Actually, I agree to give the infantry a force bost, since the best use we gave to the infantry was defensive while the artillery fired from behind, because attacking with 4 infantry, a city that defends with 2 anti-aircraft, surely you lose 2 or 3 infantry before taking the city.
It is true that in World War II, artillery did not have the important role that it did in World War I, however, everything depended on the type of doctrine of each army, and the enemy, for example, the Soviet Union used the artillery massively during most of the war, and in fact, what the bombers of the Alaids did not destroy in Berlin, the Soviet artillery did.
The point is that artillery gains importance in the face of a slow enemy army, while losing importance in the face of a fast and flexible enemy army.
I agree that the infantry defense values against tanks is ridiculous, but it is even worse, if you look at it well, the infantry has attack power against light armor +3, and the light tanks have defense power against infantry + 2 ... it makes no sense, and we are talking about level 1, but what does the image of the American level 1 infantry say? "Infantry of type 1932", if we are going to be correct, this game starts between 1930 and 1932, and until what I know, at this time, the use of bazooka and other anti-tank weapons was not widespread ... Why a Infantry has better attack than the defense of a light tank?
there is another thing that is unpleasant, the tanks and anus suffer a penalty of strength in mountains and urban provinces ... that is, what? is seriously?
Finally, all urban provinces with double resources of EVERYTHING? boring, that is, where is the strategy? at this point, everyone will start the same, everyone will have the same advantage and disadvantage ... My God, this is like those third world countries where you do not reprove in the institute because "we are all equal" xD
