Sierra should be more expansive and stronger than Akula

In this thread you can discuss any thoughts you have about balance within the game. Does a particular unit need a specification changed? Is a stealth plane not stealthy enough? Do "Belli Bar" levels need to be changed? Let us know and discuss it all here.

Moderators: Legend, Balthagor, Moderators

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Sebastiaan
Colonel
Posts: 376
Joined: Aug 29 2005
Location: the Netherlands

Sierra should be more expansive and stronger than Akula

#1 Post by Sebastiaan » Nov 11 2005

according to this source
..By 1976 it had become evident that existing industrial infrastructure was inadequate to mass produce the expensive titanium hulls of this class, and that consequently production rates would not meet force level requirements. Consequently, the Akula attack submarine project using a steel hull was initiated. Construction of the Sierra class was halted in favor of the [probably] less expensive 'Akula' class.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/theater/949.htm

the Sierra class submarines should be more expansive (and higher defence value) than the Akula class submarine because of it hull quality. While the Siera hull was made of Titanium, Akula was made from steel. Therefore the Siera should be more expansive but also have better defence.
not going forward eqeals to going backward

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 19961
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

#2 Post by Balthagor » Nov 11 2005

ok
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

Post Reply

Return to “Balance”