Mass vs. Class -1 reply

Please wait...

Dee-Jaý

Always 1 point ahead of you

50 XP

17th February 2004

0 Uploads

1,694 Posts

0 Threads

#1 15 years ago

Well, lately I´ve been reading alot of threads about what people want in the next version of FH. Most people ask for even more vehicles, planes, maps and other content. Well, my opinion on this, is that adding new vehicles etc. only really makes sense if they add something new game-play wise. I mean some people might love having a Ausf. A-Z of each Panzer model, but if their all much the same I don´t see why. While more maps would be fun, I think the devs should spend more finetuning the ones we have already. That also applys to the vehicles ingame. Do we really need another heavy soviet tank (KV-2) if its so similar to the IS-2 ? (I don´t know if these tanks are similar in RL or not, so don´t flame me). So I´m for more class (finetuning etc.) and less class (massive more vehicles etc.). Obviusly this is only a tendency, sice NO new content would get booring quickly and vice versa...




PanzerAce

Some Guy...

50 XP

11th January 2004

0 Uploads

736 Posts

0 Threads

#2 15 years ago

hehe, you meant in the last para more class LESS mass i think... but on the other hand, i want both, i want all the IMPORTANT versions of things, such as the PZIIIN and such, and i want it to be finetuned, however, since this is still in beta stage, i dont mind if they go one way or the other.




Az*

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

3rd November 2003

0 Uploads

107 Posts

0 Threads

#3 15 years ago

Fine tune the exsisting maps will do imo,maybe add one or two new ones and take another look at the vanilla maps.




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#4 15 years ago

I agree with you adding several types of the same unit is not something i think should be priority.

Panther A, D or G.....there are important diffrences but it remains pretty much the same vehicle forfillling the same role. It is ofcourse something else if their role changed over the war, such as with the Stug and the Panzer IV.

Ofcourse later types of the same vehicle in the war were more efficient then early types. Not only a bigger gun and more armour was added, also the lack of offensive/defensive mg was felt and added.......something the FH devs have yet to to in most (allied) tanks and in artillery and sometimes in tank destroyers and assault guns.

But there are many important vehicles completely missing in FH. In FH 0.5 that was field guns, maybe THE most used anti tank weapon of all in WWII.

Now in FH 0.6 there is one type late war PAK (75 mm ? ) added, and a FLAK/AT 88 mm.

But each country had their own versions of AT field guns. They should be added. Most of germanies and other countries tank destroyers are missing, that replaced these field guns later in the war.....

Several Marder types, Panzerjager 37 mm or 47 mm, Hetzer, Ferdinand or Elephant, Nashorn,JagdPanther, Jagdtiger to name a few german ones. But the russians had their own, and currently in FH 0.6 they still underequipped. Russians had their SU series : 85/100/122/150 wich were all excellent tank destroyers, the SU 122 maybe excepted because that was an infantry support assault gun. If these are not added you are missing an important part of history and realism.

The germans also had much more mobile artillery then only a Wespe, wich was a rather light artillery support gun. Sturmpanzer support guns were already available in the early war years in form of Sturmpanzer I and II Bison ( 150mm sIG33 based on Panzer I and II tanks ) Grille 150 mm self propelled artillery ( based on 38(t) tank ) and the Hummel 150 mm ( based on Panzer III tank )

Then there are a lot of aircraft missing. Beaufighter, Mosquito and hurricane to name a few Brittish ones, some mentioned the US P39 AirCobra and the German Henshel 129 wich both saw extensive action in several war theatre's but just are not that well known.




[11PzG]matyast

[11PzG] clan leader

50 XP

5th October 2003

0 Uploads

3,175 Posts

0 Threads

#5 15 years ago

Towable 88s for everyone.....




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#6 15 years ago
'[11PzGmatyast']Towable 88s for everyone.....

When you can completely disconnect them from that large and readily exploding artillery towing vehicle, yes....




MG42Maniac

A man of dubious moral fibre

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

3,932 Posts

0 Threads

#7 15 years ago

The Germans need the Marder's and the other SPA to combat the T34's as they get raped by them on too many maps.




VioLAtoR[xL]

Retteketet met je Bajonet

50 XP

29th October 2003

0 Uploads

1,075 Posts

0 Threads

#8 15 years ago

I'm not choosing either option in this poll. I think a wide and realistic variety of vehicles, and even their variants adds mass as well as class.




[SYN] hydraSlav

SYNERGY Member

50 XP

2nd October 2003

0 Uploads

2,372 Posts

0 Threads

#9 15 years ago
Dee-JaýSo I´m for more class (finetuning etc.) and less class (massive more vehicles etc.)

So are you for "more class" or "less class" :rolleyes: :p OT: I am for more class. I'd rather see optimized vehicles and maps then anything else




Negator

GF Pwns Me!

50 XP

6th October 2003

0 Uploads

46 Posts

0 Threads

#10 15 years ago

Well, in my eyes both is important and on the long run both class and mass should be a target.

Maps: There are many good maps now and instead creating more and more new ones the "not so good ones" and good maps that are not supportet by Fh (RtR had wonderfullmaps e.g. Anzino and Husky) should be updatet to make them better. So for maps more class if you ask me.