Russian vs German tanks

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Russian vs German tanks

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Russian vs German tanks

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Russian vs German tanks - 8/23/2000 10:55:00 PM

steel

Posts: 167
Joined: 6/9/2000
From: Finland, Helsinki
Status: offline

Has v3.0 corrects Russian tanks cost points. German vs Russian tanks are almoust same price ?. T34/85, js-3, js-2, js-1, su- 100 are very expensive. Germans Tigers, Panthers are same price categories, Why. Russian have mass production this tanks in WW2 and Germans had no resource to do that. I hope that this is fix v3.0. yep

_____________________________

Post #: 1

- 8/23/2000 11:18:00 PM

Larry Holt

Posts: 1969
Joined: 3/31/2000
From: Atlanta, GA 30068
Status: offline

Its been discussed in previous threads that the cost for units is not related to their actual construction costs or how many or how easy historical production was, etc. but rather they are a quantification of their combat power. ------------------ An old soldier but not yet a faded one. OK, maybe just a bit faded.

_____________________________

Never take counsel of your fears.

(in reply to steel)

Post #: 2

- 8/24/2000 1:01:00 AM

Ed Cogburn

Posts: 1979
Joined: 7/24/2000
From: Greeneville, Tennessee - GO VOLS!
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Holt: Its been discussed in previous threads that the cost for units is not related to their actual construction costs or how many or how easy historical production was, etc. but rather they are a quantification of their combat power.

Yea, I know, but it still "feels" wrong. In a long campaign in '44, the Germans having as many Panthers as the Soviets have T34/85s just doesn't make much sense.

_____________________________

(in reply to steel)

Post #: 3

- 8/24/2000 1:24:00 AM

Owl

Posts: 179
Joined: 8/4/2000
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline

I suppose one could debate endlessly about the relative combat power of units, but at least in my case I'd much, much rather have a Panther than a T-34/85. The main reason seems to be simply that the Panther hits more often. The T-34 gun is marginally better against soft targets, but even so it has to hit to be effective. Maybe the units need a different value assesment? It seems obvious in this and other posts that the current unit costs are viewed as either too "cheap" for the Germans or too expensive for the Russians. I tend to agree with that notion. ------------------ (.) (.) ...V...

_____________________________

(.) (.)

...V...

(in reply to steel)

Post #: 4

- 8/24/2000 1:29:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

The role of "points" is to provide a ballpark indication of teh units worth in game terms, not how plentiful they were. The idea being that battles between "equal points" is ralatively even... now this is typically only true in a very broad sense, but in version three, at least players know that all the units where scored on the basis of a common set of metrics, The version 3 point costs are being reviewed by the testers. They reflect a formula combining and weighting the various characteristics. Score is purely based on how the points add up and some class based 'fudge factors' to get classes correctly priced relative to each other. (infantry tends to run form 6 to 40 points while Tanks run from 25 to 255. The "Kings of the hill" are the King Tiger, JagdTiger, Maus and Centurian Mk3 at 255, The Tiger I comes in at 174, a bit behind the IS-3 at 188 (A bit low because of its low ammo supply and middlin Fire control) and way ahead of teh T-34/85 at 132. The PzIVh is right on its heels at 131 The Easy 8 Sherman may surprise some at 166, while the standard Shermans are down at 110-120 range. For infantry type units the 50cal tops the charts at 45, followed by the USMC Assault engineers at 40. The various engineer and commando/guerrila units range down to 25, twere teh late US rifle squad (with bazooka) tops the "regulars" at 25 ranging down to 10 where teh "scouts and snipers" start with the cheapest infantry units being 6 points. Now we can debate endlessly, whether a Tiger was 1/3 better than a T-34 or something else, the bottom line is that now all the units are rated consistently, based on their game characteristics! This has also resulted in generally more expensive units and a more "normal distribution" of scores (with more lumped in the middle than at the extremes).

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to steel)

Post #: 5

- 8/24/2000 2:03:00 AM

Owl

Posts: 179
Joined: 8/4/2000
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline

Thanks Paul. Sounds like you guys are on top of things as usual. You'll never make everyone happy but your efforts to tweak things to perfection are most commendable and appreciated! For those who are never happy there is an editor - and there's always Close Combat for them to play - plenty to complain about there and little/no response! ------------------ (.) (.) ...V...

_____________________________

(.) (.)

...V...

(in reply to steel)

Post #: 6

- 8/24/2000 2:51:00 AM

Larry Holt

Posts: 1969
Joined: 3/31/2000
From: Atlanta, GA 30068
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Ed Cogburn: Yea, I know, but it still "feels" wrong. In a long campaign in '44, the Germans having as many Panthers as the Soviets have T34/85s just doesn't make much sense.

This is true. I am playing a long German campaign and I just discipline myself to not buy all Tigers. Now, of course, there were Army level Tiger battalions and if you want to simulate being the commander of one, then go ahead and buy them. If you want a different "feel" then buy more common units. Actually the east front was defended mostly by infantry so don't buy any tanks at all. Then again, if you are facing the AIP buying non-historical numbers, there is nothing you can do and that's a problem. We've probably all been frustrated at facing 100+ French or British tanks as the Germans early in a long campaign. In the original SP I remember that you could only purchase a limited number of aircraft. After purchasing a few, they disappeared from the buy screen. Perhaps a similar device could be used to limit what the AIP buys to within historical limits. ------------------ An old soldier but not yet a faded one. OK, maybe just a bit faded.

_____________________________

Never take counsel of your fears.

(in reply to steel)

Post #: 7

- 8/24/2000 6:36:00 AM

Tombstone

Posts: 764
Joined: 6/1/2000
From: Los Angeles, California
Status: offline

Remember folks, with country training on the Soviets are going to have to pay less for their units anyways. There'll always be more soviet units out there than german in campaign games, unless you turn off country training. Tomo

_____________________________

(in reply to steel)

Post #: 8

- 8/24/2000 7:48:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

IF you want the AI to have a numerical advantage in a campaign game - turn the "AI ADVANTAGE ON/OFF" button ON and the AI will get "bonus points"

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to steel)

Post #: 9

- 8/24/2000 6:09:00 PM

cjpaul

Posts: 56
Joined: 8/7/2000
From: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Status: offline

I've been playing a campaign as the Germans on the Eastern Front. I'm in '44 and I have 4 Panthers, 2 Jagdpanthers, and 2 K�nigtigers. The crews are all elite. I usually face anywhere from 30 to 50 Russian tanks, depending on the type of battle. In one, the Russians had 11 T34/85s and 11 IS2ms plus 30 other T34s, SUs, and ISUs. 6 to 1 odds seems about right for '44.

_____________________________

(in reply to steel)

Post #: 10