Tech Tree modification, balance, historical accuracy.

I've noticed people discussing the prevalent use of tactical bombers, the inefficiency of anti air, the need to diversify research to respond, etc.

To touch briefly on game design, then get into some of the redundancies in the tech tree.

Anti-Air are not nearly the Hard-Counter that Anti-Tank are. Anti-Tanks will really make short work of Light Tanks. Anti-Air, not so much.

AT vs LT

7str vs 20hp -3 rounds

10hp vs 2.5str - 4 rounds

AT > LT

AA vs TB

4str vs 25hp - 7 rounds

10hp vs 3str - 4 rounds

TB > AA

That disparity only grows. Couple this with the fact that AA are generally spread out, while TB are in stacks, and AA doesn't seem so AA.

Tactical bombers follow a simple efficient tech tree. They can be used offensively, as well as defensively, in any environment. There isn't much need for research heavy diversity.

_______

Now for the tech tree.

Some might notice that the Russian 5th level AA is the 85mm 52 K... That gun was also a formidable Anti-Tank gun... which is why it was used for the SU-85 Tank Destroyer, as well as the KV-85 Heavy Tank... That's how those weapon systems came to be...

(Which is backwards, in-game... the tank destroyer is available before the gun...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/85_mm_air_defense_gun_M1939_(52-K)

This was ALSO the case for the family of 8.8cm Flak guns being used in German tank destroyers, Heavy Tanks, etc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.8_cm_Flak_18/36/37/41

...In fact it's ALSO the case for the American 90mm Anti-Air/Anti-Tank guns used on Tank Destroyers, and Heavy Tanks...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90_mm_Gun_M1/M2/M3

_______

I think you can see where I'm going with this.

These guns were pre-requisites to the platforms they were used on.

The same is true for the 37mm/3.7cm/etc anti-tank guns that were used in the early light/medium tanks. Then the 50/75/85/etc mm guns.

Even if you wanted to add more tech trees in the future, such as the Italians, you're going to have the Fiat with a 37mm gun, a ~50mm (47), a 75mm, etc.

Not only would these milestones actually be more historically accurate, they would simplify the tech trees for many platforms. The base tank chassis that these guns were adapted to, would be a co-requisite for any intuitive further developments in self-propelled platforms.

_______

We wouldn't see players simply diving into TB 1,2,3,4 etc when research and resources don't have to be split between AT, AA, Medium/Heavy tanks, destroyers, etc.

Once those guns and chassis are researched, the next development should be available quickly... just like the KV 85 being a stop-gap tank that was quickly developed... or any naval unit that could have that weapon system adapted to it.

Also: There's a reason why someone would want a towed gun vs a gun on a heavy tank. The Americans were slow to put Heavy Tanks into development and use because military doctrine saw those same guns being used in different ways.

If people are interested in the crossover of tech trees, the rapid developments in engines from aviation lead to the viability of the first universal tanks, or main battle tanks in the post war period (ie. Superchargers, used to compress air at high altitudes with low air pressure and densities. 1/3 the air density, 1/3 the fuel efficiency, less range).