H&R and SG battle tactics

[ars68]

for the most part, all battles are simply hit and run for the most part, you go 1 round fo fighting, then leave.  but if E ever gets the chance to put this in, I believe it would be awesome (although, yes, potentially abuseful as well)

Hit and Run: your fleet comes in, shoots, then retreats before anyone can bring there guns to fire back.  however due to the rushing of firing the guns, your fleet receives a huge disadvantage to attack power, but in return cannot be fired back.
attacker attack penalty: 50-70% defender attack penalty: 100%

Stand Ground: Your fleet comes in with all it has, and does not give up till either your fleet or their fleet is destroyed. 
all penalties and bonuses:0%, once a combat round is over, another is started until 1 armada is totally destroyed.

[ShAd0wS]

ok H&R totally overpowered since none of ur ships can even be touched... and SG way too powerful...

[Seither]

Yes, but you lose 70% of your attack power with it, so only weak ships would get destroyed. But I'd give them a 1 in 10 chance of hitting you back. But stand ground is perfectly fine.

[ars68]

I agree, H&R IS too overpowered, even with the 70% attack reduction.  a better replacement, however, is reconaisance, you fly in, see the enemy ships, and fly back before they can fire at you.  since the point is to see what they have without a single shot being fired, the normal penalty will be 100% to both attacker and defenders attack, the drawback, however, is that you still generate a counter.

and one of the major reasons it is overpowered is especially if you use something like YJ's.

but as far as stand ground is concerned, it is somewhat needed, as it will also lessen the need for marines in higher up battles, and lessen the effectiveness of simply using HP as a means to avoid any 'real' damage, and also increasing the usefulness of actual defense. 

IE:
1 supership vs 1 fleet of defense swarmers
supership does 0 to swarm fleet
swarm fleet does 1/4th damage to supership.
(continues another 4 round till the supership is actually the one destroyed)

shouldn't actually be to hard, I would guess, simply have somewhere where if not totally destroyed, repeat steps (whatever) unless it goes over so many rounds, then just end (running out of fuel/ammo?)

[Gunfighter Frank]

that seems to be the problem with swarmers vs super ships.  the swamers shouldnt even get a hit on the super ship.  look at it this way.  a .22 cal weapon cant touch an M 1 Abrams main battle tank. it dont matter how many you have. however that tank can do massive damage to the man using the .22. and a lot of them.  there should not a swarm bonus to attack only defense.  and hitpoints no swarm bonus.  the only way any ship should go up with defense and attack is through crew level.

[Seither]

The swarme rbonus is ok, just, as you said, take the bonus away from attack.

[Chronos]

I think that the swarm bonus for attack is just as reasonable as the crew bonus for attack.

But, think about it, 20 M16s all firing on the same spot at the same time would do more damage then 20 times the damage of one firing on that spot.

[Seither]

Yes, but lets look at it this way.

Tank vs 20 riflemen

Tank shoots 1 shell and destroys riflemen.
20 riflemen shoot their guns empty and do nothing to tank.

You multiply 20 as high as you like, the result is the same. A supership should not be easily destroyed by swarmers like that.

[ars68]

except you are talking about defense.  imagine it this way:
defense = better armour
hp = bigger ship (thus more damage required to bring it down)


M1 has a lot of DEFENSE, not hp.  if, say, a rocket hit it (or something else that would go through the armour) it wouldn't take that much to take it down.

now let's take a house.  it would have lots of HP (due to it being so big) but not very high defense (almost no real 'armour') if enough riflemen took enough shots, it could go through.

but either way, you are actually talking about a weapons ability to pierce, not necesarily destroy.

and even then, comparing what you have said yourself, would an M1 shoot once and wipe out 10 of those 20 people... then leave?  of course not, he would finish the job.

oh, and the theory of enough shooting at the same spot doing damage otherwise not present, is I believe based on the thing called 'death by a thousand cuts'

and if you REALLY want to take it farther, anyone remember star wars and how they take out the deathstar?  comparing the 2 ships is like comparing that person to that M1.  but you have enough of them, chances are they can come in, find a weak spot, and exploit it.  (IE, what if that rifleman got up close and shot through any openings in the tank he saw?  my favorite spot to think of him shooting through is the tank barrel itself... but that's just my own little fantasy... maybe...)

[Seither]

he does tat and it does nothing. Tanks were designed to be undestroyable by small infentry. I don't care if your soldiers are where titanium armor, if I shoot an explosive shell at them, they're going to do. And they can shoot all they want before hand, they ain''t doing jack squat.

[Chronos]

... Twenty infantry will be more than twenty times as effective verses a tank than one infantry.

And a thousand infantry with M16s could easily take down a tank. Even if it's mearly by the intense heat of friction. And sense, in this game, both sides get a shot even if one wipes the other out in that change of fire, it still counts. Plus, it's harder to hit infantry then it is to hit a tank.

Back to Star Wars, the towers could easily take out an x-wing, if they could hit the x-wing. But they couldn't.

[Seither]

What part of tanks are DESGINED so that INFANTRY CANNOT do anything to it. Plus, a tank only has to hit near th infantry to kill them in 1 shot. Mthbusters did a show on this, hey set up 200 M-16s  spaced out over a field and 1 military grade tank in the center. The tank had a computer programed to target the m-16s and destroy them, while the m-16 were set on a rig with the triggers pulled in. result: All m-16s destroyed. Tank had a couple of minor dents. Since so many people are wanting this game more realistic, then that's as realistic as it gets.

[Chronos]

Tank had a couple of minor dents.

That ain't nothin'.

Trust me, a tank can be destroyed if hit by a thousand fully automatic M16s. If you aim them all at one general spot, you could punch a whole through almost anything.

In short, nothing is impervious. Water can take down mountains. Sand can bring down cities. A speck of water wouldn't kill you, but a tsunami would.

Force and pressure is culmulative, synergetic, compounding. A little might not do much, but a lot of a little acts like a lot.

[Seither]

you forget that all those things require incredibly long stretches of time to do. And that's IF the all aim at the same spot, which is near impossible to do. I say something needs to be done, and taking away swarm attack bonus is fair. or the defence bonus, one of the two, as the tank would be able to hurt the infantry no matter the type of armor.

[Chronos]

It can happen pretty quickly, you've ever seen a sand blaster?

And they only have to aim at the same general spot. And no, it doesn't take long for a thousand M16s to punch a hole in thick solid steel.


And you still don't see my point. A lot of something is more damaging then a little something multiplied by a lot.

One M16 might not do a thing, A.K.A zero. But a thousand M16s is at least gonna have an effect, if not destroy it. Thus (x > 0) > 0 * 1000. You with me yet?

And an infantry is gonna be able to survive a shot from a tank if it has enough armor. Because armor has an effect, more armor has more of an effect. The summation of the increase of armor's effect is divergent, even if it's somewhat harmonic. Thus there is a number (a), where that amount of armor will cancel out the damage (b) of the tank shell.