Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

Anti tank grenade changes to SMG
All uses action when used

British, US and french SMG
Hawkins Grenade
Unlock in 2nd industry
3 CD
10 damage
+%100 bonus against all tanks
Stuns tank by 1 turn

No. 73 grenade
3 CD
15 damage
Can be used on Buildings and tanks
+%50 bonus against all tanks
+%100 bonus against buildings.

German SMG
M24 bundle
4CD
20 damage
can be used against tanks and infantry
+%50 against tanks
+%50 against infantry

Russian SMG
Molotov cocktail
5 damage
No bonus
Applies burning effect to tanks, light vehicles, and none combat vehicles which lasts 5 turns and ignore armor.
Damage is 5 per turn

Instant rpg 40 at
3 CD
12 damage
Can target only tanks
+%100 damage to tanks

Japanese SMG
Type 99 mine
3 CD
12 damage
Can target only tanks
+%100 damage to tanks

Stacked type 99 SMG
6 CD
12 damage
Can target only tanks
+%200 damage to tanks

Italian smg
Type L grenade
3 CD
15 damage
Stuns tank for 1 turn
Last edited by DreJaDe on Tue May 10, 2022 11:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by Stratego (dev) »

Others please tell ups your thought about these ideas.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

Guys, any thought on this?

@Dahdee
@TntAttack
@SS-Jericho

This idea is a combination of making the AT grenades more historically accurate and making the infantry game more fun in aoww.
Dahdee
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by Dahdee »

I like all of it. The only thing I would add is fear for the fire effect. Fear should always be a part of fire attack, as it used to be. No one wants to burn alive
Dahdee
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by Dahdee »

Fear inflicted upon successful hit. Not just because there's a guy with an SMG around.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

I think that's true even for just being bombed....

Also, that's kinda an overkill to the skill already.
Dahdee
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by Dahdee »

Agree. As stands, that would be overkill. How about this: instead of 5 DMG per turn, how about 2 per turn (it is metal after all), fear on the unit for duration (no aura), and 30% chance to destroy light tank and 15% to destroy med. No chance to destroy heavy or superheavy but retain fear. Reasonable?
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

Chance to insta kill is a no go.

3 damage is fine and then I guess fear is ok.
SS-Jericho
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by SS-Jericho »

I think molotov should have higher damage than low damage plus fear. Molotovs are actually used by soviet assault infantries such as tank desants that prevents any threat for their armour. So its used to kill anti-tank guns and infantry AT. But they are also effective against open top vehicles and light armour.
5 damage / last 4 turns only (ignores armour) / can be multiplied.

Also if germany only have 1 grenade. Why 4 cooldown?
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

SS-Jericho wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 9:27 am I think molotov should have higher damage than low damage plus fear. Molotovs are actually used by soviet assault infantries such as tank desants that prevents any threat for their armour. So its used to kill anti-tank guns and infantry AT. But they are also effective against open top vehicles and light armour.
5 damage / last 4 turns only (ignores armour) / can be multiplied.

Also if germany only have 1 grenade. Why 4 cooldown?
Although it's used against other people and light vehicles. I think that could be for later after we checked out what's going to happen with this big idea.

So im not for much changes but some balance suggestion.

German grenade will do 30 damage to all tanks and can be used against infantry with the same damage. and it's not as if I wanted the other grenade removed so German smg will still have 2 grenades.

UK grenade will only do 22 damage to tanks with 3 CD. I think it's just fair.
Jasondunkel
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:52 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by Jasondunkel »

I find all CDs too high if only 2-3 rounds should be.


i don't like the russian molotov cocktail for me it's more of a weapon against infantry or against open vehicles.
the Russians definitely have something better.

The German M24 bundle was simply a variant of several individual stealing grenades tied together. the CD is also too high

otherwise the damage distributions seem to be good
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

Jasondunkel wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 7:38 pm I find all CDs too high if only 2-3 rounds should be.


i don't like the russian molotov cocktail for me it's more of a weapon against infantry or against open vehicles.
the Russians definitely have something better.

The German M24 bundle was simply a variant of several individual stealing grenades tied together. the CD is also too high

otherwise the damage distributions seem to be good
I actually modelled CD from the current SMG though. I don't know why you think it's expensive.

Molotov cocktail is said to be one of the main weapons against tanks in ww2. You can't really use it much against infantry because humans would be more likely to see it. The number representation also would make this more logical since soldiers are like 10x the number of tanks.

I don't understand for the m24 bundle, the damage is 30 so I just increase it's CD by 1. Remember that the current have damage 20.

Remember also the in my other anti tank suggestion. They have better anti tank abilities with low cost.
SS-Jericho
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by SS-Jericho »

Wasnt it the Finnish that used molotov wide scale, mostly for anti-tank?
TnT/satchel charge would fit them, soviet assault sappers used them both anti infantry/defensive structures/tanks.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

SS-Jericho wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 11:21 pm Wasnt it the Finnish that used molotov wide scale, mostly for anti-tank?
TnT/satchel charge would fit them, soviet assault sappers used them both anti infantry/defensive structures/tanks.
I did read that but in the defense of Russia, I read somewhere that they also widely used it against tanks.

Also, I don't want this to be main infantry cause we already have so much more for anti infantry that is more effective. Like flamethrower, anti inf grenade and so much more. This is a staple btw meaning that it only have 1 CD. Why would they use it against infantry when their damage is basically higher?

So it wouldn't really make much difference.

Though I guess to add some. I'll edit it to be now able to target vehicles.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by Stratego (dev) »

I did read that but in the defense of Russia, I read somewhere that they also widely used it against tanks.
i am so undereducated in the topic, but i can agree with Drejade as even in current Ukrain war the molotovs are still used against tanks - to make fire on them i believe.
SS-Jericho
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by SS-Jericho »

Yes molotovs damages the tank but it doesnt completely immobilize medium armoured tanks. They were more used against infantry while alot effective vs armour in urban combat. While the satchel charge were more effective. It was also used against makeshift bunkers which are used a lot in the eastern front.

My idea:
Soviet smg will lose the rgd33 and have:
Molotov: high damage vs infantry (can also be used vs armour low damage *fire effect 3 turns only)
Will still have the rpg40

While the soviet guards will have the rgd33 grenade so it has both anti infantry grenade and the rpg40.

Then the soviet smg could also have the TNT satchel charge if you want another AT for them. I just find it weird if the molotov cant be used vs infantry
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

SS-Jericho wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 5:43 am Yes molotovs damages the tank but it doesnt completely immobilize medium armoured tanks. They were more used against infantry while alot effective vs armour in urban combat.
Here's what I got

"The Molotov cocktail wasn’t used against armies. It was used against tanks and other vehicles, and also against pillboxes and similar defensive positions. It wasn’t too bad. During WWII, Soviet soldiers destroyed 2,429 enemy tanks and other armored vehicles with Molotov cocktails, and that’s just the official data. Obviously, a lot of successful hits were not recorded, for various reasons."

From qoura

From what I read from so many sites. They aren't at all more used against infantry... I mean, they have guns! I also never read then using "satchel charges" commonly. Neither is it mentioned in their weaponry. It's also used by other countries for the same reason.

Im also against the idea of removing the rgd33 because it was their staple grenade. They can have the three.

Soviet guards could have the rgd33 separately.



Wait. What about this idea.

Russian SMG will have the rgd33 and rpg40 and Soviet guard will instead have the three.
SS-Jericho
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by SS-Jericho »

That would be great, its AT is useless compared to the panzergrenadier in game. Buffing it would make it a lot useful. Soviet guards in game usually get countered by machineguns since its strength is only high hp.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by Stratego (dev) »

this seems stucked
- can we get to a conclusion some way?
- if anyone has yet responed please ask him to.
- if i am wrong and here is a conclusion somewhere please summarize me

thanks!
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

Anti tank grenade changes to SMG
All uses action when used

British, US and french SMG
Hawkins Grenade
Unlock in 2nd industry
3 CD
10 damage
+%100 bonus against all tanks
Stuns tank by 1 turn

No. 73 grenade
3 CD
15 damage
Can be used on Buildings and tanks
+%50 bonus against all tanks
+%100 bonus against buildings.

German SMG
M24 bundle
4CD
20 damage
can be used against tanks and infantry
+%50 against tanks
+%50 against infantry

Russian SMG
Instant rpg 40 at
3 CD
12 damage
Can target only tanks
+%100 damage to tanks

Soviet Guard
Molotov cocktail
5 damage
No bonus
Applies burning effect to tanks, light vehicles, and none combat vehicles which lasts 5 turns and ignore armor.
Damage is 5 per turn
(2 turns lasting)

Instant rpg 40 at
3 CD
12 damage
Can target only tanks
+%100 damage to tanks

Japanese SMG
Type 99 mine
3 CD
12 damage
Can target only tanks
+%100 damage to tanks

Stacked type 99 SMG
6 CD
12 damage
Can target only tanks
+%200 damage to tanks

Italian smg
Type L grenade
3 CD
15 damage
Stuns tank for 1 turn
Last edited by DreJaDe on Sun Jun 12, 2022 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

@Jasondunkel

@TntAttack

Only need you twos confirmation.
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by TntAttack »

Don't you think the damages around 20-25 (not for the grenades the rest) against tanks are a bit too high?

If tanks were so easily countered with such, why use light tanks at all? As for medium tanks, they don't to fair much better. Unless that tank armour bluff patch is going through as well, which would probably make the damage about <20 ish give take to light and medium tanks.

I guess I am hesitant to assign the role of the SMG unit as anti tank rather than anti infantry.

And how come Molotov cocktail can only target tanks? Why not infantry and buildings?
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by TntAttack »

Don't you think the damages around 20-25 (not for the grenades the rest) against tanks are a bit too high?

If tanks were so easily countered with such, why use light tanks at all? As for medium tanks, they don't to fair much better. Unless that tank armour bluff patch is going through as well, which would probably make the damage about <20 ish give take to light and medium tanks.

I guess I am hesitant to assign the role of the SMG unit as anti tank rather than anti infantry.

If anything, what about the anti tank rifleman and RPG units? How are their damages going to balance?

And how come Molotov cocktail can only target tanks? Why not infantry and buildings?
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 4:47 am Don't you think the damages around 20-25 (not for the grenades the rest) against tanks are a bit too high?
TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 4:47 am If anything, what about the anti tank rifleman and RPG units? How are their damages going to balance?
They are not that high, comparing to my suggestion for Anti tank rifles. Even the current rifle will have higher damage rate if you consider that this AT Ability have longer CD.
TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 4:47 am If tanks were so easily countered with such, why use light tanks at all? As for medium tanks, they don't to fair much better. Unless that tank armour bluff patch is going through as well, which would probably make the damage about <20 ish give take to light and medium tanks.
In ww2, it has been considered that the age of tanks is over because of their counters also. In terms of uses, there are many types, the most common and general the are complementary and solo usage.

In solo uses like going for a breakthrough, losing few tanks is always on the calculation so this damage isn't that high also. In fact, they are kinda lower. They will then be supplemented by the infantry to fill that mop up the lines and secure it.

Problem with player is that they use tanks alone but not at least with a group of tanks for specific usage of tanks which are really bad IRL. You should amass them first before using it which I've see from old players which marched like how the Soviets did in Berlin.

If you're only seeing tanks as always superior to infantry capable lf always being alone then you're mistaken as they are not. It has long been discussed how unsupported tank units are just stupid.

In complementary usage, they are always protected by in fact "INFANTRY". Yes INFANTRY. Infantry will make sure that no sneak up can happen to their mobile CANNON.

In the tactics of the germans on the other hand, they have only used tanks early on against weaker units and faced stronger enemies and even tanks using their own infantry. So this is just proper.

The problems to this is that there's not much uses to anti tank guns so I actually want to suggest things like making them to be able to have that camo tech or first strike.

Light tanks have a different role to play which include acting like hussars that is going for clean up, or as scouts that is ok to be lost. And in this came, it's not like you will only use SMG.

They can also be used to test the enemy.
TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 4:47 am I guess I am hesitant to assign the role of the SMG unit as anti tank rather than anti infantry.
IRL, SMG aren't also exactly anti infantry. In fact, normal rifleman should be superior cause SMG's only advantage is it's automatic gun but is overall weaker than standard battle rifle. There's a reason, they are not the main rifle and I actually want to change their role later on.

Though a solution I can think of to solve this kinda problem is to make their grenades cd enabled when trained.

Btw, I based this on fact and accounts from IRL so this isn't entirely just my opinion.
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by TntAttack »

If it's what you say is true, then I am afraid I might hardly ever "use" tanks properly. As a get towns fast as soon possible player, I don't see the value of massing tanks (for a tank and infantry supported assault).

Even in situations (on a non naval map) where I am advantageous, spam infantry for the win. Why bother waiting for the slow tanks to catch up with the continued push if I can cause more damage with a horde of infantry.

For situations without the advantage, building tanks is usually target practice for your opponent. E.g. from planes, smgs and enemy tanks.

So....I wonder if we could give tanks 2 separate movement so that after firing they can retreat a bit. That way collectively they can deal more damage being a hindrance to each other e.g. limited unit locations around a certain tiles (4).
And gives them a better survival bonus.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

In my games i definitely used tanks as i said. Either a massive tank assault or mixed composition.

Though many times, im also tempted to use them alone which leads me to lose them which is where the bias of me thinking that tanks are just weaker back then.

If you're going to use combined arms tactics, you don't really need to amass them. Only in a tank assault would you ever do that. Cause you're going for a breakthrough.
TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 9:19 am For situations without the advantage, building tanks is usually target practice for your opponent. E.g. from planes, smgs and enemy tanks.
And yes, of course tanks are usually good at the role of being plane target. That exactly how it works IRL. But remember that Tanks are almost always cheaper than planes. In defensive position with AA umbrella, I can easily trade planes and tanks and I think that's fine.

Of course, you will then think that it's better to just use infantry but let's remember that even IRL, the ratio of Infantry to tanks are not even close. We can say that if there are 500,000 tanks in ww2 (probably lesser), there are about 50million infantry in ww2. Not even 1 percent are tanks.

Smg. You usually need 2 smg for 1 medium tanks. That's four cost to four. I think that's quite equal? If we mention the cd then you have an advantage if you can make them survive.
TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 9:19 am Even in situations (on a non naval map) where I am advantageous, spam infantry for the win. Why bother waiting for the slow tanks to catch up with the continued push if I can cause more damage with a horde of infantry.
This is definitely a problem cause we can't properly simulate the speed for many tanks. Though to answer question. You don't.

Why would you need tanks when you can already push with infantry? One main task of Tanks are for breakthrough, and breakthrough are usually exploited by infantry. That's the answer to your question (maybe?)

If you're already pushing with infantry then you don't really need tanks. Though you might want use complimentary speedy tank to have extra cavalry.
SS-Jericho
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by SS-Jericho »

Anti tank grenade update really seems fun but there are few more problems with this idea:

1. Some SMG's will have 2 AT grenades. That fact that they have 2 action turns, some smgs can kill a tank in a single turn. And that is very unbalanced.

2. Use of AT grenade against tank is very situational. Drejade you are right that tanks have become obsolete by ww2; But that only applies to light and thinned armour tanks. There are lots of counter against tanks, and AT grenade is one but has a very short range. So it is only applicable at close combat like urban and last resort AT when tanks try to overrun infantry. Also not all tanks go near infantry, most tanks engage at longer distances (80-250m/far from grenade throwing range). And the problem is that mechanic is hard to apply in game.

3. SMG is currently well very rounded in game. It is correct that smgs advantage is higher rate of fire. So they are only good at close combat range vs infantry, and ambushes against tanks. But that mechanic is also hard to be applied in game.

Some fixes/suggestion for this topic to work

1. If some SMG have 2 AT, then all other SMG should also carry 2 AT. Then their cost should be increased to 3 turns. They will be like the Jager infantry in game, except smgs has higher bonus against infantry.

2. Retain its 2 turn, but reduce its infantry damage bonus. All smgs will have 2 AT grenade. But this has to be paired with infantry damage bonus of rifle squads (riflemen and special infantries)

3. There could be better suggestion/fix than these 2 above.

Furthermore:

Soviet guards' rpg40 could be replaced with the rpg43.
A better AT with more HE and penetration.
3 CD
20 damage
50% bonus
Tech II available AT
Since soviet guards were more of tech II (1941). Very much like the panzergrenadier.
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by TntAttack »

DreJaDe wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 10:22 am
Why would you need tanks when you can already push with infantry? One main task of Tanks are for breakthrough, and breakthrough are usually exploited by infantry. That's the answer to your question (maybe?)

If you're already pushing with infantry then you don't really need tanks. Though you might want use complimentary speedy tank to have extra cavalry.
Shall we nerf infantry then. Let see what mechanics make infantry a viable breakthrough unit.

-Transport vehicle (unit density e.g. 3+1 unit per tile)
-Officer Bonus (speed, attack and armour)
-Healing bonus in Towns

Compared to Tanks:
-Repair bonus from rifleman and engineers
-General Bonus (speed, attack and armour)

I guess the source of this inequality is due to the unit density e.g. 3 SMGs sitting together in one truck is fine, but 2 light tanks can't converge.

Is 3 unit cap for trucks why infantry as a breakthrough unit is preferable over tanks? Should it be 2 as in AoM?

I don't suppose we could maybe, @@Stratego (dev) give all units some ability to stack together with their kind. I did mention this before, but the number of sprites required would be less 2×current number of sprites as we take away buildings and battleships.

Okay to summarise everything. Dev, for the discussion at hand, I guess I agree with it,

However, I reasoned that the role of tanks in this game is undermined by the unit density of infantry in trucks. A reasonable balancing suggestion is to reduce the cap to 2 like in AoM.

Question: What is the feasibility that we can stack the same unit types together.
My understanding is that the biggest hurdle would be the number of sprites, e.g. larger game.

Is there a way of bypassing this issue of there being too much sprites for each stacking state of each unit, by overlaying the present sprites with a symbol or sprite number. E.g. Insignias or numbers over a group of rifleman together?

This is more so a curiosity of mine than an actual suggestion to implement, as I am aware that it would break and unbalance everything.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by DreJaDe »

TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:44 pm Shall we nerf infantry then. Let see what mechanics make infantry a viable breakthrough unit.
TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:44 pm Is 3 unit cap for trucks why infantry as a breakthrough unit is preferable over tanks?
I think you're misunderstanding or it's me. I didn't say that infantry is for breakthrough but they are the one who exploits it.

Totally different.
TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:44 pm Soviet guards' rpg40 could be replaced with the rpg43.
A better AT with more HE and penetration.
I don't see why this can't be an upgrade instead.
TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:44 pm Is 3 unit cap for trucks why infantry as a breakthrough unit is preferable over tanks? Should it be 2 as in AoM
I'm really unsure if I can agree with this for IRL sake. In AOW, I think a unit is less than or just a single squad. And if that is so then three of them can definitely fit inside a truck. And what is so if they killed a tank with it? That just means that you can now also just use your infantry to pulverize them.

(Cause infantry is divided by smg, rifle, anti tank, MG when most squads have one of those so they should be in the size of below 10 people)

Another factor is that this might just become like the other suggestion like the concrete artillery.

I really suggest for you to relook first about the tanks. It might just be mistaken thought like the others. Cause I don't really see them as underpowered. They are definitely not. Some tanks though definitely wrong stats.
TntAttack wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:44 pm Drejade you are right that tanks have become obsolete by ww2
No, no. What I meant is that it's theorized that it's obsolete but as logic and IRL data we could see. There's no way that tanks are obsolete. Both in the current times or even in ww2 even in game where they play a key role in my strat.
SS-Jericho
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Reform: Smg anti tank grenade

Post by SS-Jericho »

Not an upgrade for simplification. As I said, soviet guards came around 1941, so the rpg43 would fit them. Also, if this grenade will have upgrade; so as the others. Even the panzerfaust, the latter one can penetrate an IS-2 at the front.

I understand what you said by obsolete. But the point is AT grenade is not the sole major reason for it. I too, also used tanks very much combining them with infantry or artillery. I rarely play naval games.
Post Reply

Return to “Balancing discussions”