Please what? Do you try to troll? Axis tanks are extremely bad at crushing compared to crombourghinis and comerraris, even the t34 is pretty decent at crushing.
And for the Stuka, I dont know. That thing can be very powerful, but it costs a lot and easy to destroy, unlike the Calliope. As for the range, I dont think that the Calli has less range (maybe less effective range), but you also need more skill to hit smth that isnt a stationary support weapon with a stuka.
I was thinking about the USF tanks. And no, the game should not become Deathrace 2000 … It would just be a bit fairer. I know, i know, asymmetric warfare … but the gameplay mechanisms, like the soldiers crushing or the weapons that magically appears in the hand of axis troops don’t make a lot of sense.
Calliope are tanks, so it’s kind of logical that they are (marginally) tougher than halftrack (WS). But i think that they should also be limited and adjusted. I said it in my initial post.
Overpowered indirect fire is kind of ruining (or limiting) the rock, paper, scissor gameplay. If the enemy can drop a nuke on your terrain, then you have to go for very mobile troops. So basically, I think that the so called “blobs” (when more than 1 riflemen unit is moving together. For the axis it’s called a division) are a response to over the top indirect firing units.