Entrenchments

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Entrenchments

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Entrenchments

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Entrenchments - 5/22/2000 2:56:00 AM

Desert Fox

Posts: 171
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Ohio, that is all I can say.
Status: offline

Maybe its just me, or maybe its the random factor of the game, but I don't feel that entrenchments or being 'dug in' are as effective as they should be. So far, I have been playing a couple of WW2 campaigns, one as Germans and one as the US Army. In both, I have had to deal with all types of missions, defend, advance, delay, etc. In my experience, my entrenchements really are not very effective. All too often the AI advances with his infantry and takes potshots at my machine gunners and infantry squads from 5+ hexes. Most of the time my boys are dug in and theoretically should be pretty difficult, if not impossible to hit at such ranges. However, all too often their pot shots hit and kill a guy in the unit. Usually the percent chance to hit is 2 or 3 percent. I could understand this happening every now and then, but I have lost quite a few entrenched units to enemys who have never gotten closer than 5 hexes. Now, the enemy rarely gets closer than that, I make sure to use my tanks to mow them down. However, when they do, they can usually wipe out units previously with all their men in 2 or 3 shots. In one instance, a Jap squad got to within 2 hexes of a dug in rifle squad on a hill (visibility was 2, not much I could do about it). Now granted, the Japs were all elites and my forces were mostly average, but for them to wipe out the whole squad of 12 in 2 volleys was a little bit unreal if you ask me. I think the entrenchment/dug in status needs some reworking. I really doubt that it should be that easy to kill a dug in squad with direct fire from the bottom of a hill. I really don't seem to have the same kind of experiences with dug in AI units. This is more because I use artillery and flamethrower equipped units (isn't that what you are supposed to use?). Also, what is up with the American tanks digging foxholes? Are they making preparations for the eventual bailing out?

_____________________________

Post #: 1

- 5/22/2000 4:00:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

Duf-in is perhaps a misnomer "improved position" may have been better. The thought behind it is that units in "defend" stance are looking around in their hex for stumps, depressions, folds in the terrain, etc that give then a defensive advantage. SOme actual digging may be occuring, but for the most part the idea is that the unit is taking the 2-4 turns to find and organize themselves around the best "micro-terrain" in the hex. That is why tanks can become "dug in" they aren't actually carving out a revetment, just working on the assumption that even in "open" ground we are not talking about a parking lot:-) Now if you are up against highly experienced troops, they will pick your troops off as they try to fire. and if your troops aren't very experienced, they will tend to "run off" when they see the first few buddies go down with holes between their eyes. The effects of experience are magnified from previous SP games and we are working to better account for experience differences in point costs. Your troops will last much longer dug -in than not dug in, but if you are being attacked by excellent troops and your troops are poor, they will have trouble. IF you want troops "entrenched" they need to start the game that way. Experience counts there too and poor troops will slink away from there entrenchments much faster than good troops.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Desert Fox)

Post #: 2

- 5/22/2000 7:20:00 AM

Hauptmann6

Posts: 121
Joined: 5/11/2000
From: Portage, MI
Status: offline

I have had that problem as well. The squad advancing does more damage to the defender that is entrenched than the other way. The defender was uphill in rough as well. WTH? seems to me, the MG on the hil should be able to wipe out a unit moving fast in the open, and be pretty hard to hit as well. be I have had the opposite effects. My 2 yen Haupt

_____________________________

(in reply to Desert Fox)

Post #: 3

- 5/22/2000 7:52:00 AM

Arralen

Posts: 827
Joined: 5/21/2000
Status: offline

Cannot agree - I'm at the moment doing a Japs vs. Brits campaign, and I find it REALLY difficult to get the "BR Rifle SC*" out of their foxholes - no matter if I use tanks, engineers or elite infantry, and that all at range 2 (I get range-2 weather/time in every cenario ..) Arralen

_____________________________

AMD FX-4300
Gigabyte 970A-DS3P
Kingston 24GB DDR3-1600 (PC3-12800)
Asus GTX 750 Ti OC 2GB GDDR5
Seagate Barracuda SATA III 1TB
Windows 8.1

(in reply to Desert Fox)

Post #: 4

- 5/22/2000 7:54:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

Check the experience differential. Lousy troops even if dug-in will be less effective than good troops. Remeber - "casualties" are not necessarily dead, but troops that run off or are otherwise rendered ineffective. Dug-in or not, poor troops will have trouble holding their ground against superior troops. [This message has been edited by Paul Vebber (edited 05-21-2000).]

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Desert Fox)

Post #: 5