Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
Posts: 2671
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

Postby Vasily Krysov » Wed 7 May 2014 16:49

TwojaStara wrote:Very nice orginal post , congratulations.

Only one very small suggestion, prices should be at least +5 or +10 in your 2nd post. With the current pricing of BTR60/70/Huey equal to 15$ + inf costs$$, such orginal pricing might lead to spamming low-tier tanks and mostly infantry elimination from the battlefield. Actually +10pts everywhere would bring things almost to the level of pricing in WALB - which was very nice actually.


How can one spam 10 point tanks if you can only get 12 of them per card, and there is only one card?

If people are not currently spamming the T-55A at 25, I am disinclined to say they will at 20. Especially with a lot more of their natural predator (mediums) running around.

Edit And increasing all the the prices by 10 would break the curvature too.

User avatar
HaryPL
Lieutenant
Posts: 1373
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2012 01:41
Contact:

Re: Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

Postby HaryPL » Wed 7 May 2014 16:55

Generally great idea, but isn't the 'hardened vet' distribution a bit over-zelous on USSR side? ;)
Also it might be just me but i would still welcome sort of +1/2 availability for heavies and 2/4 for medium over your proposals.

Does it take into account some proposed changes about some tanks, like recent Leo2A0/A1 topic?

User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
Posts: 2671
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

Postby Vasily Krysov » Wed 7 May 2014 17:10

HaryPL wrote:Generally great idea, but isn't the 'hardened vet' distribution a bit over-zelous on USSR side? ;)
Also it might be just me but i would still welcome sort of +1/2 availability for heavies and 2/4 for medium over your proposals.

Does it take into account some proposed changes about some tanks, like recent Leo2A0/A1 topic?


Need to have some way of differentiating the tanks for the USSR, which suffers a lot of duplication, so there are "line tanks" and "shock tanks". Soviets have a lot of different tanks so it looks like you get a lot of vets, but in practical terms you still cant field more than maybe 2500 points worth in any given game and that's an extreme example.

Greater numbers per card I do not feel can be possible, otherwise it removes the added AP pressure in this area. The idea is to make it so that a specialized deck cannot do tanks as well as an Armor deck.

The prices are for things as they currently are. if tanks change in future, then so does their price.

User avatar
Raymond Saint
Lieutenant
Posts: 1088
Joined: Fri 6 Apr 2012 12:36
Location: RSFSR
Contact:

Re: Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

Postby Raymond Saint » Wed 7 May 2014 17:50

Image

I'd call that the Affordable Tanks Act.
Or simply VasilyCare.
Image


Leyline
Warrant Officer
Posts: 490
Joined: Fri 6 Jul 2012 19:51
Contact:

Re: Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

Postby Leyline » Wed 7 May 2014 18:24

+1 for initial post.
We really need more reason to take the cold war workhorses.

You know what makes a heavy tank? 16ap, 15AV. Thats a low end heavy/borderline medium in my book.
Go up with and we move to heavy. If only one goes up, either AP or AP its a specialized medium/low end heavy...




And ATGM's need to go out of the equation. You know what my leopard2 's say to atmg throwing tanks? Thank you sir may i have another while i shoot your freakign ass from out under your fumbling ass.

ShanRevan
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon 10 Feb 2014 04:46
Contact:

Re: Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

Postby ShanRevan » Wed 7 May 2014 18:26

Vasily Krysov wrote:Fug.

Now I have to change my sig to "Literally Obama" :(

I was un-ironically told that Obama was literally Stalin the other day anyway so I think you're good still.

Leyline wrote:+1 for initial post.
We really need more reason to take the cold war workhorses.

You know what makes a heavy tank? 16ap, 15AV. Thats a low end heavy/borderline medium in my book.
Go up with and we move to heavy. If only one goes up, either AP or AP its a specialized medium/low end heavy...




And ATGM's need to go out of the equation. You know what my leopard2 's say to atmg throwing tanks? Thank you sir may i have another while i shoot your freakign ass from out under your fumbling ass.



The 15 to 18 AP/AV section is basically the new median combat power point, ie the middle of the power scale. They're probably what should actually be called "medium tanks"

User avatar
LoneRifle
Major-General
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed 3 Jul 2013 17:11
Location: Cackalacky
Contact:

Re: Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

Postby LoneRifle » Wed 7 May 2014 18:27

Points are a step in the right direction. The avail changes are..... off though.
Image

MoralCoral
Master Sergeant
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon 14 May 2012 16:47
Contact:

Re: Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

Postby MoralCoral » Wed 7 May 2014 18:28

Raymond Saint wrote:I'd call that the Affordable Tanks Act.
Or simply VasilyCare.


When you spread the tanks around, it's good for everybody.
Last edited by MoralCoral on Wed 7 May 2014 18:39, edited 1 time in total.
also known as the caulktopus

User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
Posts: 2671
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: Changing the Tanks Meta for the Better + Analysis

Postby Vasily Krysov » Wed 7 May 2014 18:38

LoneRifle wrote:Points are a step in the right direction. The avail changes are..... off though.


I am open to suggestions, use your choice of faction of the three I've done to make your case and I'll listen to it.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests