Questions about RD and unit stats changes

User avatar
SpeisCheese
Captain
Posts: 1709
Joined: Thu 3 Apr 2014 18:18
Location: Somewhere in space...
Contact:

Questions about RD and unit stats changes

Postby SpeisCheese » Wed 22 Oct 2014 16:30

So I was looking back to ALb and their units, and some things annoyed me really. Here some questions.

1.ALB Roland 2 have the same stats as RD Roland 3 but cost less and got better avaibility. Doesn't make sense if in a game with a newer timeline that their avaibility got decreased? Same goes for the OSAs.
2.Leopard Tanks got 10 armour, but changed in RD. Why?
3.T-64 was a better choice than T-72. Now in RD it is the opposite. In ALB you had an accurate tank or a meat shield. Now you have an armoured T-34(yes T-64 are now T-34 with better armour) and nice meatshields with good accuracy. So why such (awful) changes. Irl the Soviet Union liked T-64 more because it was a better choice for tank battles in Europe(it has never been exported because it was a new engineering revolution in 1970)
4.Planes avaibility(but everybody knows that)
5.More ressource points for a 1 vs 1 map compared to RD. Why such a drastical change?
6.Why is the AI even worse now. I remember playing on "Copenhague" wit others against AI and they're were pretty good. It was fun playing against them. Now they cheat and even fail when cheating. No fun at all.

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: Questions about RD and unit stats changes

Postby Killertomato » Wed 22 Oct 2014 16:36

1.ALB Roland 2 have the same stats as RD Roland 3 but cost less and got better avaibility. Doesn't make sense if in a game with a newer timeline that their avaibility got decreased? Same goes for the OSAs.


[RAD] SAMs were entirely rebalanced. None of them are F&F anymore, for one thing.

2.Leopard Tanks got 10 armour, but changed in RD. Why?


They didn't deserve it?

3.T-64 was a better choice than T-72. Now in RD it is the opposite. In ALB you had an accurate tank or a meat shield. Now you have an armoured T-34(yes T-64 are now T-34 with better armour) and nice meatshields with good accuracy. So why such (awful) changes. Irl the Soviet Union liked T-64 more because it was a better choice for tank battles in Europe(it has never been exported because it was a new engineering revolution in 1970)


Which T-64s and T-72s?
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
SpeisCheese
Captain
Posts: 1709
Joined: Thu 3 Apr 2014 18:18
Location: Somewhere in space...
Contact:

Re: Questions about RD and unit stats changes

Postby SpeisCheese » Wed 22 Oct 2014 16:40

Killertomato wrote:
1.ALB Roland 2 have the same stats as RD Roland 3 but cost less and got better avaibility. Doesn't make sense if in a game with a newer timeline that their avaibility got decreased? Same goes for the OSAs.


[RAD] SAMs were entirely rebalanced. None of them are F&F anymore, for one thing.

2.Leopard Tanks got 10 armour, but changed in RD. Why?


They didn't deserve it?

3.T-64 was a better choice than T-72. Now in RD it is the opposite. In ALB you had an accurate tank or a meat shield. Now you have an armoured T-34(yes T-64 are now T-34 with better armour) and nice meatshields with good accuracy. So why such (awful) changes. Irl the Soviet Union liked T-64 more because it was a better choice for tank battles in Europe(it has never been exported because it was a new engineering revolution in 1970)


Which T-64s and T-72s?


Didn't even know that they were Fire and Forget
Why do you think they shouldn't have 10
I talk about T-64A and T-72A

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: Questions about RD and unit stats changes

Postby Killertomato » Wed 22 Oct 2014 16:58

Why do you think they shouldn't have 10


The IRL armor values don't justify it. The Leopard 1, even the A3 with the upgrade turret, was never a particularly heavily armored tank (excluding the C2 MEXAS). It wasn't designed to be.

I talk about T-64A and T-72A


The T-64A is from 1967. It has an optical rangefinder and... not much else as far as FCS goes. The T-72A is from 1979. It has 12 years' worth of improvement in systems, including a laser rangefinder.

The T-72A is more comparable to the T-64B than it is the T-64A.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
Masky
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 626
Joined: Tue 5 Nov 2013 02:23
Location: Club 128
Contact:

Re: Questions about RD and unit stats changes

Postby Masky » Wed 22 Oct 2014 17:05

Darkus1155 wrote:
Killertomato wrote:
1.ALB Roland 2 have the same stats as RD Roland 3 but cost less and got better avaibility. Doesn't make sense if in a game with a newer timeline that their avaibility got decreased? Same goes for the OSAs.


[RAD] SAMs were entirely rebalanced. None of them are F&F anymore, for one thing.

2.Leopard Tanks got 10 armour, but changed in RD. Why?


They didn't deserve it?

3.T-64 was a better choice than T-72. Now in RD it is the opposite. In ALB you had an accurate tank or a meat shield. Now you have an armoured T-34(yes T-64 are now T-34 with better armour) and nice meatshields with good accuracy. So why such (awful) changes. Irl the Soviet Union liked T-64 more because it was a better choice for tank battles in Europe(it has never been exported because it was a new engineering revolution in 1970)


Which T-64s and T-72s?


Didn't even know that they were Fire and Forget
Why do you think they shouldn't have 10
I talk about T-64A and T-72A

As far as Leopard 1's go, the downgraded armor was an authenticity change that went along with getting the better, more accurate guns they have now.

MrRed
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon 17 Jun 2013 14:05
Contact:

Re: Questions about RD and unit stats changes

Postby MrRed » Wed 22 Oct 2014 18:59

Killertomato wrote:The T-64A is from 1967. It has an optical rangefinder and... not much else as far as FCS goes. The T-72A is from 1979. It has 12 years' worth of improvement in systems, including a laser rangefinder.

The T-72A is more comparable to the T-64B than it is the T-64A.


Well, to be fair, I'd say the T-72A is as far from the T-64B as the T-64A is from the T-72A. Otherwise, good points.

keebs63
Brigadier
Posts: 3091
Joined: Mon 3 Mar 2014 08:33
Contact:

Re: Questions about RD and unit stats changes

Postby keebs63 » Wed 22 Oct 2014 19:19

1. Part of rebalancing AA. Also, avail is in no way based on real life, or else US would have 5000 rifleman per card....

2. Which ones? IIRC they have like the same armor...

3. Lots of changes to tabks have happened, some good, some bad, just because Russia liked it doesnt mean its good.

4. Obviously a measure to help avaid plane spamming

5. Different maps and rebalancing....

6. Different engine, same reason HE power is so effective. Things cant be copied 100% engine to engine, and there was probably a programing error or something.
Image
"arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarted" -Someone, somewhere in Wargame Chat 2015

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests