Quote:
Charles22 said:
<snip>
I meant wimpy in terms of their equipment and ratings in WinSPWW2. Surely you will agree that their in-game army is much weaker than the in-game armies for GB and the USA for example?
|
Fair enough about the equipment and ratings.
As for comparison of any
in-game army against another, I have to disagree - with some caveats.
Above the tactical level, the game operates on the basis of "all other things being equal" - this ensures the player enjoys the game. We see this in the points ratios and the fully topped up formations and amount of rare kit we can purchase (though some attempts have been made to compensate e.g. Japanese home defense tank units). While Chinese equipment is not nearly as good as that of some other armies, you can buy a lot of it. As Uncle Joe said: "Quantity has a quality of it's own". The numbers for quality trade-off can fail (spectacularly in SPMBT with M1 vs T72) but these failures can often be resolved through thoughtful force selection and tactics.
What we don't see is the ability of American or British mechanized forces to punch through CCP lines and push deep into their rear areas nor do we see the effects of local villagers supporting CCP forces through information, logistics and guerilla support.
My second caveat would be about terrain. Chinese vs US over open ground is one thing, in close terrain it could be quite different. As I mentioned in a PM, I ran tests showing that in close terrain, Japanese infantry without specialized AT can hold their own against American combined arms or tank forces.
The game starts with all other things being equal, our job as commanders is to make sure they don't stay that way.
