The invicible antiair unit (troop unit)

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • The invicible antiair unit (troop unit)

      One anti-air troop version (not mobile) on the move by a pack of enemy units, mostly 15 tanks and 10 infantery units.
      I bomb them in waves of 5 tactical planes (20 planes)

      The anti-air keeps resisiting battle as the super hero unit.

      Look, this is not logic at all. First of all, the infantery units are not made to be strong when they are on the move.
      This is not a mobile antiair unit. Additionally to deploy such units, you need to dig in the troops etc. The game should resistrict the force of the anti-air unit (troops version) while on the move.

      Second. I do not know what crazy algorythm defines the battle scheme, but it is not logic at all, if there are almost 26 units, where ONE anti-air unit, 25 other types, the anti-air is promoted as G.I. Joe unit. There is no way in battle the other units are in regular battle 'covering', 'schielding' or increasing strenght of the anti-air unit.

      It is really anoying at moments the logic of the battle rules.
    • My understanding of the combat calculations tells me that the lone AA survives in a stack for so long simply because it is alone.

      The potential damage done to the stack is divided by unit, and then applied to all the units of that type. Lets say that an attack by planes might do 20 damage to a group of 20 units (oversimplified)


      So a lone AA might only get 1/20th of the potential damage, or 1 hit point damage possible.

      Then that single hit point is run through the X factor random number generator, for an average likely result of .5 hit points of damage.

      So the lone AA will survive a great number of combat cycles at half a hit point of damage each time.






      Compare that to a group of say 15 infantry in that same stack.

      15 units represented out of 20 damage possible, yields 15 damage to the infantry group.

      Again factor an average yield of 50% for the random number, to make 7.5 damage to the infantry group. That means for every combat cycle half of an infantry unit is lost. Or to put it another way, two combat cycles will destroy an infantry unit.


      So in ten combat cycles you have lost 5 infantry from this group, but only damaged the AA by half.
      War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill



      VorlonFCW
      Retired from Bytro staff as of November 30, 2020.

      >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
    • There is also a probability attached to each unit type how likely it is to receive the damage during the damage distribution phase during combat. Units like anti tank, anti air or artillery have a lower chance than tanks or infantry for example, mostly due to balancing reasons.

      (this doesnt mean that these units negate damage, just talking about how much of the incoming damage they get while in an army with other units)
    • freezy wrote:

      Spoiler: There is also a probabaility attached to each unit type how likely it is to receive the damage during the damage distribution phase during combat. Units like anti tank, anto air or artillery have a lower chance than tanks for example.

      (this doesnt mean that these units negate damage, just talking about how much of the incoming damage they get while in an army with other units)
      I was hoping it is so, and certainly makes the game more challenging (although I would take out the antitank from that category).
    • amonmontu wrote:

      One anti-air troop version (not mobile) on the move by a pack of enemy units, mostly 15 tanks and 10 infantery units.
      I bomb them in waves of 5 tactical planes (20 planes)

      The anti-air keeps resisiting battle as the super hero unit.

      Look, this is not logic at all. First of all, the infantery units are not made to be strong when they are on the move.
      This is not a mobile antiair unit. Additionally to deploy such units, you need to dig in the troops etc. The game should resistrict the force of the anti-air unit (troops version) while on the move.

      Second. I do not know what crazy algorythm defines the battle scheme, but it is not logic at all, if there are almost 26 units, where ONE anti-air unit, 25 other types, the anti-air is promoted as G.I. Joe unit. There is no way in battle the other units are in regular battle 'covering', 'schielding' or increasing strenght of the anti-air unit.

      It is really anoying at moments the logic of the battle rules.

      Compare this with real life situation, its not hard to figure that a pair of binoculars would see the enemy aircraft, thus enabling infantry to get to work..that's what they're trained for...right.

      Maybe to create a new unit...the scout, and will allow for better fog of war abilities, or might be able to reduce a more serious bombardment. Either way, an anti air unit can be easily put to its worth with a few capable fire teams.

      I say...stop your winging and get out the tissue box..this game is barely remorseful.
    • bigboss_ironfist wrote:

      Compare this with real life situation, its not hard to figure that a pair of binoculars would see the enemy aircraft, thus enabling infantry to get to work..that's what they're trained for...right.
      Ehm no.. they are not robo soldiers, if you see a plane its already too late even with binos. estimating that it takes about 10-30 mins to get a regular AA operational (decouple it from towing truck, get the thing stable with support legs, and then you have to man it and aim at the planes). a plane on the other hand is already fully armed and at speed, if you see it with binos (say about 5km away) then that plane will reach your location in 66 seconds, and thats for the lvl 1 tactical bomber.. (270kmh which is slow for a plane, even bombers) This is WAY too little time to prepare for anything other than hide in a ditch next to the road, and this is exactly what they did when they heard a stuka coming in WW2 (which was much closer than 5km, otherwise you wouldnt be able to hear the sirens(this also illustrates the point that spotting from 5km away is not always achieveable)).

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Skygry ().

    • In actual wartime situation, AA guns will be emplaced at periodic points along a convoy route, usually at front lines. Such methods were employed by the British in the Mediterranean theatre. This type of tactic means that no matter the functional state of an AA brigade or regiment, there are always AA pieces available to respond at those points during convoy operation.. It is implemented by logistics and that militaries adapted to these methods very quickly in WW2.

      In northern Africa AA guns used by the British would find it difficult to keep up with troop movements, the battles were fast moving and Rommel became known as the desert fox for his quick to initiate strategy.

      AA guns in moving battles would be like a frog leaping, once known what direction troops were moving, AA guns would be set up as soon as possible, along a convoy route. and ready to pack down and move to another location, either as a defilade or enfilade situation, AA guns are useless unless unpacked so why would ttoops sit around with these and player blackjack. Sure and yes true they take about 15 - 30 minutes to do this, but they did do this at key points and would counter/oppose enemy aircraft as they approach tanks, troops, whatever, COW allows for these reverberative tactics to measure a simulated strategy gameplay.

      Anti air guns were very popular during WW2, much of this technical equipment was widely operational.


      http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Anti-aircraft_warfare wrote:

      Batteries are usually grouped into battalions or equivalent. In the field army, a light gun or SHORAD battalion is often assigned to a manoeuvre division. Heavier guns and long-range missiles may be in air-defence brigades and come under corps or higher command. Homeland air defence may have a full military structure. For example, the UK's Anti-Aircraft Command, commanded by a full British Army general was part of ADGB. At its peak in 1941–42 it comprised three AA corps with 12 AA divisions between them.



      Troops on the ground would not just sit idle with AA guns and be coming into a frontal area with a non functional AA piece.....that is no way to fight a frontline.. ..so, ehmm...yes...they are troops functional almost as though they are robot....in direct ordered process, according to a convoy type operation...If they do not act according to process...then they get shot from the sky and killed....
      Images
      • rtyheryger.jpeg

        135.39 kB, 800×1,150, viewed 23 times

      The post was edited 4 times, last by bigboss_ironfist ().