Remove Veterancy from Multi

Nou
First Sergeant
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon 7 Nov 2011 19:41
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby Nou » Mon 16 Apr 2012 20:27


User avatar
kesmai
Corporal
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat 18 Feb 2012 21:56
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby kesmai » Mon 16 Apr 2012 20:34

vetting vehicles and helos should cost 50% per step.
inf should stay as it is.
dont´t know if it works, cos inf and ifv are bought together.
so its 80 pts 4 a fully veted vts1 :twisted:



bartke

User avatar
REDDQ
General
Posts: 6906
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2012 03:13
Location: przy stole.
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby REDDQ » Mon 16 Apr 2012 21:24

Nou wrote:Also I have not understood the tactic of "if I have tanks I am going to stop here and let them kill me while im not moving" which I see Pact doing often. Pact is meant to be a spear that drives through the enemy lines and breaks it forcing the enemy to react from cover to contain it, often weakening their own lines to the point that many more holes open up.

Stopping your tanks in the middle of a field to engage, while increasing accuracy on a lot of tanks, often just brings them under suppressive fire from mortars and artillery. If there is a time to rush in this game its when you are pact and you've made contact. Drive home, break through their lines and force them to all of the sudden reorient their forces (which any player worth their salt is going to have degrouped and spread out for protection against arty). If you can get them into a organizational mess you can often push through more forces and get in there and start basically taking pot shots at slow reacting enemies that now have their butts towards you!

Well, Pact suppose to use also overwhelming numbers with cheap, small, fast tanks and infantry, but we are far from that fantasy, don't we?

The reason is that most WP tanks has strong front armor but very weak side(MAX 5 in top T72s and T80s). If they would do like you suggest the chance that some of your units will have opportunity to attack side is bigger with every meter. In game actually NATO has everything needed to break enemy lines (Challenger has 8, top Abrams 7).
Leopard 2 has 4-5 and funny enough people complaining about it have maximum what Pact players can hope for.

Nou
First Sergeant
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon 7 Nov 2011 19:41
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby Nou » Mon 16 Apr 2012 21:38

REDDQ wrote:
Nou wrote:Also I have not understood the tactic of "if I have tanks I am going to stop here and let them kill me while im not moving" which I see Pact doing often. Pact is meant to be a spear that drives through the enemy lines and breaks it forcing the enemy to react from cover to contain it, often weakening their own lines to the point that many more holes open up.

Stopping your tanks in the middle of a field to engage, while increasing accuracy on a lot of tanks, often just brings them under suppressive fire from mortars and artillery. If there is a time to rush in this game its when you are pact and you've made contact. Drive home, break through their lines and force them to all of the sudden reorient their forces (which any player worth their salt is going to have degrouped and spread out for protection against arty). If you can get them into a organizational mess you can often push through more forces and get in there and start basically taking pot shots at slow reacting enemies that now have their butts towards you!

Well, Pact suppose to use also overwhelming numbers with cheap, small, fast tanks and infantry, but we are far from that fantasy, don't we?

The reason is that most WP tanks has strong front armor but very weak side(MAX 5 in top T72s and T80s). If they would do like you suggest the chance that some of your units will have opportunity to attack side is bigger with every meter. In game actually NATO has everything needed to break enemy lines (Challenger has 8, top Abrams 7).
Leopard 2 has 4-5 and funny enough people complaining about it have maximum what Pact players can hope for.


Which is why this game is so fun. For the most part it is realistic. You can use cheap units to do what I said, you don't attack in a column as Pact, you attack on line. 4 columns wide at least, that way you make sure that the defense which is on line has to devote fire towards your front, less they get over run. Prepping with LOTS artillery before hand, and protecting your flank with artillery fire is pretty much how the Russians planned to roll. You are going to lose a lot of units (which is why you always play timed matches, point patches are dumb) but you can try and force a break, and as soon as one column makes a break in your line you filter out those units and start attacking from the rear and now they are enveloped. Usually you can then start routing your remaining columns into that break since their line defense is now shifting to defend their rear, and any smart player is going to withdrawing.


But like you said, NATO tanks are meant to defend against that. The Abrams is meant to fight in reverse, making stands and then withdrawing to another defensive line under the cover of attack helicopters and artillery (and god if we had FASCAM artillery to lay down mine fields on our previous positions *drool*).

So Eugen gave us the tools, its up to us to see how we can use them since pretty much everything in this game is theoretical in terms of real life effectiveness (yes, you can compare against Iraq, or in Georgia, but its hardly the same as Pact vs. NATO).

User avatar
REDDQ
General
Posts: 6906
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2012 03:13
Location: przy stole.
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby REDDQ » Mon 16 Apr 2012 22:14

Nou wrote:Which is why this game is so fun. For the most part it is realistic. You can use cheap units to do what I said, you don't attack in a column as Pact, you attack on line. 4 columns wide at least, that way you make sure that the defense which is on line has to devote fire towards your front, less they get over run. Prepping with LOTS artillery before hand, and protecting your flank with artillery fire is pretty much how the Russians planned to roll. You are going to lose a lot of units (which is why you always play timed matches, point patches are dumb) but you can try and force a break, and as soon as one column makes a break in your line you filter out those units and start attacking from the rear and now they are enveloped. Usually you can then start routing your remaining columns into that break since their line defense is now shifting to defend their rear, and any smart player is going to withdrawing.


But like you said, NATO tanks are meant to defend against that. The Abrams is meant to fight in reverse, making stands and then withdrawing to another defensive line under the cover of attack helicopters and artillery (and god if we had FASCAM artillery to lay down mine fields on our previous positions *drool*).

So Eugen gave us the tools, its up to us to see how we can use them since pretty much everything in this game is theoretical in terms of real life effectiveness (yes, you can compare against Iraq, or in Georgia, but its hardly the same as Pact vs. NATO).

I'll drink to that ;)

Nou
First Sergeant
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon 7 Nov 2011 19:41
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby Nou » Mon 16 Apr 2012 23:05

This just reminds me how much I'd love to have a game mode where you have to hold as much ground as possible as a defensive force, only making attacks if you really really can.

Say a map where NATO gets no reinforce zones, but Pact does (and I don't mean like we have in siege mode, like as in NATO can never cap a reinforce zone).

Make it timed, you have to hold at least the last zones till the time runs out and you win, if you get destroyed you lose.

Another variation on that would be NATO only gets reinforce zones after a certain period of time, say out of a 40 minute game you only get to reinforce after 20.

I think that could be really interesting! Course it'd be all the better if you could deploy defensive fortifications like hull down positions and entrenched infantry (the Germans loved yanks digging up their flower gardens to stick a Patton in it during the Cold War haha).

SupComFan
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed 25 Jan 2012 13:37
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby SupComFan » Tue 17 Apr 2012 01:36

crap idea.
Last edited by OpusTheFowl on Tue 17 Apr 2012 02:23, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: EDIT: Attack the strategy, not the person.

unrealnoob
Private
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun 12 Feb 2012 00:10
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby unrealnoob » Tue 17 Apr 2012 02:06

SupComFan wrote:crap idea.


You are talking about removing veterancy, and not the defensive mission type?

Since in Men Of War, the defensive missions were some of the funnest...

Guggy
General
Posts: 8645
Joined: Thu 17 Nov 2011 02:53
Location: peaceful skeleton realm
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby Guggy » Tue 17 Apr 2012 02:10

Alot of units require veterancy to work at all sadly. Anything with an ATGM, or most AA units.

Vesson
Specialist
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon 16 Apr 2012 16:57
Contact:

Re: Remove Veterancy from Multi

Postby Vesson » Tue 17 Apr 2012 03:36

Speaking of attacking strategies and not the person, thanks to those of you who didn't resort to that.

In answer to the allegation of coming to cry on a forum after being beaten, sorry mate, but wrong. I've simply never bought vet units as Pact, until last game, where I went for 2 level four T-80U's and dominated so hard it was just stupid.

Every shot hit. Every TOW missile hit (almost), etc etc.

Yes I've been the victim of this in the past - getting surprise owned by vetted units, and again, my opinion is that we at least need a visual representation of the unit to show veterancy on the main screen, without having to hover (again thanks for that personal snipe) over every unit with 'info units' on.

Otherwise, remove veterancy. Being surprised by fully vetted units hurts too much.

Some units are useless without veterancy? That's up to the dev's to fix.

Return to “Wargame : European Escalation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests