can be my wingman anytime.

And your right, there will never be complete, unabashed cooperation, but during wartime, things are a bit different and the roadblocks to info-share fall rapidly, especially when the consequences are dire.

[Exel]

Originally posted by SeaMonkey:

My suggestion for the remaining Axis minors is that they be allowed a tech level two behind the Axis tech leader.

I still don't see a problem in allowing them to be one level behind. Think about it. If Germany gets IW3, the minors can only ever be at max IW2. And Germany still has to pay for every one of those upgrades. They wont be any magical free bonuses. Besides any advantage Germany would get is countered by the Allied minors getting the same benefits too.

What it would do is only to make the minor units effective and usable. At the moment they are of little use aside from garrison duty and cannon fodder. Level 0 infantry or fighters are simply no match against level 2 of the same.

It's all in historical context as well. When Germany had FockeWulfs Finland and Romania had Messerschmitts.

[Exel]

Originally posted by SeaMonkey:

My suggestion for the remaining Axis minors is that they be allowed a tech level two behind the Axis tech leader.

I still don't see a problem in allowing them to be one level behind. Think about it. If Germany gets IW3, the minors can only ever be at max IW2. And Germany still has to pay for every one of those upgrades. They wont be any magical free bonuses. Besides any advantage Germany would get is countered by the Allied minors getting the same benefits too.

What it would do is only to make the minor units effective and usable. At the moment they are of little use aside from garrison duty and cannon fodder. Level 0 infantry or fighters are simply no match against level 2 of the same.

It's all in historical context as well. When Germany had FockeWulfs Finland and Romania had Messerschmitts.

[Rolend]

Originally posted by Exel:

...

What it would do is only to make the minor units effective and usable. At the moment they are of little use aside from garrison duty and cannon fodder. Level 0 infantry or fighters are simply no match against level 2 of the same.

...

Yep and historically that is exactly what they were. Heck had Romaina had a real fighting force Stalingrad would of most likly turned out completly differant then it did.

If you are going to give techs to minors then I think 2 levels below is more realistic and giving CW troops exact same level as English.

[Rolend]

Originally posted by Exel:

...

What it would do is only to make the minor units effective and usable. At the moment they are of little use aside from garrison duty and cannon fodder. Level 0 infantry or fighters are simply no match against level 2 of the same.

...

Yep and historically that is exactly what they were. Heck had Romaina had a real fighting force Stalingrad would of most likly turned out completly differant then it did.

If you are going to give techs to minors then I think 2 levels below is more realistic and giving CW troops exact same level as English.

[SeaMonkey]

That's just it Exel, you can transfer the weapon systems to the minors, train them to use them, but how do you motivate them to fight in a cause that they may deem as questionable?

The Germans(Axis tech leader) are not going to install every little detail for the efficient use of their equipment, especially those intangibles.

Historically the Axis minors weren't all that keen to fight. They didn't have that Prussian military heritage, that doctrinal attitude of efficiency, that commitment to "the cause".

Goebbels did a pretty good job on the German people, not to mention Hitler's oratories, many, not all, were dedicated to a greater Germany.

Kind of hard to reflect that in the tech levels. That dedication to getting better, militarily.

The Germans and their partners did not share the cooperative training/experience and combat doctines the way the Allies did.

I'll agree that some minor's combat formations exhibited some level 2 attributes, but generally speaking they didn't perform above level 1.

Of course this is a game of "what ifs".

[SeaMonkey]

That's just it Exel, you can transfer the weapon systems to the minors, train them to use them, but how do you motivate them to fight in a cause that they may deem as questionable?

The Germans(Axis tech leader) are not going to install every little detail for the efficient use of their equipment, especially those intangibles.

Historically the Axis minors weren't all that keen to fight. They didn't have that Prussian military heritage, that doctrinal attitude of efficiency, that commitment to "the cause".

Goebbels did a pretty good job on the German people, not to mention Hitler's oratories, many, not all, were dedicated to a greater Germany.

Kind of hard to reflect that in the tech levels. That dedication to getting better, militarily.

The Germans and their partners did not share the cooperative training/experience and combat doctines the way the Allies did.

I'll agree that some minor's combat formations exhibited some level 2 attributes, but generally speaking they didn't perform above level 1.

Of course this is a game of "what ifs".

[Blashy]

Transfer can be same level, but the cost would be more to simulate the transfer of good being built in Germany or the infrastructure being built in the other country.

If you wish to have a l5 Romanian fighter why not? It will be quite inefective without HQ support. And the cost would be more than a l5 German fighter.

Historically that is not what occured, but if some player wishes to do so, it is HIS history that he is rewriting... at his own expense.

[Blashy]

Transfer can be same level, but the cost would be more to simulate the transfer of good being built in Germany or the infrastructure being built in the other country.

If you wish to have a l5 Romanian fighter why not? It will be quite inefective without HQ support. And the cost would be more than a l5 German fighter.

Historically that is not what occured, but if some player wishes to do so, it is HIS history that he is rewriting... at his own expense.