Hi, Yeah, exactly. That's actually the big reason I liked Panzers in North Africa. It was both a strategy game, but also had some fairly realistic statistics etc in it. In World War II The U.S. and British forces got a major hammering from the German Panzers. If you attempted a frontal assault odds were you'd end up dead as the armour in front was tough enough to repell most of our guns. The one and only weakness on the panzer was he armour on the rear was thin and light attack tanks like the M4 could hit them from behind and put the Panzer out of action. It really came down to speed verses raw strength. If your M4 got hit by a shell from the 80 inch guns from a Panzer you were scrap.
Cheers! On 5/23/11, Pitermach <piterm...@gmail.com> wrote: > you could say the same thing about gtc vs panzers in north africa. Ok, both > have tanks... both you shoot in... in both you have ammo... but they are > different enough. GTC is purely fictional while panzers actually relies on > actual tank data of WW2, like gun range, armour, and maximum speed. ----- --- Gamers mailing list __ Gamers@audyssey.org If you want to leave the list, send E-mail to gamers-unsubscr...@audyssey.org. You can make changes or update your subscription via the web, at http://audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org. All messages are archived and can be searched and read at http://www.mail-archive.com/gamers@audyssey.org. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the management of the list, please send E-mail to gamers-ow...@audyssey.org.
