Slitherine

Here what I see.

8.8 cm Pak 43/41 hard attack 23 initiative 14

8.8 cm Pak 36 hard attack 17 initiative 11


8.8 cm FlaK 36 [17] initiative 11

12.8 cm FlaK 40 [23] initiative 17

So the 88 can penetrate.

"Kill" is a matter of speech. It's not a one shot kill.

umm.. I would like confirmation on the -3

KV-2 initiative 9

What I see even with the penalty, some are equal, others exceed.

What year does the Pak 43/41 become available? In Kursk I can still only buy the Pak 36.

By the way you're talking about trying to balance a unit that is super squishy and moves 1 hex at a time against a unit that moves 3 or 4 hexes and is armored to the teeth.
Regardless of Pak 36 or Pak 43/41, would you really want to buy such a unit in your offensive campaign when you see the defensive player has a KV-2 and several KV-1s?

Confirmation:

Thanks for the confirmation.

And yes the Pack 36 is good better to have the Pak43/41.

Put them in a truck or AC and your good to go.

I just used the pack 5 and 8.8 in campaign 1941 3rd scenario.

Pushed back the T34's and killed them. It was tough as I only had one tank and one infantry.
After 5 turns reinforcements showed up. It the AT has support it is a good weapon. Especially if you have Art.
I admit I wasn't fighting KV's but that day will come.

Need to start some where, so GD at 22 is good.

That Kursk scenario..... Where did you get the extra planes and tanks?

You must be getting allot of Prestige per turn.

Kursk need 2 more AA and 2 fighter to balance it out.

Probably should start with one 85mm AA and one fighter and test that.

If they fix the supply issue that will help the USSR allot.

I start Kursk with 3 fighters and 1 stuka, I did not purchase any additional air units.
I started with 800 prestige, but and most of my prestige comes from capturing (and recapturing) cities. I don't think my per turn injection is very high. I ended my latest turn with 14 prestige, I'll let you know how much I have at the start of my new turn.
I didn't buy any new tanks. Two IVFs that you killed almost immediately on the Western Front, I did buy those 2. The two tigers and three panthers I have are the ones I started with. You killed all three of my Marders, but I bought 1 or 2 nashorns at 198 a piece. Too bad your KV-1s tore right through their terribly low defense values.

I can't believe it, but I may actually win, even with your five or six near invulnerable and practically unkillable KV-1s.

I'll continue this discussion about Kursk in the Kursk thread, it's going a little off topic from this general unit balance thread.

EDIT: By the way, my 'per turn prestige injection' is 5 prestige. Almost all of my prestige income came from capturing cities.

@Razz1

Regarding hard attack for Panthers and Tiger I as well as for Pak 43/41 and Pak 36.
I rechecked (source tarrif.net) penetration table shows that results. Apparently velocity of those guns was bigger so they made more penetration.
Initiative is tied to barell length and Pak 43/41 was bigger piece than famous 88 anti-aircraft.

The more I play, the less overpowered I find the KV-1 to be. Me saying this from a German perspective too.

This only cements my impression that if you nerf the GD on the KV-1, the Soviets are going to need some form of compensation in return to maintain balance.

the problem is an mentioned. Scenarios are harder campaign easy. In campaign you have experience and the KV's are allot easier.

I know they are working on adding experience for the AI in campaign so that would be great.

Hay whats up with artillery and bombers?

Does suppression stay for more than one turn?

I read allot of talk about doing this for Artillery.

Is suppression lasting more than one turn for bombers?

In our multi-player game the odds were two kills and zero for me.

I attacked three different times with same odds and did zero damage.

Got any combat log pictures? Going to need those to see what happened in detail.

My interpretation of odds that look like 0 - 2 means each unit of your 10 strength attacker has a 20% chance to kill an enemy unit. So maybe 100% of all your shots landed between a roll of 1-79?

Razz1 wrote:the problem is an mentioned. Scenarios are harder campaign easy. In campaign you have experience and the KV's are allot easier.

Oh, and I wasn't talking about this kind of experience, I was referring mostly to our second game of Kursk. Multiplayer experience.

Yes, I know. I just want to emphasize that I am glad they are looking at adding AI experience in the campaigns.

M18 Hellcat gets absolutely wrecked by infantry... on open terrain! (Yes there are some really lucky dice, but even with average luck, they'd still wreck the M18)

I guess it's the +2 vs AT.

But let's not make them too strong either. Hellcats were a little light, had a massive open-top vulnerability, and did not even come with co-axial.

Typical problem of having a single class for what are really different kinds of equipment. Maybe the +2 should only apply to infantry attacking non-(half-)tracked AT units.

The M18's also open topped, a serious problem when dealing with infantry in a close up battle.

One problem I've noticed is when bombing certain infantry like Russian engineers.

They have very high air-def, which often gives nonsensical results.

For example, attacking with Stukas often gives the Stuka an expectation of 0 or 1 kills against entrenched engineers, but the engineers are able to shoot down often 2 or more planes from the sky.

Either the air-defense on the engineers needs to be lowered, or we need to add in some other factors to the combat mechanics.


I fail to see any case where fast moving Stukas dive-bombing from the sky are going to lose more of their planes due to rifle-fire shot up in the air, than all the slow moving infantry below which are going to be blasted by high explosives.

Stuka will be defined as bomber moderately effective against vehicles and gun pieces. Infantry should be more persistent to it.
So high air defense for infantry is intentional. Problem is in ground defense for Stuka.
We want to avoid air units and especially bombers being ultimate killers that can clear the way in front of the land forces.

I like the fact that guards and engineers can shoot back.

Makes you think, "Is that a key position I am will to take losses on?"

[quote]Makes you think, "Is that a key position I am will to take losses on?"[/quote]

No, it makes me think, "What's with these unrealistic results. What were they thinking?"


BTW...
The 8.8cm Flak seems to also be a total joke in the air role. Even the AI isn't afraid to drop bombs right on top of them.

Obsolete wrote: BTW...
The 8.8cm Flak seems to also be a total joke in the air role. Even the AI isn't afraid to drop bombs right on top of them.

Previously AD were way to powerful, crippling in one shot and killing in two. The current version may be an 'over-nerf' that will need further adjustment, especially considering the killing power of Infantry with [1] air attack value compared to that of an AD unit.

Well, something sure is wrong when an INFANTRY unit, (Russian Engineers) for example, causes THREE times as much kills against air units, than an 88 would.

* Face-palm.

Obsolete wrote:Well, something sure is wrong when an INFANTRY unit, (Russian Engineers) for example, causes THREE times as much kills against air units, than an 88 would.

* Face-palm.

I personally mentioned this a while ago, and it's acknowledged as needing improvement.