Profile of Omega_Warrior

It's awesome

But They had a very weak tanks in WW2. so I think, You need set them weaker and cheaper.

1 Sherman VS 3 Chi-Ha

It will fun better

Well their tanks weren't so bad that they couldn't pierce the rear of shermans. You have to consider the game mechanics and shermans and T34s are aready cheap. Having 10 Chi-Has roaming around gets a bit hard to control. It is supposed to be a bit similiar to the P4 vs allied armor balance where they will lose decisevely from the front, but can even the balance if attacking from the rear. I kind of estimated with most the stats, but the Chi-ha should deflect often against medium other medium tanks front armor. You also want to make sure they can do a little something to heavy armor to make it fair.

As for the Chi-Nu, they were designed to go head to head with the current medium armor at the time, but like the other medium tanks fail when faced with heavely armored tanks.

The thin armor is also a big weakness as even light tanks can reliably pen them, but they should have a high rate of fire to compensate a bit. Remember this tank isn't about what tank can beat what tank, but rather about how you use the advantages of those tanks. Two T34s will lose easily to a tiger from the front, but is they use their speed to flank they can take it out quickly.

I really don't know why people on this forum try to simplify these discussions down to what tank can beat what. Just because the IS-2 has a lot of armor and lots of penetration doesn't mean a Chi-nu can never damage it. They just need to attack the rear.

This is really good work and I like your unit design. Your ideas for infantry and support weapons is great and the abilities you came up with are great.

That being said, the tanks here aren't going to help late game and I've played this game enough to know AT infantry can only take you so far. Australia most likely couldn't make up an entire faction if only for the fact they don't have enough veriety of equipment. A lot of these ideas would be more suited to a Commonwealth faction of which Australian Forces would be a part of.

Sorry if my opinions get you down, but you otherwise have some great ideas here.

In all honesty I'll be a bit disappointed if the M10 features, it wasn't all that great of a vehicle imo. The gun used on the M10 was weaker than the 76mm we started putting on our Shermans and Hellcats, so why not just feature the Hellcat instead? The Jackson should probly be doctrinal and be similar to a Sherman with a Panther's gun.

I think that both will be put into the faction eventually. I just think the Hellcat is far more likely to be a doctrinal call-in due to it's unusual characteristics. Relic tends to put units that were used more into the non-doctrinal tree unless they need to fill a role, and with the sherman already being a fast flanker they don't need another.

in short the M18 is far better then the M10, which is exactly why it won't be non-doctrinal.

I just hope they don't mix up the performance of the TDs again. The M10 is the ambusher, long range killer and the Hellcat was the fast flanker.

Yeah I though putting the Kamakazi in was stupid at first too, but after I read about the OHKA which was basically a manually driven missile, I thought it was too cool not to put in, but yes I know it was mostly used against ships.