Mitchverr wrote:1 thing that bugs me reading here.
The "no prototypes" thing, what about those that would go into production in case of war? Even if limited (btw the comment about the M8 on first page i think it was, it did go into production, the US currently have several in service iirc, but heh)?
What if the national "setup" is that of "we buy when we need"? Like the UK, saying "no prototypes" for example of the british military, would make a game based in the middle east today kinda, well, awkward, lol, not to forget ofcourse, most military campaigns by the british army in the last several decades, arguable since ww1, were based on "buy just before/during the operation", meaning that prototypes would be used, for example the sudden extra armor for british assets prior gulf war, and the milan platform for the warrior, and many other upgrades.
Just curious why people ignore how governments work, lol.
As for rather not see, well, a return of the derp arty is the obvious 1 for me lol.
Prototypes thats are beyond silly, i would rather not see, like ontos, but thats just me (im fine with logical prototypes like the M8 AGS, as an example).
"evac" having no real control on it for air support.
"dumbing down" of the command system and the way units move and fight.
No..no...its not really the fact that Prototypes exist. Its just that they should not be mainstays of decks. For the record we are talking about prototypes which are those like MBT-70 and Falcon which never entered production not those that were just late to the party.
For example Sweden right now in AB relies on the VEAK 40 prototype AA to provide Air defence against helicopters. This should not be the case as in real life RBS-70 performs that role. VEAK 40 should in this case work alongside the RBS-70 to fill a niche, not dominate it and become a must have unit for a viable deck.
Hope it clears it up.