List of enhancement requests (MoW-DCG v.4.5 / v.5.0 & MoW:AS-DCG v.4.5 / v.5.0) Thread - Dynamic Campaign Generator (DCG) mod for Men of War

[I use the google translator - apologize]

LIST OF ENHANCEMENT REQUESTS (MoW-DCG v.4.5 / v.5.0 & MoW:AS-DCG v.4.5 / v.5.0):

I started this thread because I was instructed to do so. We need a "quorum" to discuss these suggestions/ideas. Not because these suggestions are revolutionary, but they are ideas that would make the game most verisimilar (more credible/realistic/believable: tatics and behaviors).

First I shall explain the suggestion, then, second: I will detail each idea. Third: just below the detailed idea, i add replies (replica, rejoinder, reply-rejoinder) that have been made outside this forum (the "state of the art" / "status quaestionis").

1) - Implementations for Artificial Inteligence (bots):
A - Flanking Maneuvers (Occasionally).
B - Improve much more: infantry tactical "Take Cover (avoid/hide/evade/flee/prone/crouch etc.), when the infantry are faced with war tanks, artillery, mortars, bombers/bombardiers and machine-guns (this latter: if stay a certain distance at AI troops: neither too close nor too far).
C- For the future: studying more real war tactics, in order to implement.

2) - Enhancements for experience of realism/gameplay:
D- Explosions dismember the soldier's body into several pieces (eg:. Bombings/bombardiers, bombs, grenade, artillery, mortar, tanks cannon etc.)
E- Include a camera option for the first person view
F- More reduction of inventory size (infantry and vehicles), until more be verisimilar (credible/realistic)

------------ Detailing below (with their respective "replica", "rejoinder", "reply-rejoinder")
1) - A:
"" Insert scripts for the AI troops that generate, from time to time, Flanking Maneuvers against the human player (eg: Shenandoah-studio.com ; En.wikipedia.org ). Let me explain better: in the game, usually when the troops of the AI attack humans troops (example: offensive matches by the computer), they draw a straight line "A-- Z" ("A"= AI spawning; Z= target in the human terrain (defense)). In real battles, over and over again, the offensive line is not direct, but indirect: "A----> B----> Z" (where "B" is not a military target, but an intermediate turning point path/way, which can be 10°, 20°, 30°, 45°, 90°, etc. with respect to the line from "B" to "Z" - but never 0° on the same line). Scripts that draw (occasionally) varied possibilities of angle of flank maneuvers attacks would be very interesting and realistic. ...And it should not be too hard to produce it.According to Wikipedia, "The flanking maneuver is a basic military tactic, with several variations" (THEN: multiple scripts can be developed with the intention to simulate that "several variations"). This is the core of idea. ""

====> REPLICA - (by "Jason1_" Jan 6 2014, 2:30am)
"" DCG does give every AI controlled squad or platoon a 2-waypoint path (...)DCG doesn't try to coordinate a flanking maneuver because I think there are too many maps which are just too small. However, each individual AI unit has a small chance it may end up flanking you. In fact, I remember a mission where I had what I thought were my impenetrable heavy tanks deployed on a hill and I was totally surprised to see some weak AI tanks show up behind me and destroy me in my weak rear armor... ""

====> REJOINDER - (by "Dilust" Jan 6 2014, 9:58am)
"" I guess it is very hard to build up a script that could work well on every map bacuse you can't predict the geography of the map in advance. Right?However a sort of flanking manouver could be created hiding a certain amount of enemy soldiers (placed on the sides of the map) and activating them with a trigger with the following conditions: if the user controlled units are in the objective zone the trigger is activated.
Is it feasible or not? I do not know. All depends on the adaptability of such script to every kind of map and this need further tests. ""

====> REPLY-REJOINDER - (by me: "YuriFR" Jan 6 2014, 11:19am)
"" Interesting idea (trigger)...! As I tried to say before: a team of developers (DCG) have certainly should have thought of the possibility of generating random flanking maneuvers. However, the implementation of some ideas may appear difficult, at first, which does not imply definite impossibility. Discuss these (and other) hypotheses is important, I think, because it facilitates the emergence of new suggestions and solutions for a same type of script (or problem) - (contributes to the development of the mod). At least I hope, with those posts. Let's wait for the emergence of more ideas about it. I appreciate the contribution of 'Jason1_' and 'Dilust'
[I use google translator] ""

//// END "1-A" \\\\

1) - B:
"" ... THE GAME WITH DCG IS VERY FANTASTIC! However , I notice that until the DCG v4.0: (1) infantry controlled by computer (AI enemy) not avoid the tanks war, artillery , mortars, bombers/bombardiers and machine-guns, at a certain distance, as is supposed in a real combat situation. The soldiers remain/stay still, at a distance which is presumed plausible assume a huge avoidance behavior. In addition to staying still, are hit by machine gun fire (tanks and mgs) and shells (tanks, artillery, mortars, bombardiers), with no reaction. Does nothing to get rid of the shots (eg: avoid/hide/evade/flee/prone/crouch etc.). Make a test: just stop the war tank/artillery/mortars/ etc. and start shooting against enemy AI-infantry at a certain distance (neither too close nor too far), they die in droves, undermining the realism of the game! The same thing happens if there are AI enemy soldiers within any vehicle (eg: half-tracks vehicles, jeeps, motocycle, trucks etc): the vehicles suffers fire-damages and the crew do nothing to avoid the shots (no: run out for escape/"bail-out"; no: escape far away, driving the vehicle).
I suggest add a line of code to make the enemy AI "recognize", more or less, the degree of danger represented (at the instant) by the number of tanks (and/or: artillery/mortars/bombardiers/mgs), visible, approaching his field of vision (the player). And based on this "code-line recognize" decide the appropriate behavioral response: hide/cover/evade etc. or attack the threat with reinforcements.
(2) The developers could add code-lines that changes the priority of attack by computer controlled players (AI), so the first sight of a tank, artillery, mortar, bombardier or mgs: change FROM LOW priority TO HIGH priority. Thus, the enemy infantry efforts seek to knock down the player's tank/artillery/mortar etc., when spotted immediately - or else: it (AI) will run away from them, if AI infantry conclude (with "Recognize code") that the number of soldiers (AI), surrounding them, are unable to make facing player's threat. I think these implements will make the AI more realistic behavior. I hope to have helped. Thank you so much! ""

====> REPLICA - (by "Ty2903" Jan 3 2014, 5:15pm)
"" Everything you have mentioned is an issue with the AI for the game in general. That is how the computer behaves and has nothing to do with this mod.We are attempting to add more mission scripting to help improve this behavior but it is difficult to get the computer to behave rationally like another player might. ""

====> REJOINDER - (by me: "YuriFR" Jan 4 2014, 12:03am)
"" I did not know ...
But the suggestion may be still valid because I have witnessed the following scene: when we are losing a fight against enemy AI (computer), numerically superior, and we have few remaining soldiers (eg: 1, 3, or 5 mens), the soldiers of our army give up the offensive posture and adopts a defensive attitude, as if with afraid to move against the enemy's line. They begin to walk backwards (as if retreating), and avoid direct contact with the huge enemy platoons (AI controlled). Although the soldier keep shooting, it is only do as "self-defense", because his movement is in the opposite direction to the goal of attack (reverse of front-line). I could only force my small troops against the enemy (AI) positions, if I changed the command status, from " Move at will " (free movements) to " Hold position" (units stay put). Even with this change, my army resisted attack the enemy (in these cases I used the "Cancel current orders" command to prevent the withdrawal of my troops). There was also a case where I controlled only 1 soldier (who also avoided a confrontation as much as possible). I kept the command "Move at will", and watched his movements: after giving an order to attack a AI troop numerically far superior, he began to withdraw and was gradually toward the edge of the map, to defect/deserting (the soldier go out of "the computer screen" and never came back). I LOVED all these behaviors, and they must be kept ! The point in question is other...!!! See below:
So ... What i mean, AFTER ALL, with this real example? :

SURELY there is already a "standard-script/code" for AI (engine "vanilla" of: Mow and MoW:AS), able to make a soldier, squad (and vehicles) UNDERSTAND WHEN they are at a ADVANTAGE in relation to the enemy, and WHEN they are on DISADVANTAGE in relation to the enemy. Therefore, the development team only needs to FIND, AND EDIT, THIS SPECIFIC CODE/SCRIPT (which controls the AI responses), tweaking it in the desired "way". The development team DOES NOT NEED to (re)create a whole new script, from the beginning ... !! Perhaps, this is the crucial core of the matter ...
In the example above, if my army was outnumbered and so withdrew as soon conclude that the my troop was able to "realize the degree of danger" represented by enemy troops in that instant. Therefore, for this to occur, the only explanation I found is: "there is already a script or command-lines, built-in in the engine ('vanilla') of the game, which drastically alters the behavior of each soldier (squad and vehicle), according to the characteristics of the hostile army/troops".

Finalizing the reasoning: If the game already has this feature built-in, just adapt it to the DCG also, for cases where the AI controlled opponent (with numeric disadvantage) are faced with our equipment of war: tanks, artillery, mortars, bombers/bombardiers and machine-guns. Consequently, if the disadvantage of the enemy AI is notorious, in compared to our fighting equipment, the troops controled by AI will avoid direct confrontation with the human troops/equipment - AI troops begin to "Take(ing) Cover" (eg: hide/evade/flee/escape or prone/crouch, and even defect/deserting)!!!
THIS IS THE AI BEHAVIOR THAT I INTEND TO SEE IN THE DCG (v4.5 or v5.0) !!

What is your opinion about this possibility (improvement of this feature), Mr. "Ty2903" (and others developers)? It's easy to do, or is it difficult? I ask that you contact your partners on this particular issue/matter.
I believe a script that solves the point under discussion will be very welcomed by our entire community! [...]
[I use the google translator - apologize ] ""

//// END "1-B" \\\\

1) - C:
"" The idea here is to form a study material, based in reality, for implementations and future enhancements. The links below do not exhaust the matters!

Sources about the basis of tactical flanking:

.......I - The bases of flanking:
I.i - Everycitizenasoldier.org ["What is a flank (and what to do about it?)"]
I.ii - L-clausewitz.livejournal.com ["On the Typology of Front and flanking Attacks"]
I.iii - L-clausewitz.livejournal.com ["On the difference between wings and flanks"]
I.iV - Military.wikia.com [Wikipedia: notions about flanking]
I.V - Searchfiletype.com [Powerpoint about flanking and others: search for "Military Theory and Strategy (cont)"]
I.Vi - Fas.org ["Forms of Tactical Maneuver"]

.......II - List of Figures (flank attacks):
II.i - Everycitizenasoldier.org [Simplified scheme]
II.ii - Winterwar.com [explanatory animation]
II.iii - Winterwar.com [battalion flanking]
II.iv - 3.bp.blogspot.com [individual soldier flanking]
II.v - I63.photobucket.com [flanking and withdrawl]
II.vi - 2.bp.blogspot.com [suppressive fire + flanking]
II.vii - Geddon.org [double flank with formation of pocket for involvement]
II.viii- Winterwar.com [deep flanking with cutting supply line]
II.ix - Winterwar.com [abstract of the deep flanking]

.......III - About military strategies and tactics:
III.i - L-clausewitz.livejournal.com ["Definitions of strategy and tactics"]
III.ii - L-clausewitz.livejournal.com ["Mass, Economy of Force, and Maneuver. For Dummies"]
III.iii- Clausewitz.com [about Tactical Flanking and theorist Clausewitz]
III.iv - ! Clausewitz's "Principles of War" and book "ON WAR" !: Clausewitz.com & Clausewitz.com | Gutenberg.org

.......IV - For an introduction and deepening the study of military tactics:
IV.i - En.wikipedia.org [Wikipedia: list of tactics]
IV.ii - U.S. Army's institute for geostrategic and national security research and analysis: Strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil (example posted: Strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil )

I apologize for the length of the post, the reason is that the subject interests me greatly. And I think this might help ""

====> REPLICA - (by "TheTarman" Jan 6 2014, 2:13pm)
"" You really should make a post in forum as this will soon be gone in the backlog comments ""

//// END "1-C" \\\\

2) - D:
"" I know there is a Mod able to execute that idea ("explosions dismember the soldier's body into pieces"), whose name is "BM Mod: Body mutilations" (link: Moddb.com ). However there are 3 problems with it:
1 - He is old and needs to be improved and updated;
2 - The body parts are all standardized, if I'm not mistaken based on Africa Corps. of the British Army: it is possible to notice in the legs the existence of a short and light-colored clothes. Regardless of where what army dead soldier belongs, the pieces of corps are ever alike (the same "short and light-colored clothes");
3 - (perhaps most importantly) the "dismemberment bodies feature" does not come included with DCG, and when we use this alternative mod "BM Mod: Body mutilations", he modifies the other parameters of mod DCG, such as: difficulty departure, lethality of weapons, aggressiveness of soldiers etc. etc. etc. (and many others).The idea is to embed permanently the resource "dismemberment of bodies" into DCG mod. Is make it default in DCG!!

Especially for the developers of DCG: if someone does not like this feature, or think it resource is too violent, just PROVIDE THE OPTION TO DISABLE IT within the DCG itself!! ""

//// END "2-D" \\\\

2) - E:
"" I put this request, based on the fact that there is a option of camera in first person ("view from inside the soldier's head") in GEM EDITOR. Therefore, as this possibility already exists in the game engine (MoW and MoW:AS), should not be impossible (or very difficult) to provide this resource as option for normal game, through the DCG system.
Think about that possibility! ""

//// END "2-E" \\\\

2) - F:
"" Although the size of inventory has been reduced, both for the individual soldier as for vehicles, it remains a bit IMPLAUSIBLE. I think it can be REDUCED A LITTLE MORE. This because my impressions are not wrong at all, for example: always found odd that a soldier can carry around 8, 15 grenades, and large quantities of ammunition, in addition to standard equipment (weapon, helmets etc..). Many vehicles also carry huge quantities of things, incompatible with the size of the vehicle.
I'll explain better:

Let us assume*** that an American soldier is able to carry up to a maximum estimated 30kg of equipment (besides your body weight). From the equipment that I will list, soon conclude that it is UNLIKELY a soldier carrying more than 17.1 kg in "Possibility No. 1", or more than 1.4 kg in "Possibility No. 4". I obtained these numbers by subtracting values 30 (kgs) of total weight of both: No.1 (lowest total weight) and No.4 (highest total weight).
Therefore, the maximum increase in weight per soldier, in addition to equipment already listed, should be between 1.4 kg to 17.1 kg approximate.
[For this matter, the important thing is not take the weight, itself, but take the weight as an INDICATOR of the amount of objects that a soldier can carry, ie, the weight serves as a reference (as PARAMETER MEASURE) to approximate the game to reality. This is the point!]

I did other combinations of weapons, and all of them were within that range from 1.4 to 17.1. Shortening the variation for 1 to 17 kilograms is high, but if we try to turn this range in numbers of equipment (which also vary the weight), we note that it is not possible to add as many devices as we thought before ... Let me illustrate:

a) i'm not to consider the weight (variable) of other equipment, such as extra ammo, gas mask, radio transmitter, artillery projectiles, tools / fixes box, smoke grenades, bucket of gasoline, AT mines, AP mines , barbed wires, Czech hedgehogs etc.. etc.. etc..

b) some ammunition are already heavy, like of the Bazooka M1: each weighing about 3.5 kilograms! A soldier with the combination of weapons No. 4 could not even carried 1 projectile of Bazooka. The soldier with less weight (No.1), can carry up to 4 Bazooka ammo, and nothing more. The mortar ammunition must also be weighed..., this fact deserves consideration.

c) I do not consider the fact that, usually, soldiers on the battlefield carried 2 to 5 grenades (not just 1), this prevent the soldier with the M2 flamethrower carried 3 or more grenades (see No. 4). If a soldier with the combination of weapons No.1 carry 6 grenades, it can only add 12 more kilograms of equipment (eg: he can not be carrying a Browning .30 machine-gun) ...

ESTIMATED VALUES*** :

Possibility No. 1: M1 Garand Rifle (4.31 kg) + Mk2 grenade (1kg) + Bandolier-ammo (1kg) + Colt M1911 pistol (1.1 kg) + M1 Helmet (1kg) + Haversack (2.5 kg) + entrenchment spade (1kg) + war canteen (1Kg) = TOTAL: 12.91 Kg

Possibility No. 2: BAR (7.25 kg) + Mk2 grenade (1kg) + Bandolier-ammo (1kg) + Colt M1911 pistol (1.1 kg) + M1 Helmet (1kg) + Haversack (2.5 kg) + entrenchment spade (1kg) + war canteen (1Kg) = TOTAL: 15.85 Kg

Possibility No. 3: .30 Browning machine-gun (14Kg) + Bandolier-ammo (1kg) + Colt M1911 pistol (1.1 kg) + M1 Helmet (1kg) + Haversack (2.5 kg) + entrenchment spade (1kg) + war canteen (1Kg) = TOTAL: 21.6 Kg

Possibility No. 4: M2 flamethrower (20Kg) + Mk2 grenade (1kg) + Colt M1911 pistol (1.1 kg) + M1 Helmet (1kg) + Haversack (2.5 kg) + entrenchment spade (1kg) + war canteen (1Kg ) = TOTAL: 28.6 Kg

***OBSERVATIONS:
I assumed the values ​​described above, all of them, based on brief internet research about the matter. The numbers of values are only approximate (and illustrative), data are not entirely accurate. Do not take these too seriously...
Consult the following sources for further clarification:

# Ww2gyrene.org
# En.wikipedia.org
# Books.google.com.br ""

/////////////// END OF ALL \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

[I use the google translator - apologize]

Edited by: YuriFR

YuriFr;

Interesting thread and ideas, but I can´t say whether any of the above will be added into our mod, since I can´t tell the difference about coding in C++ from a canary bird... I´m only doing the easy work, like new 3d models and maps.

Jason1 is very busy with his real life work for the moment (he´s the one who do the coding) and our script man, Trog, is only sparsely seen these days.

~Zeke.

Thanks for participating!

Probably "Jason1" and "Trog" can evaluate the implementation of those ideas. If you have a more closer access to them, I ask you a favor: to contact the two about this topic. Because I don't know if "Jason1" and "Trog" are regulars on this forum...

Thank you again!

Edited by: YuriFR

Thanks for your enthusiasm YuriFR!
Men of war does have settings that tell squads soldiers when to advance/retreat based on how many enemies they see ("advance ratio" and "retreat ratio" or something similar). We don't know how to use them properly, though, so I just use the defaults. You can experiment with them in the editor though.
If you figure out how they work in the editor, you may be able to share some scripting that will help us...

Thanks for responding, mr. Jason1_! :)

My enthusiasm is justified, mr. Jason1_: the DCG mod is simply FANTASTIC, GENIAL ! I am excited and eager to contribute to make it even more cool! Despite my many limitations... :(

Your comment made ​​me optimistic:

Jason1_ wrote: Men of war does have settings that tell squads soldiers when to advance/retreat based on how many enemies they see ("advance ratio" and "retreat ratio" or something similar). We don't know how to use them properly, though, so I just use the defaults.

He confirmed that my guess was in the right direction:

YuriFR wrote: SURELY there is already a "standard-script/code" for AI (engine "vanilla" of: Mow and MoW:AS), able to make a soldier, squad (and vehicles) UNDERSTAND WHEN they are at a ADVANTAGE in relation to the enemy, and WHEN they are on DISADVANTAGE in relation to the enemy.
[(...)]
(...) the only explanation I found is: "there is already a script or command-lines, built-in in the engine ('vanilla') of the game, which drastically alters the behavior of each soldier (squad and vehicle), according to the characteristics of the hostile army/troops".

I am optimistic because I know that, now, it is possible to change this parameter to better, ie : it is possible make a more realistic "danger perception" to the troops and individual soldiers, without the need to create, from scratch, a structure of scripts to do these "realistic danger perception".

There is one catch, however: I do not know how it works and where is these settings, relating to "advance ratio" and "retreat ratio". I once worked with the GEM Editor, few years ago, but i don't have deep knowledge about this Editor - much less I am able to find these settings in there ...I really want to help, but at the moment I do not have the knowledge to do it. I still have to learn, too ...
If I found out how it works, surely I share with you (and entire team-developers).

For now, maybe there are 2 possibilities to overcome this knowledge gap:

1) Get in touch with someone who already knows modify these settings. Example: contact mr. "Trog", or another member of the team of developers. Or look/ search in the general community (MoW, MoW:AS, DCG and non-DCG, mods, and others...) people who possess this skill / knowledge;
2) You, mr. "Jason1_", try to figure out how to configure it. I suppose you have much more knowledge than I, in Mow/Mow:AS and probably: GEM Editor. (Eg: I never made a mod, or an texture...)

Anyway, I'll try to find out something about it all (and I contact you, if I get any success).

But ideally, someone with experience, devote some time to do it. I'm sure that the modification of this parameter (for the situations described: machine-guns, mg-sentry, war tanks, artillery, mortars, vehicles with arms, bombardiers-warplanes etc.) will be well received by the community, and will make the game even more convincing. I hope!

If the modification in question is not that hard to do, it can still appear within the next "pack" of enhancements, to the next version of DCG (v4.5 or v5.0)!

Let's think about this possibility !!

Thank you very much!

[I use the google translator - apologize]

Edited by: YuriFR

I disagree with 2F of the OP, I think the inventories are small enough.

Here are my requests:

Remove the Feldmutze from German Infantry Inventories. They don't do anything except take up room that would be better used for ammo.
Reduce sandbags' inventory size to 1x2 blocks
Have most infantry units come equipped with 2x sandbags.

For the purchase screen, have "Add Rifle/SMG/MG/AT" ammo in set amounts - 100 Rifle, 150 SMG, 200 MG, 25 ATR, 5 RPG - Since the latter weapons don't have universal ammo, the user would have to choose the type to add, limited of course by faction.
Ideally something similar for Sandbags (1rp for 4 bags), AT and AP grenades.

The ammo would be divided between squad members, any surplus would go to the lightest vehicles (Trucks, bikes, cars), or simply be deleted.
Right now I never use "Reset to default loadouts" for infantry since I'd lose any captured weapons & equipment, and they'd have less than enough ammo for one mission, especially defensive ones. It's annoying and very time consuming to have to go through every enemy body at the end of a mission to adequately supply my infantry for the next.

I'd also like an option to buy any given vehicle without the crew. Say for example my force is at 38/40, having lost a field gun but the crew survived and I want to purchase a new one, and transfer the old crew to it. I think I read on the changelog that you can exceed max force size for a penalty in RP but that'd get annoying and expensive for the number of times this situation has occurred.

This one's not very important, and I'd guess quite difficult, but it'd be nice to have infantry units' skins change based on the theatre of operations.

Edited by: Morbo512

Couple of feature request:

Add some kind of "dictionary" that would get rid of file path's instead of soldier names, so we see "Heer Shutze" instead of "single\ger\heershutze40_2-i2".

Externalize to XML the soldiers that can be added to squad via right click. Separate XML for each nation, allowing to add any soldier one may want and customize the cost of each individual.

Redo the air support: divide it into
*Aerial Recon - AI works more or less like current fighter support, flying over a selected point over and over, but give the plane no ammo so it wont fire at anything, low cost, one time use only.
*Straifing Run - Exactly like current fighter support, but the plane flies away after single Straifing Run (you can give plane enough ammo for only one run), low to mid cost, 2~3 uses per battle
*Tactical bomber support - works like current Stuka air support, plane flies in drops the bombs and flies away, 1~2 uses per battle

Something more complicated: buyable and placeable fortifications such as: bunkers (log and concrete), sandbags, tank traps, barbed wire, minefields, trenches, mortar pits, defensive positions for vehicles.

Edited by: taro8

A simple feature request i would really love:
1. Please make a button that says "reset inventories of all POSSIBLE units". It just takes a ton of time when i have a mixed army as i have to select each unit to reset. Just alter the loop to skip captured vehicles instead of returning errors.

2. It would be nice if I could go back and forth between the buy screen and the unit placement screen, so i can decide to buy fortification units or rush units. OR just display the objective on the buy screen is cool.

3. Instead of adding sandbags to all infantry, may i suggest adding them to only anti-tank, mortar, and portable machine guns? They are almost worthless to purchase as it is having only 1hp and the machine gun barely protecting the gunner. It's fine on city maps with lots of cover but some maps are hugely open. Making them have some fortifications like SirHinkel's mods would be nice, where the gun has a button to place fortification if a sandbag is present. OR just increase the number of engineer trucks.

4. I'm fine with inventory sizing. Fun > Realism. No matter the carrying capacity of soldiers, i usually have one guy just taking 20+ grenades hurling them against the 200 strong enemy battalion.

5. I liked that german tanks now that they cannot destroy tanks 10 miles away and are less brick-houses. Though, yeah i miss the fun tanks -IS3,Super Pershing,T29,Tortoise,Zippo Shermans etc. I however do NOT miss the artillery units. Screw killing 8 tigers with one katsyusha.

6. It would be nice if you could bump up the AA ammo a little. Vehicles with AA ammo always spray everywhere when i'm not looking and finish their load in less than a minute.