If I understand correctly you retreated 12 squads at the same time?
and 33% of them where cut down? and you don't find that too much?
I tested 1 squad 10 times...
Not at all. I retreated them in pairs, 4x2 squads, 1x1 squad, 1x3 squads.
UKF AA emplacement and retreating squads
24 Dec 2015, 13:38 PM
#41
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Not at all. I retreated them in pairs, 4x2 squads, 1x1 squad, 1x3 squads.
24 Dec 2015, 13:40 PM
#42
Posts: 677
You are entirely missing the point... Do not put your squads in a position where they will be cut down whilst retreating. Deal with the threat, then and only then move your squads into the desired position.
This doesn't just apply to bofors, it is a simple fundamental principle for the entire game...
So are you, what you are saying is do not attempt flanks if you opponent has built Bofors near a retreat route until you have killed the bofors.
It apply to all units but very few units are as efficient as bofors at killing retreating units....as shown in pictures...
24 Dec 2015, 13:41 PM
#43
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
Well thats the point of the AA emplacement isn't it?... tell that to okw 2cm flak
The OKW 2cm flak sucking is a completely different topic. I fully support buffs to make it more viable.
24 Dec 2015, 13:44 PM
#44
Posts: 677
Not at all. I retreated them in pairs, 4x2 squads, 1x1 squad, 1x3 squads.
That is a bit weird because in the picture you can see 8 units retreating at the same time,but never mind.
Anyway it seems that my placement was allot better since in my test the Gun was allot more deadlier...
24 Dec 2015, 13:44 PM
#45
Posts: 589
So are you, what you are saying is do not attempt flanks if you opponent has built Bofors near a retreat route until you have killed the bofors.
Yes, that is exactly what I ans many other are saying to you. If you know what your opponent has, and where is his forces are, sure, go for the flank/cut off if you are CERTAIN that your over extended squad will not be cut down on retreat.
That my friend is called sensible play. There are going to many other places on the map the bofors isn't.
24 Dec 2015, 13:45 PM
#46
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
That is a bit weird because in the picture you can see 8 units retreating at the same time,but never mind.
Anyway it seems that my placement was allot better since in my test the Gun was allot more deadlier...
Think!
Once they are out of range, why should I wait for them to retreat to the base?
When they got out from the range, I retreated another squads.
24 Dec 2015, 13:46 PM
#47
Posts: 677
The OKW 2cm flak sucking is a completely different topic. I fully support buffs to make it more viable.
This what you wrote not me, you brought the role of AA emplacement into the topic so don't try to avoid it...
Imo squad wiping of retreating infantries is not their role, plain and simple. If in your opinion it is, you should be asking for other AA emplacements to be able to do it also...
24 Dec 2015, 13:57 PM
#48
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
So I made a test with Panzer Schwerer in the same position like Bofors.
Keep in mind Bofors is a unit, Schwerer is a tier builiding.
I used 12 squad of volks and I sent them through Schwerer in the same way.
Result? Bofors killed 20 models, Schwerer killed... 18.
Schwerer - building.
Bofors - unit.
Keep in mind Bofors is a unit, Schwerer is a tier builiding.
I used 12 squad of volks and I sent them through Schwerer in the same way.
Result? Bofors killed 20 models, Schwerer killed... 18.
Schwerer - building.
Bofors - unit.
24 Dec 2015, 14:10 PM
#49
Posts: 677
...
Result? Bofors killed 20 models, Schwerer killed... 18.
Schwerer - building.
Bofors - unit.
I like that you test things before giving an opinion...
Shwerer:
Limited to 1, Cost 300/135
Bofors
More than 1 per player can be built, cost 280/30
As posted before if the Schwerer is equally good at killing retreating infantries (by your number 10% less efficient) it should also receive modifiers...
24 Dec 2015, 14:16 PM
#50
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
This what you wrote not me, you brought the role of AA emplacement into the topic so don't try to avoid it...
Imo squad wiping of retreating infantries is not their role, plain and simple. If in your opinion it is, you should be asking for other AA emplacements to be able to do it also...
It's called staying on topic. The topic is the UKF Bofors AA emplacement. The topic isn't the useless OKW 2cm AA emplacement.
And you are right, wiping retreating infantry is not their role. Hence why THEY CAN NOT MOVE. The only way you can score retreat kills with a bofors is when your opponent is stupid enough to retreat through it.
24 Dec 2015, 16:21 PM
#51
Posts: 677
...
And you are right, wiping retreating infantry is not their role.
...
It seem that we are actually making some progress. If it is not they role they shouldn't be that good at it (better than most units), and thus I see no reason why you object to change that will only make them worse at a role that their better than their supposed to.
Unless you argument is that having a unit retreat in path that will bring in range of bofors is extremely bad play and it should be severely punished...
24 Dec 2015, 16:32 PM
#52
Posts: 2561
It is not better at killing retreating infantry. It's just good at killing infantry, PERIOD.
There is no modifier that makes them any better at killing retreating infantry. If you are retreating infantry through it's range you deserve to be punished.
In fact, you are intentionally asking to give it a negative modifiers that no other unit has.
All this, just so you don't have to accept that you made a mistake and it wasn't the game that unfairly caused your units to get wiped. That is exactly what you deserved for retreating your units through an dedicated anti infantry emplacement.
There is no modifier that makes them any better at killing retreating infantry. If you are retreating infantry through it's range you deserve to be punished.
In fact, you are intentionally asking to give it a negative modifiers that no other unit has.
All this, just so you don't have to accept that you made a mistake and it wasn't the game that unfairly caused your units to get wiped. That is exactly what you deserved for retreating your units through an dedicated anti infantry emplacement.
24 Dec 2015, 17:21 PM
#53
Posts: 589
All this, just so you don't have to accept that you made a mistake and it wasn't the game that unfairly caused your units to get wiped.
24 Dec 2015, 17:52 PM
#54
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
It seem that we are actually making some progress. If it is not they role they shouldn't be that good at it (better than most units), and thus I see no reason why you object to change that will only make them worse at a role that their better than their supposed to.
Unless you argument is that having a unit retreat in path that will bring in range of bofors is extremely bad play and it should be severely punished...
You misunderstand. The Bofors role is not cutting down retreating units and it is in fact already terrible at it AS IT CAN NOT MOVEEEEEEE. As I have said before: the only way a Bofors can cut down a retreating squad is when the axis player decides to retreat through it. Retreating through a Bofors is akin to sending out lone capping squads on the far side of the map when you know there is a T70 on the field. Or akin to driving in range of a PAK43 with a T70. It's extremely bad play and should be punished hard. I don't see why you think it would be a good idea to have a Brit emplacement (that is both expensive and immobile) that the axis player can just ignore and not take into consideration while doing flanking maneuvers.
24 Dec 2015, 17:56 PM
#55
10 
Posts: 871
What exactly is the point of this thread (is it to convince your self it isn't your fault you lost the squad?)
24 Dec 2015, 19:17 PM
#56
Posts: 665
It's not a problem with the emplacement, they should just fix the retreating system so units will be taking the safest route to the base instead of the shortest (something that should have been done on release)
No. Retreat is not supposed to be an absolute get out of jail free card. It's up to the player to ensure a safe retreat path and not send squads in positions where they could be cut down while fleeing.
24 Dec 2015, 19:22 PM
#57
Posts: 230
Permanently BannedTheirs nothing wrong with bofors, or flak HQ.
2cm is garbage.
2cm is garbage.
24 Dec 2015, 20:23 PM
#58
Posts: 403
What exactly is the point of this thread (is it to convince your self it isn't your fault you lost the squad?)
Called it. He still wont admit hes wrong.
Lets watch him make a fool of himself even more.
Major Conscript user.
Sometimes NKVD Commander.
Sometimes NKVD Commander.
25 Dec 2015, 08:49 AM
#59
Posts: 677
...is it to convince your self it isn't your fault you lost the squad?
...
Called it. He still wont admit hes wrong.
...
All this, just so you don't have to accept that you made a mistake and it wasn't the game that unfairly caused your units to get wiped. That is exactly what you deserved for retreating your units through an dedicated anti infantry emplacement.
I have not posted a replay of "my" units geting wiped out in game, neither did I complained that my units got wiped out in game. So pls stop making this personal.
25 Dec 2015, 09:01 AM
#60
Posts: 677
It is not better at killing retreating infantry. It's just good at killing infantry, PERIOD.
There is no modifier that makes them any better at killing retreating infantry. If you are retreating infantry through it's range you deserve to be punished.
Never did I claimed that it better at killing retreating than non retreating infantry never claimed that there such a modifier...
Never claimed that retreating units should be pass by without taking any damage and thus not being punished.
I did claim that is very good at killing infantry (better than most units) and in fact too good.
In fact, you are intentionally asking to give it a negative modifiers that no other unit has.
Yes I do, if you have better solution feel free to post it. If you think that this would be the first time Relic would introduce a modifier against retreating unit you are mistaken. Such a modifier was introduced and tested before.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
16 | ||
 |
|
|
883 | ||
|
|
|
|
49 | ||
|
|
|
|
21 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.597215.735+12
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1101614.642+2
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.273108.717+24
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1234
Board Info
741 users are online:
741 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49093
Welcome our newest member, Transue
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Transue
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM