Unit types having different strength creates confusion about which unit does better.
For example; currently infantry are 54, tanks are 45, anti tank are 44? Recon are different aswell.When you try to compare two different units, you have to do unnecessary math to figure out which does better?
So, does infantry with 30 hard attack better than tank with 38 hard attack? You gotta do the math 30 * 54 = 1620; 38 * 45 = 1710 oh okay my tanks do more hard attack. What about an anti tank with 40 attack? Oh thats 1760 so its better etc... This is unnecessary.
This needs simplification. You gotta understand which unit does better at first look at the unit stats.
SUGGESTION:
All combats units (infantry-tank-anti tank) should have 40 (or 50) strenght; all support units (recon-artillery-anti air) should have 20 (or 25) strength.
Balancing can be made different, just focus on having the similarized unit strength.
Unit Strenght should be similarized
Moderators: Balthagor, Moderators
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Mar 31 2018
- Human: Yes
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22106
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Unit Strenght should be similarized
Your suggestion takes us further away from realism which some players appreciate. Russian tank battalions actually have 31 tanks. We currently unify all classes to the same size, but IRL there is no world standard for battalion sizes per class even within single classes.
I'm not sure what the community preference might be, so we'll watch as this discussion unfolds...
I'm not sure what the community preference might be, so we'll watch as this discussion unfolds...
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Mar 31 2018
- Human: Yes
Re: Unit Strenght should be similarized
In the game it is already unified per role; every single infantry battalion is 54 (except ww1 ones i believe,); every single tank battalion 45 (or 44 i dont remember) etc.
What's not cool is close roles having different unit numbers. It is ofcourse perfectly reasonable to have different numbers for aircraft and tank units; but for tanks and anti-tanks? I don't think so.
In most games; just by looking at unit stats you can instantly estimate their correct strenghts and weaknesses. However in SR, you have to manually calculate to see which unit is better.
About the community preference; %90 of the players doesnt even use forums, nor do they understand how in game calculations actually work.
Most people most likely only check unit stats; see that tank has higher hard attack value and automatically assume that the tank is better than the compared unit; but he/she doest know that hard attack value is not the only determining factor; strenght is important too.
In-game unit stat screen doesnt say that the attack values are multiplied by the strenght value of the unit. To know this information you have to use forums/guides etc.
What's not cool is close roles having different unit numbers. It is ofcourse perfectly reasonable to have different numbers for aircraft and tank units; but for tanks and anti-tanks? I don't think so.
In most games; just by looking at unit stats you can instantly estimate their correct strenghts and weaknesses. However in SR, you have to manually calculate to see which unit is better.
About the community preference; %90 of the players doesnt even use forums, nor do they understand how in game calculations actually work.
Most people most likely only check unit stats; see that tank has higher hard attack value and automatically assume that the tank is better than the compared unit; but he/she doest know that hard attack value is not the only determining factor; strenght is important too.
In-game unit stat screen doesnt say that the attack values are multiplied by the strenght value of the unit. To know this information you have to use forums/guides etc.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Oct 03 2009
- Human: Yes
- Location: Sweden
Re: Unit Strenght should be similarized
I didn't know that is how it worked even after playing hundreds of hours 2010-SRU. I don't really mind it, but maybe it could be made a little clearer for the player?
For instance if there are tooltips on the different icons/values explaining what do they are used for in addtion to the name of the value.
Or maybe it could be added as a similar value to range, a kind of a "current hard attack" which takes into account the current strength, morale, efficiency, experience or whatever is used. That said it could get very cluttered.
For instance if there are tooltips on the different icons/values explaining what do they are used for in addtion to the name of the value.
Or maybe it could be added as a similar value to range, a kind of a "current hard attack" which takes into account the current strength, morale, efficiency, experience or whatever is used. That said it could get very cluttered.
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Mar 31 2018
- Human: Yes
Re: Unit Strenght should be similarized
Morale, efficiency, experience, weather effects etc. are all dynamic values; they change every in-game hour so they are very hard to accurately show to player.smygsork wrote: ↑Jun 08 2023 I didn't know that is how it worked even after playing hundreds of hours 2010-SRU. I don't really mind it, but maybe it could be made a little clearer for the player?
For instance if there are tooltips on the different icons/values explaining what do they are used for in addtion to the name of the value.
Or maybe it could be added as a similar value to range, a kind of a "current hard attack" which takes into account the current strength, morale, efficiency, experience or whatever is used. That said it could get very cluttered.
On the other hand, strenght is a fixed value:
It is currently 54 for infantry units. That means, every attack value is multiplied by 54 for infantry units (unless the unit is damaged.)
It is currently 44 for tank units. > attack values are multiplied by 44.
It is currently 45 for anti-tank units > attack values are multiplied by 45.
It is currently 30ish for recon units (36?) > attack values are multiplied by 36.
Most players will assume that a tank unit with 38 hard attack value has higher hard attack than an infantry with 36 hard attack; which is wrong because 38 * 44 is lower than 36 * 54.
The wording of the "unit strenght" is problematic and confusing aswell, because it doesn't actually represent the "strenght of the unit". Better names would be "unit count " or "number of units", "battalion size" etc.
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Unit Strenght should be similarized
Tanks and infantries won't have similar hard and soft attacks anymore. Tanks will generaly have better hard and soft attack values (in the open unless we are talking about heavy mech infantry types like Bradley which might be close to some tanks). Infantry will have rather high close attack values.
Please teach AI everything!