Yeah, Wikipedia plays a big part in my research. But I stumble across other websites as Iâ€™m hunting for things also. Sometimes I find declassified official documents from the time. I also use other games in my collection, like War in Flames and Battlewagon, where the designers did the research, and came to their own conclusions about how to fudge things. I used to be in Military Intelligence when I was active duty army. I spent six years at NSA (â€œIn God we trust. All others we monitorâ€) 😉 So I developed the habit of confirming intelligence from multiple sources whenever possible. Iâ€™m still in the National Guard, actually. But I switched my MOS to MP so I didnâ€™t have to drive so far for drills.
Good job on the research. Every time I start to do it for land forces, I get distracted by all the different sources, and how they use different methods for listing things. Yeah, with the way A&A works, where the infantry of one country is equal to the infantry of every other country (unless you are using the elite units in Global â€™39), then you have to reflect differences in troop and equipment quality by using different ratios to represent one unit.
One idea Iâ€™ve toyed with is using the same ratio for everyoneâ€™s infantry, (like 1 for every three divisions) but then reflecting the differences in firepower by assigning different ratios for artillery. For instance, at the start maybe Germany gets an artillery unit for every 2 infantry, and France gets one for every 5 infantry, or something along those lines. The problem there, of course, is that the French (and Russians) really really liked artillery, and it made up a bigger percentage of their overall forces. So it would not be entirely satisfying from a historical perspective. For the same reasons, I am reluctant to just start them off with a bunch of SS units. Although I suppose I could just not call them SS units. But Iâ€™d know. Iâ€™D KNOW, and it would bug me 😄