Thanks, I couldn't really find much hard stuff on SMG usage by the Yanks. Apparently that's why.
It was very ad hoc. There were cases where Rifle squads got issued a whole bunch of M3's, but it was on a temporary basis for an assault of some kind and an officer had to scrounge them up from somewhere. Unlike every other nation during WW2, the US didn't officially give a submachine-gun to the squad leader until the war was pretty much over. The US Army was a strong believer in the semi-automatic rifle providing all the firepower the Rifle squad needed, so much so that they kept the M1918 BAR as the squad's automatic weapon even though it was a pale imitation of a light machine-gun.
The M3 was far more common than the M1 Thompson, but was mainly given to vehicle crews and other non-frontline troops who just needed a small defensive weapon. The M1 Thompson was pretty expensive to make, so it was highly prized.
Again, more off-topic history tidbits. Apologies |
And this applies to any instance of range values being used. Accuracy, Cooldown, Reload, etc. If it has different values at different ranges, then it gradually shifts from Near to Mid, and from Mid to Far. |
While we're on the topic, the standard firearm of the Rangers was the M1 Garand, backed up with a single M1919 light machine-gun per section, and a single M2 60mm mortar and two Bazookas per platoon. So an M1919 LMG upgrade would not be out of the question.
Submachine-guns were not officially issued at all to the squads, but US troops were packrats and found ways to get their hands on additional equipment all the time. One well-documented trick that Infantry Company commanders had was to officially declare their weapons platoon had 'lost' their two light machine-guns and then requisition some 'replacements', effectively doubling their automatic firepower |
Another vote for giving them an ability or two.
They're solid in stats, but lack flavour. Something that represents their fearlessness would be appropriate, akin to the old Fire Up! from CoH1, or something new. |
I'm not sure if Criticals have an executer in the first place. Are you sure it's working with check_self at TRUE? |
By the middle of 1944, the Red Army only outnumbered the Wehrmacht by a small margin. So in order to ensure they had the numbers to achieve an operational success in an area, they used elaborate deceptions to conceal what they were up to, and tried to trick the Wehrmacht into allocating manpower elsewhere.
Operation Bagration is a good example of that, and led to a crushing German defeat where they lost an entire Army Group and had a huge hole in their front line. All because the Wehrmacht fell for the deception and moved the bulk of their forces out of the region of the Ukraine. The deception was so successful the Soviets enjoyed a roughly 3-to-1 ratio in tanks and assault guns, and 2-to-1 ratio in personnel and field guns.
tl;dr Red Army liked to win fights through out-numbering their enemy, but they had work for it and be smart about it. |
I agree.
The Pershing definitely does not feel like a 230 Fuel tank, nor one that should be limited to just 1. I'm finding I constantly have to retreat it since it takes damage so easily.
Given that it historically was only slightly better than a Panther, I think it should be re-adjusted, both in cost and stats, to be that way. And then remove the limit of 1 and make it buildable from the Battalion building just like the Easy Eight is. |
I kind of find that statement insulting, pretty much saying that thematics is pointless. That's a large reason people play Relic based games. When you play the Dawn of War series 70% of the reason you are playing that game is because it is based off of Warhammer 40k. A big reason some people like me play this game is because they love WW2, and like the matching thematic factions of the war. If this was some Sci-Fi setting with lasers being shot out everywhere having no correlation to WW2, I'd probably not be interested at all.
I think you're misunderstanding my point. I was agreeing with ThoseDeafMutes that tinkering with things like levels of veterancy, income rates, and artificially denying/adding units to achieve a weird theme (i.e. kübelwagen instead of heavy machine-gun team) is going to make it very hard to balance. Theme IS important, but it can be expressed through other means, such as unit roster, unit abilities, commander abilities, upgrades, the benefits gained from each level of veterancy, and so on, without having to change a core foundation of the game. |
Might still be possible for modders to remove the top gunner and make it act as if it's remote controlled. The gunner is specified in the EBP, and removing the entry would make him disappear without (hopefully) affecting the gun's functionality. Also (hopefully) the hatch's open/close state can be controlled through another action. |
Could do something similar to CoH1's Sherman 75mm -> 76mm upgrade.
1. Put the T-34/76 back into the Tankoviy building, price it accordingly as a cheap tank that's a little weaker than the Panzer IV and Sherman.
2. Put the T-34/85 in the Mechanized building.
3. In the Mechanized building add a T-34/85 upgrade (Manpower and Fuel cost). This upgrade allows you to spend Munitions to refit any T-34/76 you already bought if you bring them back to the Mechanized building and wait X seconds for the refit to complete (can't move/shoot during refit process, and being fired upon interrupts it). Refit T-34s retain their veterancy, of course.
4. Optional: Once upgrade is bought, you can no longer buy T-34/76s from the Tanoviy building, you're stuck with buying brand new T-34/85s in the Mechanized building to replace any tank losses. |