Comments - maksyutar

England, why do wellingon and speedfire, which were adopted in '38, need to be investigated, but the Airborne Forces, which were first used in 1941, not? Why is Malda, which was only used in 1941, is available without research? Why is an armored vehicle worth the price of a heavy tank? It has been said that there is an emphasis on historicism in fashion.

It is strange that the Matilda heavy tank is available in '39, because its first production began only in May '41
Serial production of the Daimler armored vehicle began only in 41, and thus it should not be available in the 39 era.
It is not clear why in 39 Great Britain the lion's share of its aviation needs to be investigated, because speedfire and Wellington were adopted for service a year before 39.
The formation and first use of the British Airborne Forces dates back to 41, their goal was to undermine the aqueduct in southern Italy. Thus, it can hardly be attributed to era 39 and should be available only in era 42. In general, the use of airborne forces in all nations refers to at least 41 years, hardly any airborne forces are appropriate to be available to any nation in the era of 39 years.

I may be wrong, and perhaps you are following the principle that 41 belongs to era 39 and that 44 belongs to era 42. But in this case, it is not clear why the planes of 38 years in Britain need to be investigated. Based on this logic, later troops, such as Matilda or Airborne Forces, should be available in 39 year only as a research, and should not appear at the beginning of the game.
The solution is possible in both directions, but in any case, something must be done.

The United States is now imbalanced in '39, it is very difficult to play against the smartest AI in Britain. "Priests" 42 years old are available already in the era 39, however, as Lee 41-42 years. The 1941 B-25 Mitchell was also present in the 39th year. In fact, at 39, the United States was militarily the weakest nation in the game, and at that moment, in fact, had not yet conducted any hostilities. Please correct.

I would also like to say about artillery and buildings, in short, one artillery on the map terrifies the floor of the map, it bombs supply stations, which are often more expensive than itself, bombs fortified areas, bombs manufacturing buildings. It was said that you need to use camouflage - but I can't keep the floor of the card in camouflage all the time. And to build artillery yourself a dead-end path - besides, some nations do not have heavy artillery. Therefore, I would like to say that the reload time was slightly increased, and the accuracy and damage to buildings were slightly reduced, so that artillery, while organized into batteries for massive fire, did not have such a destructive effect on the battlefield.

It is worth saying that the AI ​​amazes me with its intelligence, it makes fewer mistakes than some of my opponents, but it still has problems - for example, the Frenchman completely defeated my army in the center, he opened up an operational space towards my base and he could quickly finish the game, but instead he went to the west to crush my flanking army, it was highly unreasonable.