Tech trade-offs

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Tech trade-offs

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] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command: World War I >> Tech trade-offs

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Tech trade-offs - 2/9/2022 1:55:33 AM

mdsmall

Posts: 461
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline

A) I would be interested to know if and when other players chose to invest in Production Tech. I find whenever I am playing that I will always to prefer to invest in Industrial Tech, rather than Production Tech, as the pay-off is greater (usually at least at 10 - 15% increase in MPPs, versus a 5% decrease in costs per increment) and the MPPs gained this way can be used for any purpose, not just for purchasing units. I know that there is a benefit to Production Tech in reducing NM costs of lost units and strength points, but surely this is a marginal benefit. How do other players view this?

B) in a similar vein, I find if I have MPPs to spare and the investment capacity, I will usually invest in Command and Control before investing in Infantry Warfare. My thinking being that better generals provides equivalent combat benefits, while benefiting air units too. But I have never tried to directly compare the value of a 1 point increase in general's' command rating vs a 10% increase in morale, at least for infantry and cavalry units. Which do you think is more useful?

Post #: 1

RE: Tech trade-offs - 2/9/2022 2:42:17 PM

Chernobyl

Posts: 444
Joined: 8/27/2012
Status: offline

I think C&C is stronger than Infantry Warfare. The range and extra unit slot for your HQs help because most countries don't have enough HQ. I actually get C&C before Infantry Weapons research in this game. I think many players research Infantry Weapons a bit too early out of habit from the WWII games.

Production Tech is really hard to find the right moment for. I always get it for rich countries, but only after researching most other things. The research MPP limit for many countries prevents you from researching it even if you wanted to (which simplifies the dilemma).

< Message edited by Chernobyl -- 2/9/2022 2:43:07 PM >

(in reply to mdsmall)

Post #: 2

RE: Tech trade-offs - 2/10/2022 2:48:13 AM

OldCrowBalthazor

Posts: 1108
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: offline

Ah the Production Tech question.

Well, of course it depends on the nation but I usually go for Industrial Tech before Production. Also Command and Control before Infantry Warfare.
Of course it depends on the circumstances and which nation your talking about. I found getting C&C for France relatively early is helpful for instance.

One thing I really like about SC-WW1 is that research is a lot more granular. So, if there is like an extra 40, 50, or even 75 MMPs in the wallet after the other priority expenditures, well its nice to have the option to drop that money into a secondary reaserch slot.

Production is pretty important though. Not only because units cost less, but that those units if lost while having higher Production Tech means less loss to NM and less gain to NM to the victor.

Id say try to get Production Tech going marginally at least if possible fairly early on. You can always add more chits to it if warranted.

_____________________________

Balthazor's Strategic Arcana

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwnsBUHYdk7tcejmU5k9cOw

(in reply to Chernobyl)

Post #: 3

RE: Tech trade-offs - 2/10/2022 8:07:54 PM

Bavre

Posts: 299
Joined: 12/5/2020
Status: offline

B)
The thing with morale is that it goes poof REALLY fast in the late game. A max tech cannon does an avg 4*20 demoralisation a turn, a ground attack bomber 45 etc, you get the idea. The bonuses from HQs (both rating and xp) however go directly to readiness and the only ways to negate them are cutting off the unit or destroying the HQ. Furthermore those bonuses are "absolute" ones. Not sure how to word this, so here's an example: Let's say you have a kick ass high xp HQ that gives 30% readiness on its own. Then it will boosts a 50% unit to 80% and a 20% one to 50%. While it's the same % the 20% unit will relatively speaking gain much more from this. With the massive barrages of the mid and late game totally demoralised and severely damaged units en masse just can't be avoided, but propped up by a rating 10 xp 3 Foch or Hindenburg they will still give a hell of a fight. So yes C&C all the way!

A)
Admittedly not one of my top priority techs, though there have been some long and hard fought matches where I regretted not having it.

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)

Post #: 4