Oracle Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 Throughout my sleepless night I pondered the current state of the game and realized a greater distinction between early & late game units are needed. I'm sure this common sense for most, and I don't aim to insult the intellect of my readers, yet this topic must be broached to ensure ideas are free lowing and direction is maintained.I am going to list some common early/late game units below and I'd like all others with ideas to chime up following the same format listed below. Please refrain from reposting same types. Format:Unit typeEarly game unit / Late game unit. -------------LandRecon Jeep / M8 Heavy Recon AT-Gun / M10 Wolverine Tank DestroyerAA-Gun / M3 Halftrack .50cal VariantRecon Jeep (light troop carrier) / M3 Halftrack (or just introduce it as a sole troop carrier which can tow light support guns)Artillery Howitzer / M7 Priest 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted December 21, 2015 Report Share Posted December 21, 2015 Marvelous ! I like your idea. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oracle Posted December 24, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 24, 2015 Continuing with the earlier post, I have another I'd like to list. AirFighter/Bomber / FighterFighter/Bomber / BomberI make this suggestion after much consideration to the direction the game is likely headed. We will continue to receive new units on a monthly to bi-monthly basis until we the arsenal is full. Thinking ahead, I truly believe we introduced the fighter & bomber too early. They are entirely too powerful for early/mid-game units and should be characterized as late game units. It replace them, I suggest we introduce the Fighter/Bomber. Though they saw limited life during ww2, these carrier and land based aircraft were fitted to be the inbetween for the fully developed fighter & bomber. To fight in game, they can have half the potential of the fighter and bomber and will retain usefulness on the battlefield for aircraft carriers as cheaper yet capable aircraft. Just a thought. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oracle Posted December 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 26, 2015 Adding onto this idea, there could be further distinction between the roles performed by the Flying Fortress Bomber (current edition) and the fighter/bomber (proposed). The current bomber can be adjusted to act as a anti-building/structure bomber capable of doing more range to villages/cities/military zones/harbors large bombs released from within, while the fighter/bomber is better suited for the Close Air Support mission by doing more damage to infantry/vehicles/armor due to the cluster bombs/billets it drops. The former will do more centralized damage on targets while the latter does more area of affect damage. More to consider, though it seems rather plausible to me. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog Posted December 27, 2015 Report Share Posted December 27, 2015 Oracle you got some good ideas lol 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oracle Posted December 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 27, 2015 Oracle you got some good ideas lol Thanks. Just trying to make the game better. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rampageTG Posted December 31, 2015 Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 Adding onto this idea, there could be further distinction between the roles performed by the Flying Fortress Bomber (current edition) and the fighter/bomber (proposed). The current bomber can be adjusted to act as a anti-building/structure bomber capable of doing more range to villages/cities/military zones/harbors large bombs released from within, while the fighter/bomber is better suited for the Close Air Support mission by doing more damage to infantry/vehicles/armor due to the cluster bombs/billets it drops. The former will do more centralized damage on targets while the latter does more area of affect damage. More to consider, though it seems rather plausible to me. like me the idea it's just the current bomber is more of a b25 Mitchell since it's a twin engine medium bomber. The b17 Flying Fortress was a 4 engined heavy bomber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oracle Posted December 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 like me the idea it's just the current bomber is more of a b25 Mitchell since it's a twin engine medium bomber. The b17 Flying Fortress was a 4 engined heavy bomber.Thank you for the correction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aviatorbaron Posted December 31, 2015 Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 Got some questions... Would early/late game be decided by how long the player has been in the map, how long the map has been going on, or player level? Players of a lower level already have the disadvantage of not being able to have as many units, if they are also weaker units it may discourage people who don't play as often. Maybe I'm not understanding the concept of the idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.