Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Sorry, correction.
"Attack Move is fine if you have 2 braincells to rub together and understand the basic concept of micro."
Posts: 178
So I guess you belong to the people that have 2 brain cells and you can maneuver CQB to squad so that all entities are exactly at 10 range. My apologies if my micro is not that good.
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
I have explained what the problem with attack move are.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I mean, have you? SMGs for example have long range - they just don't do any damage there. What happens when you have a squad like PPsh conscripts or G43 grenadiers?
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
The point of Attack Move is so that your units don't get engaged in a fight you didn't want and don't go walking into their death while you were looking away. At max vision distance you can pull out, re-maneuver, or in the instance of a CQC unit coming up on an inferior unit, frontally charge them and force them away.
If you're simply taking fights with Attack Move and not issuing any orders to your unit that encountered an enemy, you're doing it wrong bud. Attack Move is not intended to be the end-all be-all of issuing a unit an order. It's a security measure first and foremost.
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
And once more I have explained how difficult it is to maintain optimum range.
If you problem is the attack move order then you should asking for a different attack order instead of becoming toxic.
Posts: 1527
Permanently Banned Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Optimum range depends not only what you are attacking with but also what you are attacking. Conscripts optimum range against Stormtroops is max range. Against Grenadiers its close range. Optimum range is also not really that relevant due to the cover mechanic (e.g. it's better to be in green cover at 18 range than be in gray cover at some ideal 15 range point or whatever). Then there is the fact that almost every unit in the game has a weapon where max DPS is achieved at close range, so you can't use that as a metric either.
It just seems impossible to implement in a meaningful way, without also making the game play itself. So.. why bother?
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
What makes you think that it is "impossible to implement in meaningful way without also making the game play itself"?
The game already plays itself and that makes moving units into desired range very difficult due to number of thing like formation and cover gravity.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Because, as I said, units don't have an optimum range since optimum range depends on what they are fighting and what the cover situation is.
And it does so the same for everybody. What difference does it make if A-move now will always take SMG troops into the magic <10 range for all squad models? SMG squads will get nerfed and so their effectiveness stays the same and you have achieved a grand total of nothing.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Optimum range in fight between 2 squads depends on allot of factors and should require user input.
The suggestions is to have the option to move SMGs troops to range 10 (in most cases) where they have the highest DPS.
This is not balance issue but user friendly issue.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
That's a dictionary definition of contradiction right there pal.
That's players map awareness and micro issue...
...
That's just arguing semantics(again).
...
Posts: 3260
Well one could probably add a "invisible weapon" with no damage with max range the desired one.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 203
Posts: 3260
I am not sure why people claim that so difficult since a similar thing has ready been done in MOD.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Which mod? SneakEye's a modder so I trust him to know what he's talking about.
Posts: 789
Not only is that not possible, that would be the most inane way to try going about it and would only cause more problems down the line. Attack Move is fine and doesn't need some ridiculous Spaghetti code added.
If you don't understand the backend of the game and the tools you're attempting to theorycraft for, don't speak so matter-of-factly about how "easy" supposed solutions would be, because I guarantee you they aren't easy.
 |
|
|
131 | ||
 |
|
|
58 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
 |
|
|
189 | ||
|
|
|
|
24 | ||
|
|
|
|
19 | ||
|
|
|
|
8 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
