I am sorry if this has been discussed before but afaik, it hasn't. Now, forgive me if I have overlooked an element or two in this post.
*NOTE*My points concern SupCom's all-vehicular land combat only, forget about aircraft and battleships for now*NOTE*
There are some good conversations under progress concerning different strategies in SupCom such as ambushing and flanking. However, without any penalties for the victims of your strategy, why even bother? If the armor has the same strength all around the units, it wouldn't help you.
A larger force would win vs. a smaller force, since you attacking your enemy's flanks or his rear doesn't make his units fall any faster. I've checked the public facts, nothing. And I can't seem to recall CT mentioning this in any interview or presentation.
SupCom has the best possibilities of allowing the use of strategy and tactics, but they'll have to help you in some way, more than the element of surprise of course.
Therefore: I suggest that the element of armor strength should be added to the units in this game. In reality, tanks have stronger armor up front, and weaker on the sides and in the rear. That is the reason as to why they are flanked in combat at all. Another reason is probably the time it takes for a tank to turn and react, but this is not WWII, this is SupCom, and your units attack automatically.
Even though the game we are talking about is SupCom, if you're enemies don't fall faster than your own, you will suffer defeat. It will basically mean: Strength in numbers > Tactical ingenuity. I am sure that we don't want it that way.
Also, we don't necessarily have to call this "armor strength", we might as well call it "benefits of flanking your enemy and crushing down on his rear". Just as long as you get some sort of damage benefit when flanking.
Discuss.
/Shapeshift\
