|
| What do Ground bombers and fighters do in the current ground battles?
Are they programmed yet? |
|
| I think that they work fine - i have seen battle with ground fighters attacking. They have a planetary range and therefore are not part of short range combat.
|
|
| So which order do we use to initiate a long range battle?
My GPs appear to ignore any opportunity to engage in a long range attack and just move to short range. |
|
| The ground enemy list should trigger when you enter the sector of the target. If you use ground assault it puts you into short range (if possible). There does seem to be a gap in the orders reguarding a ground attack from planetary range - it may need some work on the ground assault order.
| QUOTE | | My GPs appear to ignore any opportunity to engage in a long range attack and just move to short range. |
You would need to be more specific about what you did, not sure what you mean. |
|
| Recent events seem to indicate that Ground Fighters and Ground Bombers DO NOT require Crew Factors, contrary to their TM's - at least they are not affected on either their accuracy or their numbers during defensive battles with less than optimal crew factors... Perhaps this should go in the "Bug" Section? Unless I'm missing something completely obvious (which has been known to happen).
Rich Fanning
aka 
Lord Lawrence Scrimm
CIA Director of Regional Operations |
|
| | QUOTE | | Recent events seem to indicate that Ground Fighters and Ground Bombers DO NOT require Crew Factors |
All crewfactors were dropped from ground combat equipment. Its no longer on the TM as well. I will added a few back dated fix lists and they shoudl cover it. |
|
| So - in other words, a single Wimble Mercenary is capable of controlling, with 100% efficiency, 32k+ MU's of Ground Combat Kit? Why am I bothering to train Mercenaries up? I can send in an assault force of 250k MU's of Battle Tanks, Bombers and Warbots commanded by a single Wimble - blast the defenders to Hell and not even bother with trying to "contest" the starbase - there'll be nobody left to defend it after the single Wimble is done. He's less likely to get hit amongst all that kit and he'll damn sure get promoted to Veteran status.
This makes NO SENSE AT ALL! This penalizes the Affs with large contingents of Troops on their Payrolls every week, while making production Affs unstoppable.
Rich Fanning
aka
Lord Lawrence Scrimm
CIA Director of Regional Operations |
|
| Huh? And why doesn't ground combat equipment require crew factors? |
|
| I don't understand it either, makes my troops feel bloody useless. In fact if combat factors are not required for combat equipment why have troops? Much easier to produce 1000's of MU's of kit every week and sack all the troops and save a bundle on wages every week.
Cheers
Jons - SMS |
|
| | QUOTE | | Huh? And why doesn't ground combat equipment require crew factors? |
Cos while it sounds like a good idea, it turns out noone can get it right in practice. And thats without the messing about of combat. Ships are configured before battles so it can be worked out then - GPs are generally thrown together at the site. |
|
| | QUOTE | | This makes NO SENSE AT ALL! This penalizes the Affs with large contingents of Troops on their Payrolls every week, while making production Affs unstoppable. |
Essentially it is a valid tactic to wipe out a starbase with tanks, it has to be. If you make tanks require troops then you do not make troops useful, you make them a requirement for using the tanks.... Basically having to have crew for the tanks just seems a waste of time, troops have to be valuable on their own. Troops now have value in that fact that they control the battle, dmg in ground combat is considerably less than in space combat and control is the way to take a starbase .
I understand that you are worried but you kind of have to trust me and read the ground combat doc.
I did miss something out of ground combat to do with the 100kmus of tanks and 1 troops but i'm just fixing that now and i will ammend the doc (just increasing dmg to attacker if he does not have control).
Basically i'm not stupid but i am always rushed and i tend to miss things but i do correct them.
|
|
| Ok i was concerned that once 10000 tanks parked in short range there was no way to get them out - since when you have 100% control of the starbase there is nothing to fight for in the control battle. So i cranked up damage done to attackers while they do not control any portions of the starbase - basically you don't get as much cover from the starbases structure until you have a small amount of it. So battles with loads of tanks and nothing else can still win but you will have to sustain large loses.
I just ran 10000 battle tanks + 100 troops against a large starbase, the a attackers lost minimal military and the defenders lost about 2000 tanks. |
|
| I assume that the flip side to this is that warbot are now extremely powerful as defence since they are good at short range.
Would it be reasonable to keep the ground factors of warbots since a one to one ratio of warbot (or similar) to troop is simple maths. |
|
| Yup i think the warbots are the only problem with taking away crew factors from ground stuff. Also the warbots can be limited in combat only which was one of the main concerns for me. And 1:1 ratio seems ok. |
|
| Well, it takes stellars to maintain troops, while it doesn't to maintain tanks after they have been build. It's much more expensive to have an 1000 tank + 1000 troops army running than to have a 1000 tank + 10 troop army in the game. I thought this was a nice way to limit the military build up in the game. Before you had to do your math to have an army of a certain size, now it's just factory production again. Regarding the control this is of course correct. But after a 1000 tank + 10 troop army has moped up that 1000 troop controlling army it doesn't really matter anymore, does it ? |
|
| I think a question is more, how about making ground equipment look a bit more like real life.
A tank require 4 soldiers to make, so produce 20 of those, will cost you the production, resources and 80 soldiers, each tank now have maintenance of 4.
this would make it so, that you have to pay for ground stuff, on the other hand, warbots could be runned by troops not part of other vehicles.
Thats my suggestion anyway. |