• Announcements

    • SNIPER62

      64-bit is LIVE   03/27/2020

      CHIMM: 64-bit client is now LIVE and Campaign 172 continues!  
a3ist

F2P feedback - why I wouldn't pay for this

156 posts in this topic

no he was talking about kills, dunno why he brought all those ratios in...

here it is as i see it

 

Allied scout cars kills on tanks: 118

Axis scout cars kills on tanks: 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game is about inequalities that in the aggregate balance to 1:1.

WWII history is filled with differences and inequalities. The Germans had Tigers and Me262s, but only a few. USA built 50,000 Sherman-family tanks and 80,000 good fighters.

The Germans had armored cars designed for recon. The Allies didn't, but that didn't matter for most of the war because they had air control. 

The Germans had an excellent LMG. The Allies had OK ones.

CRS shouldn't undo history to make the sides red=blue=green. What CRS should do instead is what they've done since 2000: balance the sides overall, with each side having some inferior units and others that are superior.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** The game is about inequalities that in the aggregate balance to 1:1.

Where is the axis piece of gear with a 29 KD against the similar allied gear? ? ?
 

Just what piece of gear do you think counters a fast moving, silent, kill every tier axis panzer?

Slow bomber?  Slower 88?  even our 'uber' LMG doesn't kill allied armored cars unless adjacent to them (232 flamed from 100m).

 

And I think you are completely nuts to think they have some formula to compute the lethality of each side - much less even them out.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** CRS shouldn't undo history to make the sides red=blue=green

You always say this against axis, never allies. 

Hmm, grease gun?  Hmm, Garand?

 

Hmm, we can't have smoke for tanks because allies won't get any smoke tier 0.... hmmm.

I could go on.  You use this every time against axis - but somehow it disappears when talking about allied gear.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, delems said:

*** CRS shouldn't undo history to make the sides red=blue=green

You always say this against axis, never allies. 

Hmm, grease gun?  Hmm, Garand?

 

Hmm, we can't have smoke for tanks because allies won't get any smoke tier 0.... hmmm.

I could go on.  You use this every time against axis - but somehow it disappears when talking about allied gear.

 

Usually when the Allied gear doesn't appear in a discussion of the problems of modeling equipment superiorities, it's because there are relatively fewer instances of early tier Allied gear that was superior to a significant extent compared to the German equivalent, other than sometimes quantity which is mostly irrelevant in game terms. That's just the facts.

The grease gun is an excellent example of a game management mistake, IMO. It's game-superior not because it was historically superior like the MG34/42, but because it's parameterized unrealistically, I assume to achieve a lethality-balance need. That's not the only instance of the designers putting their thumb on the scale in parameterization so as to achieve balance, but it's the most recent, most obvious one.

Obviously the Garand doesn't belong in British hands...it was a tiny presence there relative to the .303...unless that move is justified as "what if", in which case there are a number of other technically-realistic-what-if game moves I'd be happy to see.  :)

I don't know, but my guess is that Scotsman's ordnance submissions include smoke for the 75mm L/24s at least, and probably for the German vehicle long 75mms as well. I've never defended not having realistic cannon smoke in-game already. Various of us were proposing smoke ordnance additions in the design forum a decade or more ago. The challenge from CRS's perspective is figuring out how to keep the game tactically balanced if smoke works realistically. Something will have to be done for the early tier British and French or the tactical game will go way out of balance, and there are historical, gameplay and resource constraints on what that something could be. I don't want to see the equivalent of a grease gun solution to early tier Allied smoke, i.e. something way out of chronology and with unrealistic performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

CRS shouldn't undo history to make the sides red=blue=green

Quote

You always say this against axis, never allies.

Side bias is never my intent. The particular point above was in regard to ACs. The German one has a stability issue that everyone agrees needs fixing, but aside from that has realistic firepower (i.e. not much) and way too much mobility. The British one has realistic firepower in a technical sense (a lot), but then it's super-multiplied because it's combined with the way-too-much-mobility problem.

My point was and is that if a given game modality like ACs is realistic but unequal, that's the way the game should be designed. Both sides need to have superior and inferior weapons to get to overall side balance. In this instance, they're not realistic because of the mobility situation. When something in-game is unrealistic and aggravatingly unequal, it shouldn't be fixed by adding a corresponding unrealism to the other side. It should be fixed by dealing with the unrealism, which in this case is the fantasy off-road mobility for all wheeled vehicles.

Edited by jwilly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.