Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Capco last won the day on June 17

Capco had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

519 Hero

1 Follower

About Capco

  • Rank
    Allied High Command
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
  • Preferred Branch
    Air Force
  • Preferred Unit
  1. Nice Ohm! Thank you for your efforts on these intermissions. It gives the players a little spice, and it gives the HC a much needed break.
  2. @merlin51 Don't forget, the Sherman also had ease of maintenance and an excellent HE shell for infantry support (at least the 75mm and 105mm versions). Also, the majority of those Tigers and Panthers were consumed on the Eastern Front. So you are looking at an even greater disparity than a simple Germany vs US comparison would otherwise indicate. I believe at one point in the ETO, the US had enough tanks to give each of their Infantry divisions an organic armor battalion attachment if they wanted to. That's an absurd amount of armor (but also a testament to how little infantry the US initially committed to the ETO compared to what they really should have; at one point they were desperately low on basic rifle battalions).
  3. Idk what it is, but today's group has gotten soft in regards to supply (maybe from the lack of HC?). Not having your favorite unit and still finding a way to win that battle is what this game is predicated on. Lower supply levels make for more intense engagements and actually allow attrition to unfold. Lower resupply timers means that attritioned units can quickly come back to combat readiness thereby mitigating major map rolls. I've said this for years, but the best combo for RDP and supply lists is: -smaller supply lists (maybe 40% below what we have) -faster resupply timers (8 hours or almost twice as fast) -increased factory and bridge repair rate by 2x (to increase the long-term impact of RDP bombing)
  4. Again, I understand this part very well. I'm talking about how that contrasts with the 15 hour resupply timer. You're basically saying it's worth it to have that weird discrepancy (routed brigades getting resupplied faster than an empty, unrouted brigade) in order to prevent boredom? As an HC officer, if I really wanted to min/max the system, then I could be actively trying to get my empty brigades cut off for the resupply advantage. And that would be totally legal right?
  5. This is what I find most bizarre about the current state of the game. Momentum swings are even more volatile because of the low population. Generally speaking, after a cutoff like the one earlier this map, you won't see such a massive momentum swing in the other direction within the same campaign. I mean, it's cool that the Allies are pushing back! But how do you go from enough HC to cut off 9.5 divisions to "No GHC Online" within a matter of days? The Allies also got somewhat complacent at the German factories, but it took at least a week for the momentum to shift.
  6. Wait. It's 6 hours now???? That's even sillier then. I understand your point about getting units back to the front in good time, but then how do you justify the 15 hour resupply timers? If I lose a Tiger in combat, it takes 15 hours to come back, but if I just let all 4 Tigers in one brigade get cut off they all come back in 6 hours? Do you really think having routed brigades getting resupplied twice as fast as brigades that have retreated in good order makes any sense? Like how do you justify that discrepancy?
  7. My thoughts on routed brigades: Many complain about them being magically able to pop up on the front anywhere. On the one hand I see where this is kind of silly, but on the other hand one can argue that it simulates the fog of war. For a war simulation, this game doesn't really reproduce the fog of war effect very well apart from 1 other key feature. I am able to see every unit my enemy has, anywhere on the map at any time. Not only that, I am given access to his brigade movement timers and his fallbacks. The only real fog is the fact that I am unable to see my enemy's supply disposition (which is actually an amazing component of an attrition based warfare sim). By making routed brigades reform at a factory and move manually to the front, you are just adding more work to an already overburdened HC system and removing one of the few fog of war mechanics. I'd like to see more fog of war mechanics. For example, only being able to see enemy brigades that are next to your brigades, unless players get to within town range (the range at which your HUD actually lists a town) of backline towns, at which point they could act as reconnaissance and give a snapshot of enemy unit positions behind the front line (aircraft and scout cars would be ideal for this, as in RL). The overall silliest part of routed brigades (imo) is that it's more efficient to get an empty brigade routed off the map (6 hours) than it is to get it fully resupplied (15 hours IF factories are producing at 100%). This is why I think RDP timers should NEVER be above 12 hours. It's just stupid. If you want to replicate attritional warfare better, make the lists smaller. Stop raising the damn resupply timers to obscene levels as a lazy way out. It would also be cool if RDP damage was also applied to unit reformation times. At 50% damage, a routed brigade would take 9 hours to reform rather than 6.
  8. Leave the tanks alone for now bud. The only thing super-critical right now is the infantry. Ohm already said he doesn't like altering supply mid-map (except in extreme circumstances like the infantry hiccups). We are expecting to see some changes next campaign. Let's wait and see for now.
  9. How on Earth could people possibly complain about this change? Maybe the timer is too long, but that's changeable. I'm a pilot by trade so I've seen this stuff first hand. Something needed to be done about this years ago. It will also have the added benefit of not killing any noob pilots who are learning the ropes of bombing, allowing them to just make a second pass rather than respawn, fly back, etc....
  10. Don't hesitate to communicate with us if you are feeling overwhelmed about something, @OHM. All crying and moaning aside, we are ultimately here to help. Let's get this right for next campaign so we don't ever have to go down this ugly road again.
  11. That's not what I meant. I was strictly referring to history. In game, we don't really have the ability to do those things I listed above. No one here will despawn a tank just because they are getting strafed with BBs out of utter fear, nor can we attack fuel depots and support vehicles. Every WWII game I've ever played that included aircraft also included effective ground attack aircraft in some fashion (even games that stressed realism). If anything, one in our game can argue that direct kills on armor simulate the "disabling" I described above.
  12. Tanks can't function without supplies, fuel, and crew. The vast majority of armor "disabled" by Allied air power was done by attacking the above. Many times crews would just abandon perfectly functional vehicles at the sight of the air force. That's where von Runstedt's comments yield some answers.
  13. If it's done correctly, this is the best way to go.
  14. Absolutely correct! It's not perfect. But it's usually better than looking at current campaign stats. The most obvious example is when one side is winning and has considerable overpop. They will likely die less and kill more on average considering their population advantage and higher morale. To put it simply, campaign conditions affect campaign stats. But in the long run, both sides have roughly the same amount of winning campaign conditions since both sides have roughly the same amount of wins. Again, it's not perfect, but I think it tends to be more accurate than looking at current campaign stats for the reasons stated above. Ideally, you'd do something like look at the stats of the last 30-50 campaigns to get an even more accurate picture, since it would include less of the variances that you've correctly noted.