GShock
Posts: 1245
Joined: 12/9/2007 From: San Francisco, CA - USA Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins quote:
ORIGINAL: GShock Inexperienced troops learn more from a battle than experienced troops. However, losing troops will also lose disposition and equipment. Yes, i know, and it also rebalances with the fact that when those depleted units receive replacements from camps, their quality will also go down, but the same goes with the winner. It's true that participating to a battle (whether won or lost) accumulates experience anyway, but it's also true that it feels a bit wrong to see in that report that losers accumulated more quality than winners. After all, winners didn't rout. Don't you think a "penalty" to the quality gain would be more appropriate to the loser? quote:
1.1) Losing div/corps/armies *improving* logistics/command (etc) and gaining lots of experience. Why shouldn't they also have a chance to learn? Both sides participating in a battle have an equal chance to gain experience research and staff ratings. Because of the same reasons as above...Losers shouldn't gain more experience than winners. :) quote:
2) Routers being caught by column+force march. 2.1) Routers only surrendering when totally surrounded. 2.2) Routers shooting back. These balance out each other really. Column+force march is still a formation, routers drop equipment (if they have to) and run as fast as they can. It's evident the routers are faster than pursuers if they escape but i very very often manage to catch them with column+force-march and I also split bdes. In the meanwhile, routers should be very very far...and considering i can surround them (1 hex = 6 sides) it seems to me these routers are too slow. Sure, it's rebalanced by the fact you need SIX bdes to surround ONE enemy, but they travel in mass and you can often use water/cliffs. Add to this that 2 adjacent enemy BDE do not need 12 hexes to be surrounded. It seems just too unrealistic that an organized force march can catch a disorganized "run for it" party. Routers shooting back, i insist, seems totally inappropriate. (I've noticed anyway that sometimes shooting a router has no effect, the unit just skips its turn...very strange because it doesn't seem to happen with a reason) quote:
2.4) Battle report not counting surrendered bdes in count of total losses (i *presume* this fakes the decisive battle nw/vp status along with many other things). By design due to historical paroles. To make it clear: If i hit 7000USA casualties and capture 10x2000 bdes, the total losses would be 27000. This makes a difference as 7 is not a decisive battle while 27000 certainly is one. Regardless of what the events log shows, are these computed as 27 or as just 7? quote:
3) Countervolleys stronger than volleys. Not true as a rule, turn on your combat reports to find out what's going on. Is there any penalty to the countervolley? I.E. attacker is penalyzed according to the remaining movement points (among the several) while the "defender" isn't. Are there any penalties in the countervolley *as a rule* ? Seems to me ruling the same attacker's movement-penalty onto the "defender" would be a good counterbalance. quote:
4) Charges from the rear failing miserably with enemy bdes totally surrounded. Also very rare case, not the rule. Am starting to believe part of this had something to do with difficulty levels, but it did happen to me to even lose a charge against a caisson. The problem is that weapons do give charge protections but in the information pop-up on the enemy bdes you aren't told either who their general is, or what weapon they are employing. The only thing you see is the enemy facing and the terrain. Nothing else and it leaves it out to chance... quote:
5) Runners disappearing/dead with no explanation in log. Should be mentioned, but agree that we could report runner losses more clearly. Runners that go below Strength 3 are automatically disbanded. LoL ok that's indeed something i didn't know. I thought they had to go down to zero. This solves a big mistery, thx! quote:
6) Supply units disappearing when routing (doesn't happen in chit view luckily). Haven't seen it, sounds like a bug. Picturing it's impossible for an army to attack or defend without even a single supply cart, has it ever happened to you to see that there's none in the enemy army? I mean, is it possible that an army spawns without supply carts (this might have something to do with the fact that the strategic caissons are independent from the placing of a group and group is placed ahead and the caisson has to catch up)? Anyway, when you see them routing, pay attention to the texts below "Supply has routed!" and the screen goes to indicate a cyan-highlighted hex. You will see in that hex there's neither the supply cart nor its group designation. That will tell you the supply cart was there (invisible) :) Anyway, luckily this doesn't seem to happen in chit-view, but it's very marginal. quote:
7) Enemy generals being wounded twice (the general horse is not removed in standard view when wounded and yes he can be wounded again). Doesn't seem like a bug really, generals were wounded more than once in real life too. I'd agree with you if the manual didn't state clearly that wounded generals do not affect battle anymore. Sec10:182 LIGHT manual. Marginal wounds where general is still there, could be omitted but when general is considered wounded and he doesn't help in battle anymore, he should be removed from the bde imo (wounded= removed, not wounded = no change). On a final note on this "observation" post, i'd like to point out 3 more things i hadn't mentioned in my previous list (though mentioned elsewhere in other thread). 1) The AI seems a bit too passive during the night where i manage to surround and capture enemy bdes very easily. AI just turns facing but doesn't carry out any plan. Perhaps shooting by night should automatically cause fatigue (considering the troops have fought all the day), that would rebalance towards the AI making this "exploit" very risky (next morning they still have to fight a fresh enemy while they are all fatigued). 2) Obj. Location, probably the only tactic that pays is to wait for the AI to come to you at one of the 2 or 3 spots. In case of 3 spots, the AI "burns" 2 of its troops to occupy them and fights sometimes outnumbered. If the goal is still to rout the enemy army, rather than sneaking to capture all victory locations, perhaps the capture of one of those should affect the will-to-fight. What i mean, is to give some material importance to these locations or they can easily be exploited to outwit the AI who goes for it. 3) Some "initiative" options do not make much sense. I refer, in particular, to the one where you can raid the enemy supplies before battle. What possible use is this if a single caisson can refill all enemy units before i get to them? I was wondering perhaps if that "200" number over the caisson would mean the total number of supplies available and if these weren't unlimited, then raiding those supplies would really give an edge in the upcoming combat. Just scattered thoughts...thanks for answering me, i know i'm a pain... :)
|