'Tanks in Flames'

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

'Tanks in Flames'

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> 'Tanks in Flames'

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

'Tanks in Flames' - 7/29/2011 2:09:25 PM

Manic Inertia

Posts: 51
Joined: 2/7/2006
Status: offline

It's been a few years since I last contributed to this forum, but I've followed Shannon's updates with interest non the less. Let me prelude this thread by writing that we, the Melbourne (Australia) WiFFE enthusiasts - who convene weekly for the express purpose of continuing our ongoing '36-'52 Supergames - await with baited breath the release of this most anticipated product.

Being lucky enough to live in the Lucky Country, a few of us have attended the inaugural two WiF 'AusCon' experiences, and are consequently now proud to be numbered among the de facto social acquaintances of Harry Rowland, Ray Sonsie and others, the original WiF pioneers.

During the last Auscon earlier this year, I shared many bottles of good cheer with Harry et al, and was consequently granted the opportunity to tell him all about my idea for a WiF supplement, with which I have been obsessed for some years now. Harry's reaction was certainly very positive, and he has encouraged me to continue developing it.

In essence, the project involves creating a PiF style game supplement that replaces all the Armour class counters (and all the self-propelled artillery counters) with a new counter set that uses AFV images to replace the NATO symbols currently used. Each units' class and type would be represented by a much smaller symbol in the top right corner, just like the Flak counters from FiF.

In my increasingly pedantic search for historicity and rythm, however, I've reached an impasse. The problems I've experienced in realising even a blueprint for it are manifold, but can nevertheless be summarized concisely. Harry remains keen to see it, but so far I've been unable to complete something to my satisfaction that doesn't involve meddling with arrival dates or counter stats. Is anyone interested in collaborating on such a project? I'd be happy to share the work I've done so far..

< Message edited by Manic Inertia -- 7/29/2011 2:26:40 PM >

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/29/2011 3:42:20 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

You need to provide more of an outline concerning the tasks that need to be done. Perhaps another paragraph of your 'vision' for what the final product would be wouldn't hurt either.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Manic Inertia)

Post #: 2

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/29/2011 5:16:48 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

I've always thought 'Tanks in Flames' was released in about 1978. It was called "Squad Leader: Cross of Iron" (ironically originally a game about infantry combat), and was actually the 'Gold' edition of a game from the late 1960s called "PanzerBlitz".

But kidding aside, this is a slippery slope in WiF. Personally, I don't like seeing the game get overly tacticalized, which my browser tells me is not a word. Planes in Flames was a big hit and improved the feel and flavor of the air game, compared to the generic counters in use up to 5th Edition. But ever since the air combat rules have been led down a path towards it becoming a tedious dogfighting game (and still kinda generic). If I wanted to play one of those, I'd pick up an aerial shooter video game. If the armor units had actual tank models associated with them, I could easily see an argument late in a game about whether the German Pz Jg 1 armored anti-tank division the Germans have had since the first turn of the game shouldn't be allowed to get double bonuses against the 1st Guards Banner Armor Army, because it now has JSU-152's and there is no way a Pz Jg 1 could penetrate the armor on one of those beasts. In short, WiF is an operational/strategic game and it is important not to lose sight of that. Such thoughts have also led a lot of players back to playing WiF Classic rather than WiF Super Deluxe.

As a result, more than a few people have daydreamed about the idea of Tanks in Flames, without anything ever happening. Nevertheless I think there are avenues that could be explored in the game. This question always reminds me of the late-period SPI game "Desert Fox", which I believe only ever existed as the insert in one of the last few SPI issues of Strategy & Tactics magazine. In that game, the armor units such as the 1st Regiment of the British 7th Armored Division, had multiple counters. When the theater commander historically received a new shipment of improved-model tanks (such as Churchill's beloved "Operation Tiger" convoy sailed straight through the Med, ironic given what the Allies discovered they would fight in 1943 in Tunisia), the player could replace the original tank unit counter with a newer version with higher factors.

Something like this could work in WiF I think, perhaps in conjunction with the added production detail recently added to the game in Factories in Flames. For post-1945 gaming, a system is in place for atomic weapon research & development. Many given generic multi-player build-colonize-conquer game has a system for spending part of the player's "money" on R&D. WiF could use something like this. The Allies and the Germans continuously put a lot of effort into this. From what I can tell, the Russians preferred to badger the West into giving up their secrets, or learning them the hard way from the Germans, while the Japanese hoped to crib from the Germans via delicate long-range naval contacts. (Not my area of historical interest really). Anyhow, the technological race could be a nice part of the game. What would happen to the convoys or the strategic bombers if Germany had led the race towards centimetric radar? WiF seems like the perfect game to explore those possibilities, as long as it is kept simple and playable. Perhaps a set of combat modifiers for the results in the technology war? To some extent the generally unpopular Intelligence rule is supposed to represent this, but I think there is a lot of room to work on something like that.

But I've drifted far from the shore of the excitement of the Germans running into the first T-34's and KV-1 in July 1941 and deciding they better get in gear on that Panther project; sorry I can't help you there. Harry does like being handed free content though, that's for sure.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 3

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/30/2011 12:10:35 AM

Manic Inertia

Posts: 51
Joined: 2/7/2006
Status: offline

Thanks for that reply, brian. Certainly some interesting points there. I must confess to being a little confused though: you start out by describing such a proposition as being part of a 'slippery slope' and yet you draw the conclusion that there are 'avenues that could be explored' which involve multiple counters representing the same unit and extra rules for research and development.

I was also mightily interested in your comment about other people having 'daydreamed' about such an idea for WiF. Despite not being quite certain that the work I've done on this so far - which includes contributions from a graphic illustrator as well as a discussion with the game's designer - could be categorized as a daydream, but d'you have any more information to qualify your observation that other 'dreamers' have already blazed a part of this trail? I'd really like to collaborate with them!

As for your example involving self-propelled 47mm guns countering a late war tank army, you're right, some minor tinkering is needed in a very few places to try and minimize such visually absurd contingencies (in that particular case, my project depicts the PzJg I as a pink print 2-5 motorized unit, making it less appealing as a prospect for late war building) But to be honest, I'm really struggling to understand how the pretty pictures on the PiF counters have changed the strategic/tactical balance of the game to such a degree that 'a lot of players' have felt compelled to return to dry old WiF5. Thats just sounds silly to me.

The idea, ultimately, is to improve the visual aspect of the game in two counter sheets totalling 400 counters: luckily, there are around 380 armour class & self-propelled unit counters in WiF, so it's potentially quite a neat and tidy product. I don't think having extra rules for research and development is necessary in order to ensure that the images don't lose their relevance at a later date: there are 'heavy' upgrade units afterall. the WiF rulebook is big enough, it's that simple. No-one wants more rules. I'm told people would like some more nice counters though. Harry likes to be handed free content you say: who said it would be free?!

< Message edited by Manic Inertia -- 7/30/2011 12:36:51 AM >

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 4

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/30/2011 12:24:57 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Manic Inertia

Thanks for that reply, brian. Certainly some interesting points there. I must confess to being a little confused though: you start out by describing such a proposition as being part of a 'slippery slope' and yet you draw the conclusion that there are 'avenues that could be explored' which involve multiple counters representing the same unit and extra rules for research and development.

I was also mightily interested in your comment about other people having 'daydreamed' about such an idea for WiF. Despite not being quite certain that the work I've done on this so far - which includes contributions from a graphic illustrator as well as a discussion with the game's designer - could be categorized as a daydream, but d'you have any more information to qualify your observation that other 'dreamers' have already blazed a part of this trail? I'd really like to collaborate with them!

As for your example involving self-propelled 47mm guns countering a late war tank army, you're right, some minor tinkering is needed in a very few places to try and minimize such visually absurd contingencies (in that particular case, my project depicts the PzJg I as a pink print 2-5 motorized unit, making it less appealing as a prospect for late war building) But to be honest, I'm really struggling to understand how the pretty pictures on the PiF counters have changed the strategic/tactical balance of the game to such a degree that 'a lot of players' have felt compelled to return to dry old WiF5. Thats just sounds silly to me.

The idea, ultimately, is to improve the visual aspect of the game in two counter sheets totalling 400 counters: luckily, there are something like 380 armour class & self-propelled units in the game, so it's potentially quite a neat and tidy product. I don't think having extra rules for research and development is necessary in order to ensure that the images don't lose their relevance at a later date: there are 'heavy' upgrade units afterall. the WiF rulebook is big enough, it's that simple. No-one wants more rules. I'm told people would like some more nice counters though. Harry likes to be handed free content you say? Who said I was doing it for free?

I'll repeat myself, you need to provide a clear explanation of your vision if you expect to have others join you in this project.

From your latest post I learned that you do not intend to change any rules

- I didn't know that before. And you are apparently worrying about colors as well as unit characteristics.

Think of this as asking people to help you build a building. Is it a house? a barn? a tool shed?, a fancy mailbox? Aim for one or two sentences which sums it up and then some details about what work has to be done to make it happen. Then people will be able to decide if they like the goal and whether they have any of the requisite skills to help you complete it.

EDIT: You might want to look at the Units Descriptions thread, scanning for writeups on armor units and the like. MWIF has hundreds of writeups done for those units, which often describe what the units most likely represent historically.

< Message edited by Shannon V. OKeets -- 7/30/2011 12:27:57 AM >

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Manic Inertia)

Post #: 5

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/30/2011 12:54:58 AM

Manic Inertia

Posts: 51
Joined: 2/7/2006
Status: offline

Thanks for repeating yourself Steve

!

Yes, I am indeed preoccupied with colors and unit characteristics rather than rules. I'm looking, simply, for anyone else that might be. Perhaps this is the wrong place to discuss this project though, as it has nothing to do with the infinitely larger and more challenging stuff you're working on, mate!

Maybe I need to get out more ..

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 6

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/30/2011 5:02:09 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

I can recall someone posting here about the idea a few years ago (maybe that was you?). Someone on the Yahoo list also had some posts about working on the idea. One or the other of those people was one of the many dedicated WiF players from Norway I think. Most people I have played WiF with have had exposure to the Squad Leader series and PanzerBlitz, so it is a common topic of discussion over the table.

WiF Classic is not 5th Edition....it is just a way to play the game without the counter densities that result from playing WiF:Super Deluxe. And without late-war air battles and land actions feeling like a game of Risk.

I was just daydreaming about things that could still be accomplished in the game, and especially so with the new specialized factories from Factories in Flames. Harry's great achievement in WiF is keeping the game's focus on the idea that gamers want to command military forces. They don't want to play Quartermaster in Flames.

I've always thought German tank production could get a boost based on occupying Czechoslovakia during a Days of Decision game, and even the installation of Vichy France for that matter, say a -1 to the cost of a new ARM or related unit after France, perhaps several of those for occupying Czechoslovakia. I guess though, that the red factories in each place take care of that idea. There I am daydreaming again.

(in reply to Manic Inertia)

Post #: 7

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/30/2011 6:53:37 PM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Manic Inertia

It's been a few years since I last contributed to this forum, but I've followed Shannon's updates with interest non the less. Let me prelude this thread by writing that we, the Melbourne (Australia) WiFFE enthusiasts - who convene weekly for the express purpose of continuing our ongoing '36-'52 Supergames - await with baited breath the release of this most anticipated product.

Being lucky enough to live in the Lucky Country, a few of us have attended the inaugural two WiF 'AusCon' experiences, and are consequently now proud to be numbered among the de facto social acquaintances of Harry Rowland, Ray Sonsie and others, the original WiF pioneers.

During the last Auscon earlier this year, I shared many bottles of good cheer with Harry et al, and was consequently granted the opportunity to tell him all about my idea for a WiF supplement, with which I have been obsessed for some years now. Harry's reaction was certainly very positive, and he has encouraged me to continue developing it.

In essence, the project involves creating a PiF style game supplement that replaces all the Armour class counters (and all the self-propelled artillery counters) with a new counter set that uses AFV images to replace the NATO symbols currently used. Each units' class and type would be represented by a much smaller symbol in the top right corner, just like the Flak counters from FiF.

In my increasingly pedantic search for historicity and rythm, however, I've reached an impasse. The problems I've experienced in realising even a blueprint for it are manifold, but can nevertheless be summarized concisely. Harry remains keen to see it, but so far I've been unable to complete something to my satisfaction that doesn't involve meddling with arrival dates or counter stats. Is anyone interested in collaborating on such a project? I'd be happy to share the work I've done so far..

I am against replacing NATO symbols with icons but I wouldn�t object to it as an optional counter set.

I assume you want tanks icons and etc. to be presented simular to the air unit icons.

But how would you decide which icons for the units?

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Manic Inertia)

Post #: 8

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/30/2011 9:57:38 PM

Centuur

Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline

German armoured divisions had usually a mix of all kind of AFV's (so did French and Russian armoured/mechanised forces). I don't know how the US or British armoured forces were composed, but there I also expect a range of all kind of tanks and SPG's in such units. IMHO Tanks in Flames is already in WiF with the introduction of MiF...

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 9

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/30/2011 11:23:09 PM

michaelbaldur

Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur

German armoured divisions had usually a mix of all kind of AFV's (so did French and Russian armoured/mechanised forces). I don't know how the US or British armoured forces were composed, but there I also expect a range of all kind of tanks and SPG's in such units. IMHO Tanks in Flames is already in WiF with the introduction of MiF...

a note to your post. Germans and Russians used many AFV from other countries... a simple quess is that Germany had about 50 models of tanks and 20 of self propelled guns

British armour divisions where are mix of British and american designs

american armour division used mostly american designs. but they had many model .. as I remembered there were about 10 models of Shermans

I find this project impossible .. just take the famous desert rats (7 armoured) doing it�s life time it was equipped with at least 10 different tank model. so how do you decide what image to use ????

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to Centuur)

Post #: 10

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/31/2011 7:48:25 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur
I find this project impossible .. just take the famous desert rats (7 armoured) doing it�s life time it was equipped with at least 10 different tank model. so how do you decide what image to use ????

Agreed.

(in reply to michaelbaldur)

Post #: 11

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/31/2011 8:18:57 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

I would not say this is impossible - although that depends on exactly what is trying to be achieved;

If its simply a case of bringing the counters up to PiF and SiF standard (and given the counter limitations of a board game), then surely the silhouette shown on the counter just needs to correspond to the availability date on the back e.g. early British armour and mech will have Matildas and Crusaders etc, while later corps will show Shermans and Cromwells etc.

Personally, given this is largely an Army/Corps game, I would prefer to keep with the NATO symbols for the land units rather than this sort of modification.

It has been briefly discussed before that the army counters could do with an overhaul - Armies in Flames - and with the game now on computer, and the flexibility that provides, maybe we will see this one day. I recall Harry Rowland saying in one of the annuals that he would like to see actual manpower levels being incorporated - making players far more cautious (presumably in any lost battle, a certain no. will be taken prisoner as well as killed). Countries could run out of troops as per the real war.

However, all this is taking WIF away from the game we know and love - and maybe we should wait for the day when MWIF comes out (whenever that may be) and just enjoy WIF on the computer!

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 12

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/31/2011 8:29:05 PM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur

German armoured divisions had usually a mix of all kind of AFV's (so did French and Russian armored/mechanized forces). I don't know how the US or British armored forces were composed, but there I also expect a range of all kind of tanks and SPG's in such units. IMHO Tanks in Flames is already in WiF with the introduction of MiF...

a note to your post. Germans and Russians used many AFV from other countries... a simple quess is that Germany had about 50 models of tanks and 20 of self propelled guns

British armored divisions where are mix of British and American designs

American armored division used mostly American designs. But they had many model... as I remembered there were about 10 models of Sherman�s

I find this project impossible .. Just take the famous desert rats (7 armored) doing its lifetime it was equipped with at least 10 different tank models. So how do you decide what image to use????

REMEMBER I AM NOT A PROPONENT OF THIS IDEA

But if it can be done for the air units it is not impossible.

AN EXAMPLE

Germany

A silhouette of a Sd.Kfz. 251 or an Armored Car could represent mechanized units.

A silhouette of a Panzer of the time of the unit�s availability could be used for the Armored units. Or you could use the strength and availability of the unit to decide the silhouette.

A silhouette of a Flakpanzer IV Wirberlwind could be used for armored Anti-aircraft units.

A silhouette of an 88 could be used for towed Anti-aircraft units.

A silhouette of a Panzerfeldhaubitze 18M auf Gesch�tzwagen III/IV (Sf) Hummel, Sd.Kfz. 165 or an Sdkfz 124 Wespe could represent Self-propelled artillery units.

A silhouette of a 15 cm sIG 33 (schweres Infanterie Gesch�tz 33) could be used for powerfull-towed guns.

A silhouette of a 10.5 cm leFH 18 (German: leichte FeldHaubitze "light field howitzer") could be used for less powerfull-towed guns.

< Message edited by Extraneous -- 8/1/2011 11:46:48 AM >

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to michaelbaldur)

Post #: 13

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 7/31/2011 8:49:53 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

I see you think your Flakpanzer IV Wirberlwind idea so good you named it twice

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 14

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/1/2011 7:39:55 AM

paulderynck

Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

Personally, on the PiF counters I couldn't care less what the silhouette looks like, nor whether it's an F4A or an ME109E. I'm mainly interested in the "primary use" combat factor and the range.

I'd feel the same about Armor/Mech/SP units whether their symbols/silhouette were NATO, a Flakpanzer IV Wirberlwind, or a bathtub.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 15

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/1/2011 7:57:30 AM

Joseignacio

Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline

Ditto. In fact, I prefer Nato symbols.

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 16

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/1/2011 2:30:03 PM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I see you think your Flakpanzer IV Wirberlwind idea so good you named it twice

Copper theives broke into power station, started fire, and knocked out power before I could fix that yesterday.

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 17

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/1/2011 7:09:38 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I see you think your Flakpanzer IV Wirberlwind idea so good you named it twice

Copper theives broke into power station, started fire, and knocked out power before I could fix that yesterday.

Warspite1

We are getting a lot of that sort of thing too

. Drain covers seem to be the in thing at the moment

. The only good news is that apparently in the last 12 months four thieves have died and thirty-one have been injured in trying to nick metal from roofs, train tracks etc

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 18

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/1/2011 7:16:24 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Personally, on the PiF counters I couldn't care less what the silhouette looks like, nor whether it's an F4A or an ME109E. I'm mainly interested in the "primary use" combat factor and the range.

I'd feel the same about Armor/Mech/SP units whether their symbols/silhouette were NATO, a Flakpanzer IV Wirberlwind, or a bathtub.

Warspite1

I guess that the good thing about MWIF is that in future, perhaps people can have the choice of NATO symbols, or pictures or even household fittings on their counters

Personally I think aesthetics are extremely important in any game and love the SiF, PiF and NATO counters that currently available.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 19

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/1/2011 10:54:32 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

I vote for bathtubs

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 20

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/2/2011 12:57:58 AM

HansHafen

Posts: 258
Joined: 2/3/2008
Status: offline

If you can do it for ships and planes, why can't it be done for tanks etc? I am frankly surprised it hasn't been done yet. Seems you would do that before you did Factories in Flames or Merchantmen in Flames.

I would love to have some cool tank images like we have for Planes and Ships.

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 21

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/2/2011 6:40:41 AM

Joseignacio

Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline

If I am not wrong, the variety of NATO symbols is very limited in sea and air, and they are very scarcely used.

(in reply to HansHafen)

Post #: 22

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/2/2011 8:36:53 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

If I am not wrong, the variety of NATO symbols is very limited in sea and air, and they are very scarcely used.

Yeah, my take on this is that the actual images of the planes and ships are nice but they do not convey crucial information. For ships it is the abbreviations (CV, CA, BB, etc.). And the for the air units it is the silhouette and orientation of same.

The NATO symbols for the land units are crucial for differentiating the types of units and their capability. So, if this were to be done, the images would have to be crystal clear in communicating to all players what the unit type is.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Joseignacio)

Post #: 23

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/2/2011 10:26:51 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

As a counter upgrade only, that could be pretty I guess. But as I typed above, I would disagree with tinkering with the values on the counter just because of the AFV model. For German motorized AT assets, the letters 'Pz I' are on the first such counter. The next such counter is for the JagdPanther. So in between there were at least the Pz II, the Marder (3 variants at least), the Hetzer, and perhaps a few others. Taking away the red combat factor, which doubles the factors when attacking enemy armor units, would be wrong. The Germans invented the concept of self-propelled armored anti-tank guns, which was quickly imitated by the other tank-using powers. They should enjoy the advantages of that unit for a few years, not see it reduced just because of a bias against the weakness of the very early war PanzerJ�eger I, the first such vehicle in history I would think. The gun units represent army level assets; having the AFV models printed on the self-propelled ones is just for additional flavor in the game.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 24

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/3/2011 10:41:48 AM

Extraneous

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

If �tanks in flames� were implemented where would it end?

You could have Silhouettes, German Tactical Symbols, Japanese Tactical Symbols, and etc.

Lets leave this one alone at this time.

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 25

RE: 'Tanks in Flames' - 8/4/2011 2:35:24 AM

HansHafen

Posts: 258
Joined: 2/3/2008
Status: offline

Has it ever ended yet? Why now? And not 5 years ago? That's the beauty, you use what you want and don't use what you don't want. Plus, Harry could make more money! You can season the game the way you want, more flavor or less.

(in reply to Extraneous)

Post #: 26