Heavy Tanks - a new technology

@marine36:

three sounds pretty good. one would be complicated, how would you know what tanks are heavy and which tanks arnt?

By using the battleboard and counting every second tank that you still have in the combat as a 4 (heavy tank), put on the 4 hit area on the battle board! Do this procedure for every cycle of combat! :wink:

@Kaladesh:

not ;-)

first combatcycle:
put 2 tanks on 3 and 1 tank on 4 … repeat this until all tanks are on your battleboard. at the end of the combat remove casualties.
second combatcycle:
remove all remaining tanks from battleboard and redeploy them by putting 2 on 3 and 1 on 4 … repeat that until all your remaining tanks are on the battelboard…
and so on

Thank you Kaladesh, for clarifying how Tiger Tanks works! :)

@Kaladesh:

it was a pleasure :D

Do tou play A&A Europe, if you do I sugget you to take a look at the A&A Europe forum for NAs! :D

@Guerrilla:

The 3 option is awesome… but make it only for the first round, because of the obvious Russian Repercussion(recieved not given :wink: )

GG

How about giving it as an advantage and let German tanks attack and defend in the openingfire step during the first cycle of combat? This one would make it more simple, than every theird tank at 4/4!

I have tested both in a few games and my game friends land I like both variants!

@Guerrilla:

another thing Mr Andersson… On variaant one your saying on attack and defense Tanks are better than Fighters… maybe you should reverse them from fighters (Attack 4 dfend 3)

GG

Well GG then they wouldn’t be worth it, some 30+ IPCs on average! Remember that an artillery and a infantry combination costs 7 IPCs and together are approximately as effective as a heavy tank (4/4). Maybe 3/4 and NO 6 IPC cost and additional cost for each tank you have before the development come in to play.

Why would a 3/4 tank be worth 5 IPCs?
Simply because that a 3/4 tank is more of defensive character, and as a defensive unit it would be cheaper to buy two infantries (can take two hits) at the same cost! Sure the 2 in movement and an approximately 50% better offensive capability would be a strong incentive over the 2-infantry combo, but not better than a artillery and infantry combo for 7 IPCs!

However the 3/4 appers to be a much more balanced variant since it now doesn’t favor Germany much more than any other nation. Imagine US with Chinese Divisions advantage and an IC in Asia that could bring two heavy tanks each turn! Or not to mention if US with Lend-Lease could support Russia with fighters so they could roll for the heavy tank development!

GG, You have been a true light in the darkness of heavy tank development! A 3/4 tank at regular 5 IPCs it is!

Germany began the war with LIGHT TO MEDIUM OFFENSIVE TANKS to perform the battlefield function of offensive breakthrough and were highly successful from 1939-1942 against WWI style opposition. The design of the offensive tank was driven by physical reality to have the maximum cross-country mobility to infiltrate through enemy lines to collapse them from the inside out . The thing that won the “lightning war” (blitzkrieg) battle according to German Panzer General Hans Guderians was TRACKS not tank dueling. The goal was to defeat Army units to win battles and wars not destroy other tanks to chalk up “kill marks” on your gun tubes. The heavy tanks like Tigers were made for tank dueling and hence of a defensive value, to make newly captured areas less susceptible for counter-attacks! :wink:

@Guerrilla:

thanks… I think it will be a much more favorably bought tech and is not as complex… although the ones you have invented already are pretty sweet… :lol:

GG

You are right GG! And therefore our endeavour deserves a small history to bring some realism to it!

Germany began the war with LIGHT TO MEDIUM OFFENSIVE TANKS to perform the battlefield function of offensive breakthrough and were highly successful from 1939-1942 against WWI style opposition. The design of the offensive tank was driven by physical reality to have the maximum cross-country mobility to infiltrate through enemy lines to collapse them from the inside out . The thing that won the “lightning war” (blitzkrieg) battle according to German Panzer General Hans Guderians was TRACKS not tank dueling. The goal was to defeat Army units to win battles and wars not destroy other tanks to chalk up “kill marks” on your gun tubes. The heavy tanks like Tigers were made for tank dueling and hence of a defensive value, to make newly captured areas less susceptible for counter-attacks! :wink:

@Guerrilla:

exactly…Tigers were more of defensive Artillery/Howitzer with a big AT Gun… Same as the US they started with the Sherman and Priest and in the End came out with the 90mm Pershing…

THe Germans neede to develop a defensive tank when it reached the point where its blitzkrieg collapsed…

GG

So which development of ours do you think it should replace? :wink: :o
OR should one just make a list of more techs? I still think that Coastal Bombardment need to be refreshed, like mine Super Destroyers with 3 in move!

@Guerrilla:

Well I was thinking Super Destroyers! but the next one is rockets…

GG

Why not have another tech and make it eight!??? Do you have any suggestions for the 8th tech??? It has to be good (not an advantage) and historically correct to gain acceptance by the A&A community!

Or how about this one as the 8th technology?

TECHNOLOGICAL ESPIONAGE
Once a technology has been discovered, any player may use spies to steal that technology.

By using spies one will reduce the cost of develop a technology. Every third tech roll per turn is for free, for a technology that is developed by any other player.