Originally Posted by Crni vuk (Post 162000)

Then I think Men of War might be eventualy the wrong game for you. Without the intention to sound cocky or insult you. I thought about the game in a similar way and it meant a lot of frustration, at least in the begining. Till a friend told me I should not play realistic but witht the rules of the game. And now it works a lot easier and better. Men of war is a complex RTS with WW2 as theme. Its in no way a battlefield simulation. What ever if the intention was to give units realistic values or not but fact is that its a game first and anything else later. I personaly prefer realism over a lot of other things as well. But for a RTS you cant simply make evertyhing realistic. Not if you want to have some fun as well. Otherwise you would see Kingtigers destroy anything on ALL ranges with pin point accuracy (almost), sounds not all to fun does it ? Though now you would have to give the other side either a powerfull airforce and/or artillery units, making the Tiger II eventualy very vulnerable to mechanical problems meaning that only 5 % of them would see the battlefield in the end. Not that fun either ...

Its incredible hard to make a realistic game.

Originally Posted by Crni vuk (Post 161937)

issue with angling your tiger is that you expose your tracks and then your tiger is soon enough dead.

The Germans are not bad. They are just overkill. You end often enough in situations where you dont use the appropiate gear to counter the enemy armor like a Tiger I or Panther which have been excelent units but simply go for the "kill it all think later solution" that are the King, Jagd and Sturmtiger. And those are many times the vehicles you see. It doesnt mean that you dont see other vehicles. The panther is one of the most usefull vehicles if used correctly. Its just a bit ridiculous that you have trouble to penetrate sme tanks like the IS2 for example already from the side only cause the game decided now that youre shell is almost ineffective cause youre shooting from to far away ...

Originally Posted by Crni vuk (Post 162000)

Then I think Men of War might be eventualy the wrong game for you. Without the intention to sound cocky or insult you. I thought about the game in a similar way and it meant a lot of frustration, at least in the begining. Till a friend told me I should not play realistic but witht the rules of the game. And now it works a lot easier and better. Men of war is a complex RTS with WW2 as theme. Its in no way a battlefield simulation. What ever if the intention was to give units realistic values or not but fact is that its a game first and anything else later. I personaly prefer realism over a lot of other things as well. But for a RTS you cant simply make evertyhing realistic. Not if you want to have some fun as well. Otherwise you would see Kingtigers destroy anything on ALL ranges with pin point accuracy (almost), sounds not all to fun does it ? Though now you would have to give the other side either a powerfull airforce and/or artillery units, making the Tiger II eventualy very vulnerable to mechanical problems meaning that only 5 % of them would see the battlefield in the end. Not that fun either ...

Its incredible hard to make a realistic game.

Originally Posted by CzaD (Post 162080)

I have never played Close Combat, but I have played a fantastic and hugely tactical turn-based game called Steel Panthers. The tank ranges in SP are much better represented and the game attempts to fight historical campaigns and has like 1000’s of historical battles. Contrary to MoW, which seems to be all about “technology race” (you see a Tiger = you buy a Pershing), you would have to apply different tactics and use 3 or more Shermans or T-34s or a tank assault squad to hunt a Tiger down. You could appreciate the might of the Tiger and the bravery of Sherman tank commanders more. If you wanted a Pershing you would have to play a battle set in 1945.

So for me, eras is a big yes.

Originally Posted by Nikitns (Post 162116)

In this game, King tigers are ALWAYS targeted by both artillery and tanks. But instead of sending 3 tanks (where 2 of them would die) people simply wear down the King Tiger, before going in for the kill.

I think if we play 1943, Tiger 1 should cost as much as King Tiger, for example. This entire thing would take allot of work, but it would certainly be worth it!

Originally Posted by Nikitns (Post 162116)

In this game, King tigers are ALWAYS targeted by both artillery and tanks. But instead of sending 3 tanks (where 2 of them would die) people simply wear down the King Tiger, before going in for the kill.

I think if we play 1943, Tiger 1 should cost as much as King Tiger, for example. This entire thing would take allot of work, but it would certainly be worth it!