Make western tanks powerful

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • This is a serious issue,the attack rating of western tank level 5 against tanks is 10 which is less than 11 rating of eastern tank level 2.There is no other western vehicle which you can use to counter eastern tanks and if they are stacked with anti air too then you have no way to defeat them.
    I am the best player of this game that was and ever will be

  • Western is a aircraft doctrine, western should not necessarily build tanks but choppers or strike fighters for example.

    Or just try artillerie, rocket launchers are equally good with every doctrine.

    Eastern tanks have about 2 damage more vs tanks compared to western and european, so please stop overdramatizing.

    How anti-armor damage of tanks change between level 1 and 7:

  • This is what I already said that western tanks cannot defeat eastern tanks and western airforce is also ineffective if eastern nations have anti air.Artillery is the only option for a western nation now.There should be an option for every country to switch their doctrine like india is currently switching from eastern to western doctrine.
    I am the best player of this game that was and ever will be

  • GoldenGuy wrote:

    This is what I already said that western tanks cannot defeat eastern tanks and western airforce is also ineffective if eastern nations have anti air.Artillery is the only option for a western nation now.There should be an option for every country to switch their doctrine like india is currently switching from eastern to western doctrine.
    That's what mobile SAMS are for, and that's precisely the reason Russians are generally regarded as superior on this regard: Users of their tech ussualy have to deal with superior enemy airpower.

    Thus, in order to deal with this, Western focused ( for example) on stealth or stand-off weapons.

    In my opinion, tanks are extremely unrealistic right now, and not because or hit points ( though you could argue about each side caractheristics compared to real life, perhaps eastern models shoudl have a little less health, while mantaining or increasing their hit power due to ATGMs from the tube, etc) but because of being a damm slow unit you CANNOT air-transport, unlike real life where MBt users ussualy have some way to transport them over long distances, such as C5 Galaxys, An-124s, C-17s and so on.

    And this gets WORST over time, as -in real life- older tanks are actually easier to transport, as they are lighter. But in this game, it's newer ones that get airportable...

    SIDENOTE: india is not "switching their doctrine".

    First of all they never used Russian doctrine. They have always used a more british one.

    Second, Russia is still by far the largest supplier of weapon to India in almost every regard, and - unlike some biased sources would said- their are buying more, not less, russian weapons so...

    Not every buyer of russian weaponry uses "russian" doctrine. In fact, you would be surprised, as most of them don't.

    Iraq in 1991, for example, used nothing like an "eastern" doctrine. Their doctrine was also much more brit than anything else.

    Sorry for the off topic :P

  • armor transported by air vehicles is technically doable, but logistically undoable outside of very tactical and operational situations.

    There is a reason why countries do not make their armored force fly around except if "time is of the essence", because it is hellishly expensive as a transport tool, and a oiled war machine is all about efficiency.

    For example, all the C 5 in the current US army (starting from the principle they are 100% operational) are able to transport 2 armored brigades at once (on the 10 operational the US have at all time). On the contrary, the current US navy is more than able to transport at once 20 armored brigades (if US had as much), as well as al support personel, ammunition, spare parts, combat crew, support infantry, etc.

    Ironically, the time to load/unload, go back&forth, as well as the risks, make naval transport more reliable for, let's say, a long range deployment. The difference is "do you want to deploy quickly, or do you want to deploy in great volumes".

    It's the base of US power projection, that is unmatched by other countries.


    Airlifting is just not how large amount of war assets are moved on the planet.

    1°) Ships
    2°) Trains
    3°) Roads
    4°) Air

    The fact that we can airlift MBTs is related to gameplay more than realism. If it was all about realism, many units shouldn't be airliftable, granted that few countries on earth have enough logistical abilities to transport by air a small amount of such armored vehicles.





    This is how we move large amount of MBTs on our planet (which is conveniently covered by mostly water).


    Now... CoN is a game, and so, it seems logical to me, and more enjoyable, that technological commitment opens the ability to airlift, even if it's unrealistic. It would be really counter intuitive to gameplay for the player to pays for Tanks that gradually become less agile and can't be deployed as easily.


    It's really hard to make "reality" works with "gameplay", so... if you want to buff tanks, i suggest to manipulate their stats and data.


    "SIDENOTE: india is not "switching their doctrine".

    First of all they never used Russian doctrine. They have always used a more british one.

    Second, Russia is still by far the largest supplier of weapon to India in almost every regard, and - unlike some biased sources would said- their are buying more, not less, russian weapons so...

    Not every buyer of russian weaponry uses "russian" doctrine. In fact, you would be surprised, as most of them don't."


    It's the same problem : Reality vs Gameplay. Reality is complex : India is in such a strategical position that it is able to buy weapons to nearly everyone : Russia, US, France, Belgium, Germany, etc. Now, we can't really depict that on gameplay.

    Doctrins are basically another way of saying :

    Team A with better aircrafts
    Team B with better anti-air and ground
    Team C with better support

    And with different visuals to make the game feel more immersive and varied.

    As much as i agree that India isn't following a "Russian Doctrine", it's needed for the consistancy of the game, and we can't realistically create a Doctrin fitted to every single one country, with the good units, the good stats, and the good visuals :D
    Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.

  • Opulon is completely right.
    When Modern Armys thinking abour a Theater or AOI, first thing is thinking about SPODs (Sea Port of Disembrakation) to get in the heavy material and supplies.
    Of course light troops, Trucks, even light support vehicles and also choppers can be wrapped up and flown into the Zone, but heavy metal is still moved by Sea.

    The new A400M (the Airbus which shall play a vital role in the german federal armed forces air mobility concept) is capable of transporting one state of the art AFV (German Spz Puma in Protection class A !without! the additional armour needed on modern Combat sites. Therfore you need another transport carriing the modified skirts for 3 of the AFVs,...
    Every Logistics specialist /controller will favour the Sea transport.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Dorado Games
    DE - Team Lead
    Conflict of Nations




    "That was not me, it was already broken!"

  • Opulon wrote:




    "As much as i agree that India isn't following a "Russian Doctrine", it's needed for the consistancy of the game, and we can't realistically create a Doctrin fitted to every single one country, with the good units, the good stats, and the good visuals :D"




    Ohh I understand this, of course. It was more a reply to GoldenGuy's post :)




    Regarding movilization times, the fact is, no other country currently enjoys Power Projection capability as the US does.

    Russia has a considerable power projection inside it's own borders. Few people are aware of this, but the reality is, Russia is so big, actually moving 3 or 5 brigades in order to perform as excercise means ussualy moving over 100s, if not thousands of kilometers.


    Of course, this is achievable due to Russia's vast railroads, wich are not really simulated in the game.


    Most other countries prefered way of moving heavy armor is trough railway, as well.


    ( China is just starting it's power projection assets: and considering they have not big interest in expeditionary forces ( as least for the moment) situation is likely to remain this way at least for some time on.)


    However, lacking any mean of realistic speedy ground movement except for logistic networks, tank movement becomes extremely difficult even inside one country's territory.


    This is -IMHO- unrealistic, and nullifies tanks most important role- offensives.


    It wasn't like this when I first played this game, so I must say it's a nerf I did not welcome :(


    But hey, I recognize you guys are doing everything in order to keep this game ballanced, so please don't take it as a critic. I just wish tanks would be more easily deployable again ...Cause I love tanks :D

  • Opulon wrote:

    armor transported by air vehicles is technically doable, but logistically undoable outside of very tactical and operational situations.

    There is a reason why countries do not make their armored force fly around except if "time is of the essence", because it is hellishly expensive as a transport tool, and a oiled war machine is all about efficiency.

    For example, all the C 5 in the current US army (starting from the principle they are 100% operational) are able to transport 2 armored brigades at once (on the 10 operational the US have at all time). On the contrary, the current US navy is more than able to transport at once 20 armored brigades (if US had as much), as well as al support personel, ammunition, spare parts, combat crew, support infantry, etc.

    Ironically, the time to load/unload, go back&forth, as well as the risks, make naval transport more reliable for, let's say, a long range deployment. The difference is "do you want to deploy quickly, or do you want to deploy in great volumes".

    It's the base of US power projection, that is unmatched by other countries.


    Airlifting is just not how large amount of war assets are moved on the planet.

    1°) Ships
    2°) Trains
    3°) Roads
    4°) Air

    The fact that we can airlift MBTs is related to gameplay more than realism. If it was all about realism, many units shouldn't be airliftable, granted that few countries on earth have enough logistical abilities to transport by air a small amount of such armored vehicles.





    This is how we move large amount of MBTs on our planet (which is conveniently covered by mostly water).


    Now... CoN is a game, and so, it seems logical to me, and more enjoyable, that technological commitment opens the ability to airlift, even if it's unrealistic. It would be really counter intuitive to gameplay for the player to pays for Tanks that gradually become less agile and can't be deployed as easily.


    It's really hard to make "reality" works with "gameplay", so... if you want to buff tanks, i suggest to manipulate their stats and data.


    "SIDENOTE: india is not "switching their doctrine".

    First of all they never used Russian doctrine. They have always used a more british one.

    Second, Russia is still by far the largest supplier of weapon to India in almost every regard, and - unlike some biased sources would said- their are buying more, not less, russian weapons so...

    Not every buyer of russian weaponry uses "russian" doctrine. In fact, you would be surprised, as most of them don't."


    It's the same problem : Reality vs Gameplay. Reality is complex : India is in such a strategical position that it is able to buy weapons to nearly everyone : Russia, US, France, Belgium, Germany, etc. Now, we can't really depict that on gameplay.

    Doctrins are basically another way of saying :

    Team A with better aircrafts
    Team B with better anti-air and ground
    Team C with better support

    And with different visuals to make the game feel more immersive and varied.

    As much as i agree that India isn't following a "Russian Doctrine", it's needed for the consistancy of the game, and we can't realistically create a Doctrin fitted to every single one country, with the good units, the good stats, and the good visuals :D
    100% this is going to Germany for the Practice (as the Mericans did) sending their stuff to Rotterdam/Vlissingen then further to germany :D

  • Ah yes, it's true that Russia has a very high ability to move inside its territory.

    It's my occidental bias here : we see power projection only when it's to crush a random country in the middle of nowhere :D
    Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.

  • LoL I see :D


    Perhaps in bigger scenarios ( WW3 and such) SOME strategic railways could be available since minute 1 for bigger nations? Example: Trans -siberian railway for the Russians, Amtrak for the US, perhaps even India's and China's one,wich are also among the world's biggest.

    China might have another advantage: High-speed rail. As they are the country with most rails of this type in the world ( they have more high speed-rails than the rest of the world combined).

    So, while tanks would surely not be transported at over 300 km/s hour, infantry could: their high-speed lines currently run all the way from the coast to Xianjiang, thus making for an interesting projection capability into Mongolia and Central Asia.

    Perhaps this could be implemented trough already upgraded terrain with logistical networks? :)

    Or just a new improvement called "rail system".

    Anyway, I might have got a little carried on by this subject here, sorry :P

  • Sure!

    And I agree that's why they are for ( though I think speed of movilizaiton but rail would be great and more efficient at larges scales, eg. moving mlitary units, than by roads)

    What I was wondering is: If some roads/railroads could be implemented from day 1, in due maps.

    Thus making huge countries more viable, specially for nubie playes ( such as me, I'm pretty much one of them ) and also adding some strategic deept into certain provinces.

    As rivers would do :P