itkotw2000
Posts: 30
Joined: 8/27/2005 Status: offline
|
I loaded up one of my old saves to check the research and unit pools of the allies (I only have played axis so far). The major unit pools as of June 28, 1942 - British can still build 2 armies and 3 tanks, but no corps; the Russians have maxed out their corps/armies/tanks (they have a 1945 sized army in 1942); the US can still build 2 armies and 6 tanks (corps maxed out). So most of the allied countries, especially Russia, have nearly maxed out the size of their army in the first year or two of the war. Research wise, if we look at Infantry weapons/advanced tanks/advanced aircraft, the research levels for the allies is - Britain 2/2 inf weapons, 2/5 adv tanks, 3/5 adv aircraft; US 1/2 inf, 1/5 tank, 3/5 air; Russia 2/3 inf, 2/5 tank, 3/5 air. Mpps for the allies in this turn (either income or saved) - Britain 374, US 1314, Russia 1777. So from these numbers, we can see that Russia has maxed out its army size one year after the war started, is 50% of the way to having 1945 levels of research, and has mpp to spare. Both Britain and the US are in worse shape, but most of their unit pools are at nearly the max levels (US has enough mpp to nearly max its pool this turn). If the AI would stop using mpps to move units operationally, their research and unit levels would be even higher (AI loves to shuffle units). In my other post I just wanted to address the fact that there are so many mpps that the player (or AI) doesnt have to really make a hard choice whether to build units, keep research going, or choose "NO" for an expensive event decision. There is no "either-or" type decisions. I think historically, Russia didn't worry about "research" much early in the war, they just tried to pump out units to replace losses. If the player (or AI) wants to get ahead in research instead of doing X, there should be some give and take. This makes for more variety and replayability.
|