@Jennifer:
@newpaintbrush:
1. Nothing is as broken as Lend-Lease. Most of the other Allies NAs are horribly overpowered.
I don’t know how this is broken. Lend-Lease:
Russia may convert ONE British land unit and ONE American land unit to Russian units. That’s 2 units and they have to be infantry, artillery or tanks.
That’s because you’re reading the LHTR version.
OOB Lend Lease puts no restrictions on number or type of converted unit. So you end up with a unbelievably powerful Russian air force.
OOB Dive Bombers: Like industrial bombing, but even less cost effective. Not all that great, because German fighters have to help defend against the Allied navy.
PanzerBlitz: OK, actually.
U-Boat: You can’t take Russia with U-Boats. Almost useless against KGF.
Banzai: The ability to redirect attacks between Ssinkiang, Yakut, and India is vital. Japan must almost inevitably use fighters and tanks in the midgame.
Superfortresses: A US NA. And how is it 25% death rate?
“I like several of Germany’s NA’s. Panzerblitz, Luftwaffe Dive-Bomber, and Fortress Europe have all been very effective in games I’ve played. I’m planning to take the sub-based ones for a test run in an upcoming game, too.”
Good for you. I wonder why you found Luftwaffe Dive-Bomber to be useful; was the Allied player determined to go KJF, freeing Germany’s fighters up? How is it that Fortress Europe was that good for you? It is only a slight advantage against Allied strafes (for lightly held German territories), and the added cost makes it marginally useful against heavy Allied attacks. The sub-based ones are not awful, if you take them both. But really - the fact of the matter is, yes, each German NA is better than NOTHING, but I find the German NAs to be underpowered in comparison to the Allied NAs.
OOB, that is.