? for vic..

? for vic.. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series

Message

freeboy -> ? for vic.. (1/28/2008 3:39:44 AM)
Vic, I love the game, but why do hq not affect naval or Air units? I would love to have fleet hq stf's on my fleets at sea to augment their performance s in real life.. thanks

seille -> RE: ? for vic.. (1/28/2008 3:18:30 PM)
Cause Vic decided it´s better the way he coded. Where is the problem ? Nobody has a disadvantage if the HQ has no effect on these units, just the experience and the readiness. In addition how this should work ??? A BB can´t carry staff and is mostly out of range of it´s HQ. For planes it´s the same. The attacking player would nearly always have a BIG disadvantage cause his planes are out of range of the own HQ, but mostly close the the enemies HQ, so the attacked players planes would have full HQ support. 100 % unfair and probably the reason Vic did not implemet staff support here. Things like this are in my eyes questions for the basic game design and not for updates and i´m sure Vic had good reasons to code it the way he did.

xBoroNx -> RE: ? for vic.. (1/28/2008 3:33:17 PM)
Yeah admirals and airforce generals would be cool. Furthermore peoples tactics, the predecessor in fact had admirals and airforce generals [:D]

seille -> RE: ? for vic.. (1/28/2008 4:41:33 PM)
But Vic decided very early that he´ll remove the officers used in PeoplesTactics and replace them with the staff as it is now in AT. Tweber explained somewhere how you could create special SFT´s like Manstein or something. The current system simply doesn´t allow a fair use of staff for air or sea units. The defender would have ALWAYS a big advantage. Nobody can really want this especially since defending fighters already get a 25% bonus !

freeboy -> RE: ? for vic.. (1/28/2008 8:09:05 PM)
right, I appreciate your comments , BUT you seem to miss me, I would call these sfts special air and navel, they would move WITH the units allowing no out of range affects.. fyi, vic does not need you to defend against an honest ?

seille -> RE: ? for vic.. (1/28/2008 9:03:05 PM)
I can´t see how such a SFT could improve the game engine to be honest. You want a Galland flying with your german JG ? Why ? Is setting the XP or tech level for the planes not enough ? If the "staff" is always in range for your planes or ships setting XP higher or lower has a similar effect. But hey you´re right, that´s Vic decision.

freeboy -> RE: ? for vic.. (1/28/2008 10:00:24 PM)
Well, think about hte advantage for having hq's? they add a flavor in that you can help, or hurt depending on how you use them u troops .. and I was thinking for naval combat, including perhaps in futre additions having a naval interdceipt, that a hq on board the task forces would sim nicely the actually command structures wherre Admirals made the bigdecision and then exection took over... so not just quality won the day, see midway etc. If you could put a sea admiral unit in a stack at sea and have it influence carrier air and sea units, I think that would be fun, and a worthwhile add on.. I would also pay for this in another release fyi. So it would improve the game engine by adding an aspect ot the naval side, also the air side as well giving one more detail to look at .. I would add to these special units, interceptors and marines but that is another topic for another thread.. cheers..

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.171875