Wage of war: NSB UnBalanced of Production cost of equipments.

[ComradeKroo]

Cost of some important equipment in NSB:
Mechanized II, III : 6 to 10. Its 6 with varriants reduce 40% cost.
Med Tanks: 25 to 30, if you using conversion trick, its 14 to 16.
Heavy Tanks: 30 to 40, if use trick, its 16 to 19.
Airplanes: 22 to 32 (34).

==> Mechanized becomes dirty cheap and effective.
Tanks becomes too expensive, if you dont use tricks.
Airplanes still the same. But now compare cost/effectiveness, you can easily find out that 1 plane is overall better than 1 tank.
In reality and historicaly, compare the cost of some planes and tanks in WW2, you can find plane cost should be much higher than Tanks.
Example of some Tanks and Planes cost ($):
Tank
T-34: $ ~20 - 30k.
M4-Sherman: $ ~40k.
Panther : $ ~60k
Tiger: $ ~120 - 140k

Planes (just use US airplane for default, because correct the cost of others countries stuffs is hard, for example, an IL-2 of USSR as i know is about $ 22k, which is insane)
P51-Mustang: $ ~50k
B-17: $ ~200k

==> Planes in average and usually more expensive, from 20% to 100% higher cost than a Tank.

So, if the cost ratio of equipment is about like this:
Mechanize = 10
Medium Tank = 20
Heavy Tank = 30
Fighter = 30
Bomber = 40
...
It would be much better and historical.

The next time, maybe a comparision about Airplane vs Ships cost.

 

[STABBY5]

Tank balance is all out of wack. Everything is way too expensive. Then you add the resource costs and most of the modules aren't worth putting on.

 

[sdplissken]

Tank balance is all out of wack. Everything is way too expensive. Then you add the resource costs and most of the modules aren't worth putting on.

You can make really cheap tanks though now too with only requiring iron which is really good. It’s kind of a mixed bag.

 

[Secret Master]

You can make really cheap tanks though now too with only requiring iron which is really good. It’s kind of a mixed bag.

Yep. People are forgetting that there are plenty of ways of making cheap tanks that don't use tungsten or tons of chromium.

One of my favorite things to do right now is make rocket tanks for regular tank battalions, but have a battalion of TDs with high velocity guns provide the piercing. I have one smaller production line using tungsten, but the vast majority of my tank production lines are not.

You don't have to make an over-priced Panther look-a-like if you don't want to.

 

[ComradeKroo]

You don't have to make an over-priced Panther look-a-like if you don't want to.

I understand your point, but i think ppl keep saying tanks are expensive in NSB because they try to get a design with output have a stat like pre NSB tank, and they cant.
For example, its nearly impossible to have a med tank with cost = 13 in NSB that has a stat of pre NSB med tank. And, Tanks in pre NSB is better because of varriants buffs.

 

[sdplissken]

I understand your point, but i think ppl keep saying tanks are expensive in NSB because they try to get a design with output have a stat like pre NSB tank, and they cant.
For example, its nearly impossible to have a med tank with cost = 13 in NSB that has a stat of pre NSB med tank. And, Tanks in pre NSB is better because of varriants buffs.

I’m a big fan of the auto cannon with machine gun modules. How often are you really facing enemy tank divisions? Like against AI it’s rather rare, doesn’t cost anything but iron and it’s very cheap, can get high SA for 12-13 production ish on medium and lower on Light tanks.

 

[Secret Master]

I understand your point, but i think ppl keep saying tanks are expensive in NSB because they try to get a design with output have a stat like pre NSB tank, and they cant.
For example, its nearly impossible to have a med tank with cost = 13 in NSB that has a stat of pre NSB med tank. And, Tanks in pre NSB is better because of varriants buffs.

Maybe you shouldn't be trying to get to those pre-NSB stats.

I know some folks have argued that tanks are obsolete in the current build. I'm not sure I agree. But I do recognize that tank balance has radically changed. That means taking a good hard look at what you are doing and adjusting expectations accordingly.

I did a Germany game recently that tried to emphasize heavy tanks with expensive guns on them for Barbarossa. I nearly bankrupted Germany with tungsten and chromium imports putting together 4x40w HARM divisions with some TDs built for some of the foot infantry divisions. It was not what I consider a winning strategy due to the economic realities of Germany's position in that game. I learned my lesson, though.

 

[STABBY5]

Yep. People are forgetting that there are plenty of ways of making cheap tanks that don't use tungsten or tons of chromium.

One of my favorite things to do right now is make rocket tanks for regular tank battalions, but have a battalion of TDs with high velocity guns provide the piercing. I have one smaller production line using tungsten, but the vast majority of my tank production lines are not.

You don't have to make an over-priced Panther look-a-like if you don't want to.

Sure I don't have to but then it just makes more sense to build things that aren't tanks. With how supply works now tanks are a liability. Not only do they consume a lot of supply, if supply is bad even for a moment they won't have fuel and it just disables them. Why use them when I can just build more planes which don't hurt my supply? Or just use heavily buffed motorized who turn into normal infantry when out of fuel.

 

[Secret Master]

Sure I don't have to but then it just makes more sense to build things that aren't tanks. With how supply works now tanks are a liability. Not only do they consume a lot of supply, if supply is bad even for a moment they won't have fuel and it just disables them. Why use them when I can just build more planes which don't hurt my supply? Or just use heavily buffed motorized who turn into normal infantry when out of fuel.

I simply don't have those problems with fuel and supply. I can encircle and destroy hundreds of Soviet divisions (not even on the border on day 1) using German panzer divisions. And I don't ever use air supply.

I mean, yes, eventually, my tanks run out of supply and fuel as we advance. But I have no problem keeping them fueled and ready to go between pushes. I do have to cycle them off the front line periodically while I wait for things like railways to convert or when weather goes bad. But when it's time to attack again, they go right back to the front and perform within expected parameters.

What you can't do is random encirclements that ignore where enemy supply depots and rail are located. You could do that before. Now you need to tie panzer formations to areas where they can wipe enemy divisions in areas that will lead to seizing more rails and supply centers.

EDIT:

I should point out that past Moscow-Leningrad-Stalingrad, there aren't enough rails or supply centers to support panzer offensives anymore. But by then, I've wiped the Red Army, so it's just infantry pushes to tidy things up at that point. And most players with LaR have probably slapped collab on the Soviets to render that final push irrelevant.

 

[CrasherZZ]

Sure I don't have to but then it just makes more sense to build things that aren't tanks. With how supply works now tanks are a liability. Not only do they consume a lot of supply, if supply is bad even for a moment they won't have fuel and it just disables them. Why use them when I can just build more planes which don't hurt my supply? Or just use heavily buffed motorized who turn into normal infantry when out of fuel.

Actually this is a really good description of real-life considerations in WW2.

 

[PorkchopSandwiches247]

Do you need tanks with the same stats now? With the big bonus to breakthrough for motorized, I dont really see a reason to care about how much tanks have. Seems like its all about Attack, Armor and Hardness.

Unfortunately Im in the same position as everyone else, where tanks seem more like a novelty, when its better to spend that production on air dominance if you actually want to win.

 

[STABBY5]

I simply don't have those problems with fuel and supply. I can encircle and destroy hundreds of Soviet divisions (not even on the border on day 1) using German panzer divisions. And I don't ever use air supply.

I mean, yes, eventually, my tanks run out of supply and fuel as we advance. But I have no problem keeping them fueled and ready to go between pushes. I do have to cycle them off the front line periodically while I wait for things like railways to convert or when weather goes bad. But when it's time to attack again, they go right back to the front and perform within expected parameters.

What you can't do is random encirclements that ignore where enemy supply depots and rail are located. You could do that before. Now you need to tie panzer formations to areas where they can wipe enemy divisions in areas that will lead to seizing more rails and supply centers.

EDIT:

I should point out that past Moscow-Leningrad-Stalingrad, there aren't enough rails or supply centers to support panzer offensives anymore. But by then, I've wiped the Red Army, so it's just infantry pushes to tidy things up at that point. And most players with LaR have probably slapped collab on the Soviets to render that final push irrelevant.

Except I can just build an army of infantry and planes and I don't have to follow rail roads. That and it makes sure I have enough fighters to prevent logistics bombing which will stop tanks in their tracks. I stopped using logistics bombing because it was far too easy to abuse the ai with it. I don't even use anything but foot infantry. If I really needed a breakthrough unit I'd use motorized which has 40% hardness and tons of breakthrough, uses less fuel, less supplies, go faster and cost nothing because I over produce trucks for logistics and occupation anyway.

Actually this is a really good description of real-life considerations in WW2.

Except, tanks were cheap and pilots were hard to come by. You can always find someone to drive excess tank but not excess airframes. And in real life you could store more fuel than for just two days of fighting. If fuel would trickle in, even in poor supply things would work better but you seem to just get none if you go over the supply limit and you cannot store much.

 

[Corpse Fool]

You can make really cheap tanks though now too with only requiring iron which is really good. It’s kind of a mixed bag.

Isn't the cheapest tank something like 6 IC? Compared to the previous 7 IC of the greatwar, that is not much of a difference in cost with a dramatic difference in stats/performance.

 

[CrasherZZ]

Except I can just build an army of infantry and planes and I don't have to follow rail roads. That and it makes sure I have enough fighters to prevent logistics bombing which will stop tanks in their tracks. I stopped using logistics bombing because it was far too easy to abuse the ai with it. I don't even use anything but foot infantry. If I really needed a breakthrough unit I'd use motorized which has 40% hardness and tons of breakthrough, uses less fuel, less supplies, go faster and cost nothing because I over produce trucks for logistics and occupation anyway.

Again - this too is comparable to real life considerations in WW2. It seems that NSB is somewhat successful in that regard. Perhaps IRL Germany would have survived WW2 longer by devoting more IC to planes, infantry, and trucks than panzers after 1941. In retrospect their panzer production ultimately did not prevent them from losing.

Perhaps the problem in NSB is that planes are too cheap compared to tanks, not that tanks are too expensive.

 

[STABBY5]

Again - this too is comparable to real life considerations in WW2. It seems that NSB is somewhat successful in that regard. Perhaps IRL Germany would have survived WW2 longer by devoting more IC to planes, infantry, and trucks than panzers after 1941. In retrospect their panzer production ultimately did not prevent them from losing.

Perhaps the problem in NSB is that planes are too cheap compared to tanks, not that tanks are too expensive.

Thats not accurate. In fact they had too many planes for the number of pilots they had. As per their tank production they really screwed that up a lot. They were not mass-producing tanks like America or the Soviet Union(who used factories designed by Americans). I'm not sure how much that would have really helped either because they did not have the fuel to run them. Planes are in a funny spot because the game has far too many planes flying at once, but America can't produce as many planes as they did in real life without sacrificing everything else.

 

[CrasherZZ]

As per their tank production they really screwed that up a lot. They were not mass-producing tanks like America or the Soviet Union(who used factories designed by Americans). I'm not sure how much that would have really helped either because they did not have the fuel to run them.

Yes, so in effect their tank production was too "expensive" because their tank factories were inefficient. Since they did not improve their mass production process, their tanks were too expensive relative to other production.

Thats not accurate. In fact they had too many planes for the number of pilots they had... Planes are in a funny spot because the game has far too many planes flying at once, but America can't produce as many planes as they did in real life without sacrificing everything else

Yes, that was the case for all the major countries. It's true that they could manufacture planes much faster than they could produce competent pilots. My point is about the relative cost of planes to tanks. Relative costs are going to be different for every country since the production efficiencies are going to be different for the various tanks and airplanes in every country. Therefore in Germany tanks were more expensive relative to planes than for the SU and US.

 

[Leinad965]

Cost of some important equipment in NSB:
Mechanized II, III : 6 to 10. Its 6 with varriants reduce 40% cost.
Med Tanks: 25 to 30, if you using conversion trick, its 14 to 16.
Heavy Tanks: 30 to 40, if use trick, its 16 to 19.
Airplanes: 22 to 32 (34).

==> Mechanized becomes dirty cheap and effective.
Tanks becomes too expensive, if you dont use tricks.
Airplanes still the same. But now compare cost/effectiveness, you can easily find out that 1 plane is overall better than 1 tank.
In reality and historicaly, compare the cost of some planes and tanks in WW2, you can find plane cost should be much higher than Tanks.
Example of some Tanks and Planes cost ($):
Tank
T-34: $ ~20 - 30k.
M4-Sherman: $ ~40k.
Panther : $ ~60k
Tiger: $ ~120 - 140k

Planes (just use US airplane for default, because correct the cost of others countries stuffs is hard, for example, an IL-2 of USSR as i know is about $ 22k, which is insane)
P51-Mustang: $ ~50k
B-17: $ ~200k

==> Planes in average and usually more expensive, from 20% to 100% higher cost than a Tank.

So, if the cost ratio of equipment is about like this:
Mechanize = 10
Medium Tank = 20
Heavy Tank = 30
Fighter = 30
Bomber = 40
...
It would be much better and historical.

The next time, maybe a comparision about Airplane vs Ships cost.

Wikipedia says between $44000 to $64000 for Sherman ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_Sherman ) and $51000 for Mustang ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang ). So fighter should cost similar to medium tank, not 50% more.
M3 half track cost $10300 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M3_half-track )
And Pershing cost $81000 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M26_Pershing )

So if I make base current 26 for fighter, than
Fighter = 26
Medium tank = 26
Heavy tank = 41
Mechanized = 5

 

[Corpse Fool]

So fighter should cost similar to medium tank, not 50% more.

IC Isn't really related to money, it is more a measurement of manhours/work.

 

[ComradeKroo]

IC Isn't really related to money, it is more a measurement of manhours/work.

I know, but money is measurement of value, and in purest meaning, the value is work hours.

 

[Atalvyr]

It is also worth keeping in mind that even Germany, who had a bit of an armor fetish, only deployed 19 panzer divisions for Barbarossa, compared to more than 100 infantry divisions. The 40W tank meta of pre-NSB resulted in a much higher proportion of armor for most nations, with infantry divisions being left much weaker (little to no artillery/AA/AT) and less numerous than they were historically.