Matrix Games Forums

Deal of the Week: Command Ops goes half price!New Fronts are opening up for Commander: The Great WarCharacters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the Family
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Whats the Dif.............

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> Whats the Dif............. Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Whats the Dif............. - 6/20/2007 8:13:12 PM   
captskillet


Posts: 2475
Joined: 3/1/2003
From: Louisiana & the 2007 Nat Champ LSU Fightin' Tigers
Status: offline
I'm not trying to start a flame war but..................... what would/wouldn't warrant buying the AGEOD CivWar offering if you already have Forge of Freedom????????????

_____________________________

"Git thar fust with the most men" - Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest

Post #: 1
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/20/2007 8:28:04 PM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3032
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: online
A very good game for one thing.
They are 2 very different games tho on same subject.
IMO in some sense AACW is more of a simulation of the ACW than FoF, which means through scripting and other things that the ability to recreate a pure ACW is IMO a bit better in AACW than FoF.
That said u have a lot of options in FoF, which some hates others like, that IMO in some senses give more of a game and more replayabilty. In FoF u have the whole build and tech's that gives more options, which isnt in AACW. Then the whole historic ACW commander and controll issues seems IMO better captured in AACW.
Are the problems IMO in AACW, yes but just like WCS has with FoF, AGEOD seems to be very determained to work on AACW and i have faith in that, that game only will get better too.
In short if u have the time IMO buy both. Both are IMO very good games with a different focus on the same topic.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

(in reply to captskillet)
Post #: 2
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/20/2007 8:46:46 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3613
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline
What wouldn't warrant buying ageod's game is if you find tactical control of battles completely necessary. Thought I could buy just one or the other but I started to develop nervous twitching and had to get both. Glad that I did.

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 3
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/20/2007 8:58:06 PM   
Roger Neilson II


Posts: 1515
Joined: 7/16/2006
From: Newcastle upon Tyne. England
Status: offline
I have both, and both frankly languish on my hard drive after being desperate to buy them.....

FOF I have played more, I play the Union. It seems to me that I have to spend a long long time simply building forces then eventually I get to do something.... and then the amazing Confederacy birthrate steps in....... I find the game very frustrating. In some ways I'd be happiest if I could just play the detailed battles alone though I'm not convinced by the actuality of them. I get very frustrated about hitting a Confederate unit on 3 sides with volley after volley and getting nowhere whilst they score fantastically good kills on all my units, seemingly able to pivot on the spot and fire repeated shots (no ammo problems for them). I do not like the other battle styles at all. So every now and then I fire the game up, play for an evening, then give up on it again.

Ageod's game looks great at first look, but then the amount of detail confronting me, and the amount of shuffling of units drives me insane. Plus there's no detailed battles... so I try it and put a lot of work in, then wham bam thank you mam, its all over.

Maybe, just maybe the Grigsby one, if it ever emerges will be the winner. Or maybe the Civil war is just not possible to properly game?

And in case anyone thinks these are just too complex for my simple mind, I'm coming from WITP.... 'nuff said?

Roger



_____________________________


(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 4
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/20/2007 10:10:28 PM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3032
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson II
I'm not convinced by the actuality of them. I get very frustrated about hitting a Confederate unit on 3 sides with volley after volley and getting nowhere whilst they score fantastically good kills on all my units, seemingly able to pivot on the spot and fire repeated shots (no ammo problems for them). I do not like the other battle styles at all. So every now and then I fire the game up, play for an evening, then give up on it again.


Sorta OT sorry.

Roger can i ask what difficulty level u playing on?
If u have 3 units all facing same opponent u should alrdy there get around 75% bonus, IIRC. Assuming u not playing with high difficulty or some other factor only very bad rolls can explain that. Since rolls are betwen 1 and 100 a certain randomness are included for better or worse.
I can tell that ammo is a problem for them.
If u turn on the attack reports in Advanced menu during HW u can get the exact reason why the fire results are as they are.
If u do that u will notice enemy units indeed get the no ammo penalty and the moral penalty too if out of ammo.
IMO attack reports are about the best way to learn what pays and what doesnt in HW. Its a great learning tool, once understod.
That said the attack reports arent the most intuiative, but after u seen enough and get accusomed to them it seems ppl get the point. If u have any questions after u look at them, ask away.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 6/21/2007 12:25:06 AM >

(in reply to Roger Neilson II)
Post #: 5
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/20/2007 10:37:07 PM   
Roger Neilson II


Posts: 1515
Joined: 7/16/2006
From: Newcastle upon Tyne. England
Status: offline
I just use whatever the default level is, sergeant?

Next time I feel brave I shall try your suggestion. It is a long time coming to get to a detailed battle though to try it out.

Roger

_____________________________


(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 6
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/20/2007 11:59:21 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10583
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson II
my units, seemingly able to pivot on the spot and fire repeated shots (no ammo problems for them). I do not like the other battle styles at all. So every now and then I fire the game


Some people were apparently under the mistaken belief that when an enemy unit is out of supply its status would be reported by the same blinking out-of-supply indicator that shows out-of-supply on the player's own units, and I was especially slow-witted at figuring out why a dozen or so people were under the impression that the AI never runs out of supply. This is not the case: Players never see the supply status of enemy units, the AI's units do run out of supply.


_____________________________


(in reply to Roger Neilson II)
Post #: 7
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 12:29:11 AM   
dude

 

Posts: 399
Joined: 5/4/2005
From: Fairfax Virginia
Status: offline
I can't agree more that the Attack Reports can really help you get a feel for how Detailed Combat works.  Before using them I felt as Roger did... I was always in disbelief over the results I was "seeing"... but after I learned about the reports and played for while and really read them carefully I got a much better understanding of what works and why I was seeing the results. 

For example you will see that the supply status of both sides has an impact... the amount a unit moves before firing (and this includes changing facing)... the die roll itself (I sometimes am still in shock when I roll really low a bunch of times in a row...)...

But the offshoot is I now feel I play much better in detailed combat.  I won't make attacks that I know woudn't be very effective on this turn especially if I know now that the enemy unit would get better bonuses... (I use to have the bad habbit of moving slightly thinking this would improve my shot but when you factor in the move loss in the combat result vs the enemy not moving... ouch that can hurt.) 

also seeing things like the how the sharpshooter ability if figured in made me really appreciate that much more too.  I highly recommend playing with the reports on for a few games (I can slow things down reading them but it is worth it.)

Back on topic... The thing about FoF that I greatly appreciate is the large number of options at the start to tailor the game to your style of play.  Every time I hear (as Roger mentions above ) about the large confederate "birthrate" I just want to point out that the next time... change some of the options at the start... increase your bonus for example to give you more build power to offset this... or there are a number of other options you can choose... you don't have to take the default settings.... I don't and I really enjoy the game.

I can't speak yet of AACW but I really enjoyed Birth of America (which AACW is based off of correct?) so I will probably get it too.  I wouldn't mind playing a CW game with less tactical combat sometimes... The problem I have with FoF is if I want to win as the Union I HAVE to fight detailed combats just so I can eliminate CSA units.  If I use Quick Combat I end up playing Cat and Mouse with CSA units since they don't won't surrender any where near as often as they do when I use detailed combat. 

But don't take this as a complaint or fault FoF... I really like it but some evenings I just don't want to be bogged down with a 70+unit detailed combat which can take a couple of hours to fight.  (and I trust my command ability in detailed combat more than the AI's in quick combat.  Battles that are close calls in QC that I loose I know I can win in DC.)

Dude

_____________________________

“Ifs defeated the Confederates…” U.S.Grant

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 8
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 12:35:28 AM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3032
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: dude

I can't speak yet of AACW but I really enjoyed Birth of America (which AACW is based off of correct?)


Correct.

Rasmus

(in reply to dude)
Post #: 9
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 12:41:14 AM   
Roger Neilson II


Posts: 1515
Joined: 7/16/2006
From: Newcastle upon Tyne. England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson II
my units, seemingly able to pivot on the spot and fire repeated shots (no ammo problems for them). I do not like the other battle styles at all. So every now and then I fire the game


Some people were apparently under the mistaken belief that when an enemy unit is out of supply its status would be reported by the same blinking out-of-supply indicator that shows out-of-supply on the player's own units, and I was especially slow-witted at figuring out why a dozen or so people were under the impression that the AI never runs out of supply. This is not the case: Players never see the supply status of enemy units, the AI's units do run out of supply.


I didn't particularly make my comments to start some sort of flame war, and I certainly did not expect to have a privileged view of the enemy status. I also know that you should not argue from a single occurrence, but frankly that's all I have in my memory at present. Three strong Union units, one across a road, the other two flanking the road..... all in line, all initially well supplied. Confederate unit comes up the road in column, fires and scores significantly better on all three Union forces, they all rapidly lose supply and it continues to score significantly better for several rounds of combat. There was something wrong there.....

Ok enough, I will, next time I have nothing to do in WITP dust the game off again and have another look.

Roger

_____________________________


(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 10
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 12:48:10 AM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3032
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: online
Hehe roger sounds like an almost perfect situasion for u tho.
1 of my absolut tricks on the AI is march a line of mine up on the flanks of a column and fire away. If u Fresh u almost garantied 300+ casulties while taken only a fraction of that.

Normally in the situasion u descripe u would be master there could be reason why u see not optimal results tho. 1 is u if u had less units than him u would very easily be in a hexes with all 3 of ur lines which is full of smoke since u would gain that in ur hex both in his and urs fire. Full smoke really decrease ur effect. Lets say u had worse weapons too, then the math might start to even out the fact that normaly u would have a clear advantage in line vs a column. I cant say that is what happened in ur case, but that is certainly a possibilty. Attack reports should help clarify stuff like that.

Hope it helps,

Rasmus

Edit : PS. Sorry for high jacking ur thread Captskillet

< Message edited by Walloc -- 6/21/2007 12:56:37 AM >

(in reply to Roger Neilson II)
Post #: 11
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 1:27:36 AM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10583
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline
quote:


I didn't particularly make my comments to start some sort of flame war, and I certainly did not expect to have a privileged view of the enemy status. I also know that you should not argue from a single occurrence, but frankly that's all I have in my memory at present. Roger


Flame war? Did I say something that was offensive in British slang or something? I never had any such notion that what I wrote might be construed as inflammatory, and as soon as I find out which are the inflammatory parts I'll apologize for them instantly!



_____________________________


(in reply to Roger Neilson II)
Post #: 12
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 1:51:08 AM   
Gray_Lensman


Posts: 640
Joined: 4/10/2003
Status: offline
ericbabe

I think people are just naturally skittish about how discussions that center around comparisons between FoF and AACW get rather heated, and they start off their replies with "Not wishing to start a flame war", just to let everyone know they want an answer but not to get over excited. Least that's the way I'm understanding it.

_____________________________

You've GOT to hold them back!

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 13
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 5:15:46 AM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10583
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline
<smacks head>... right... I forgot this was a comparison thread, I'd just popped in to clarify a game-related question.



_____________________________


(in reply to Gray_Lensman)
Post #: 14
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 5:47:24 AM   
ChuckK


Posts: 66
Joined: 5/22/2004
Status: offline
I own both, like both, but in the last four weeks or so I've been playing FOF exclusively.  I'm hard pressed in finger exactly why.  Perhaps I like micro-managing the war economies in FOF more than I like micro-managing the command structure of armies in AACW?  Respectively, those seem to be the big stand out, defining features of the two games 

For whatever reason, FOF is getting just about all of my solo and PBEM time these days. 

_____________________________

Saratoga CV-3
One of 3 U.S. pre-war carriers to survive WWII
Awarded 7 battle stars
Torpedoed on two separate occasions
Hit by 6 bombs, holed twice, on 2-17-45
Sunk at Bikini Atoll, '46, after enduring 2nd A-Bomb test
She was a tough Lady!

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 15
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 8:02:07 AM   
Odox

 

Posts: 34
Joined: 3/1/2006
Status: offline
Esteemed friends:

I've just spent the last little while perusing the info available on this new American Civil War game, AACW.

To be honest, I feel sad. No, in fact I feel downright gloomy. I struggle to control myself, but I can feel the power of my outburst ready to explode out of me despite me literally trying to clamp my jaws together with BOTH HANDS:

WHEN IN THE WORLD WILL GAME DESIGNERS STOP MAKING GAMES DESIGNED FOR ADULTS LOOK LIKE CARTOONS???

*ahem*

(Pardon me while I straighten my tie and regain my composure.)

I'm sure AACW is a fine game, and I'm equally sure I'll be buying it sometime in the not-too-distant future.

But it's the same thing for me with AACW as it is for FoF, and for that matter Civ IV and countless other games. These creations may contain subtleties of gameplay as yet unheard-of in the world of wargaming. They may incorporate the very cream of research of LEGIONS of doctorates in history of the various time-periods they endeavor to recreate. But gentlemen, I beg you, let go your seeming obsession with childish little figurines and storybook houses, with garish primary-colored terrain and cartoonish displays! I literally become ill from hours of staring at second-grade renditions of human forms and broad formless swashes of screaming landscape colors. I feel as though I have been living in some Looney Toons nightmare; Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck and Wile E Coyote et al.

You have created masterpieces of simulations and raised them to a level of an art form! Why then, do they still retain so much crudity in their art?

(I remember loading Civ into my computer for the first time. I didn't know whether to retch or laugh hysterically. "Oh, look," I said to myself, "aren't those little forts and barbarians so CUTE? I think I'll send this off to my grandson. He's eight. He may enjoy it for awhile before he hits PUBERTY.")

Forgive me friends, gentlemen, fellow enthusiasts. But there's only so much an adult can take. Hat in hand, I bow most humbly and beseech you all: PLEASE, RAISE THE BAR.

With abiding admiration,

Odox

(in reply to ChuckK)
Post #: 16
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 8:34:45 AM   
Gray_Lensman


Posts: 640
Joined: 4/10/2003
Status: offline
Only prob I see with AGEod games is their screens look so busy. Almost too much, with all the provincial lines, borders and rail-lines criss-crossing everywhere. I'm sure it's all needed information, but it sure seems to run together for me.


_____________________________

You've GOT to hold them back!

(in reply to Odox)
Post #: 17
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 10:08:37 AM   
Roger Neilson II


Posts: 1515
Joined: 7/16/2006
From: Newcastle upon Tyne. England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

quote:


I didn't particularly make my comments to start some sort of flame war, and I certainly did not expect to have a privileged view of the enemy status. I also know that you should not argue from a single occurrence, but frankly that's all I have in my memory at present. Roger


Flame war? Did I say something that was offensive in British slang or something? I never had any such notion that what I wrote might be construed as inflammatory, and as soon as I find out which are the inflammatory parts I'll apologize for them instantly!



Didn't mean it that way, rather my desire to stop any nastiness before it got started.....

I have now had a look at playing detailed battles with the detailed reports on, they do give a lot more information. This encourages me to play a few more combats out to see how it all shapes up.

An important question however-

If I fire on a unit, do they always fire back? I ask as my feeling is that firing on a unit does always get return fire, so this can multiply the response fire. One unit fires a specific amount of shots in any one move.... I have four units who all fire on an enemy unit, and it 'seems' to gain four sets of firing back at my units by virtue of me firing at it.... and is able to do so to front, both flanks and flanking rear.... if that is indeed the case then its daft to fire on the unit surely?

Or am I dreaming this?

Roger

< Message edited by Roger Neilson II -- 6/21/2007 10:09:52 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 18
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 10:10:06 AM   
Roger Neilson II


Posts: 1515
Joined: 7/16/2006
From: Newcastle upon Tyne. England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gray_Lensman

Only prob I see with AGEod games is their screens look so busy. Almost too much, with all the provincial lines, borders and rail-lines criss-crossing everywhere. I'm sure it's all needed information, but it sure seems to run together for me.


I have to agree with this,it really puts me off the info overload.

Roger

_____________________________


(in reply to Gray_Lensman)
Post #: 19
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 10:12:34 AM   
Roger Neilson II


Posts: 1515
Joined: 7/16/2006
From: Newcastle upon Tyne. England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Odox

Esteemed friends:

I've just spent the last little while perusing the info available on this new American Civil War game, AACW.

To be honest, I feel sad. No, in fact I feel downright gloomy. I struggle to control myself, but I can feel the power of my outburst ready to explode out of me despite me literally trying to clamp my jaws together with BOTH HANDS:

WHEN IN THE WORLD WILL GAME DESIGNERS STOP MAKING GAMES DESIGNED FOR ADULTS LOOK LIKE CARTOONS???

*ahem*

(Pardon me while I straighten my tie and regain my composure.)

I'm sure AACW is a fine game, and I'm equally sure I'll be buying it sometime in the not-too-distant future.

But it's the same thing for me with AACW as it is for FoF, and for that matter Civ IV and countless other games. These creations may contain subtleties of gameplay as yet unheard-of in the world of wargaming. They may incorporate the very cream of research of LEGIONS of doctorates in history of the various time-periods they endeavor to recreate. But gentlemen, I beg you, let go your seeming obsession with childish little figurines and storybook houses, with garish primary-colored terrain and cartoonish displays! I literally become ill from hours of staring at second-grade renditions of human forms and broad formless swashes of screaming landscape colors. I feel as though I have been living in some Looney Toons nightmare; Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck and Wile E Coyote et al.

You have created masterpieces of simulations and raised them to a level of an art form! Why then, do they still retain so much crudity in their art?

(I remember loading Civ into my computer for the first time. I didn't know whether to retch or laugh hysterically. "Oh, look," I said to myself, "aren't those little forts and barbarians so CUTE? I think I'll send this off to my grandson. He's eight. He may enjoy it for awhile before he hits PUBERTY.")

Forgive me friends, gentlemen, fellow enthusiasts. But there's only so much an adult can take. Hat in hand, I bow most humbly and beseech you all: PLEASE, RAISE THE BAR.

With abiding admiration,

Odox

I have to agree with you, its the usual 'dumbing down'. I can think of very few games where the artwork is reasonably real as opposed to 3d animated smiley stuff.....

On the DB FOF has it about right I think and you can always switch to NATO symbology. However the displays are still too cartoonish for me. I 'suspect' these could be modded though.

Roger

_____________________________


(in reply to Odox)
Post #: 20
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 10:26:34 AM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3032
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson II

An important question however-

If I fire on a unit, do they always fire back? I ask as my feeling is that firing on a unit does always get return fire, so this can multiply the response fire. One unit fires a specific amount of shots in any one move.... I have four units who all fire on an enemy unit, and it 'seems' to gain four sets of firing back at my units by virtue of me firing at it.... and is able to do so to front, both flanks and flanking rear.... if that is indeed the case then its daft to fire on the unit surely?

Or am I dreaming this?

Roger


Yes, it always gets return fire, even if out of weapons range. No casulties in that case ofc.
IMO, there are valid reasons for that. If it didnt humans would take advantage of that so focus even more on single units with no "reprisals".
No its not daft to fire on same unit many times.
Well each time a unit fires smoke to a certain point fills its hex since that will happen to the 1 unit firing many times its return fire will in short order be subjected to that and have reduced effect from that. The smoke also affects ur units effectiveness but since smoke both in target and firer is count smoke will affect him more than u.

2ndly. Fireing in back and flanks are about the best thing. IIRC fire to back is reduced 75% so u fire, so assumming every thing else is same weapons, quality, dice rolls and so on u will do 4 times casulties. Flank is a hefty bonus too if not quite 75%.
3rd if u have units facing same unit in adjecting hexes u get extra bonus on top of that.
Lets say u get 75% from firing into back and another 75% from several units adjecting and facing.
VERY nice fires all of a sudden again assuming all other factors are equal.

3rd and most importandly. Whan an army hits 50% of its units routing. Use the V to check on this. A army starts to panic and its Will to Fight will drop rapidly. This is the main cause for winning/lossing battles tho not the only in HW/DC.
Well the more units u have firing on same the sooner it will run. Assumming it dont reorgazine the sooner u get AI to a point where 50% of its units routing the better for sake of winning. Focusing ur attention on a lesser number AI units is certainly a way to get there. Ofc there is pitholes in that tactic i cant always 100% recommend. It as any thing its situasional, but given a situasion that allows it. Its one of the area's human minds seems to tend to out wit AIs.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

P.S Roger ill happily answer more questions but this is sorta off topic so if u will make a new thread for that, TIA

< Message edited by Walloc -- 6/21/2007 10:38:34 AM >

(in reply to Roger Neilson II)
Post #: 21
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 10:32:44 AM   
Roger Neilson II


Posts: 1515
Joined: 7/16/2006
From: Newcastle upon Tyne. England
Status: offline
Agree its going off topic.... will do

Roger

_____________________________


(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 22
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 2:08:19 PM   
captskillet


Posts: 2475
Joined: 3/1/2003
From: Louisiana & the 2007 Nat Champ LSU Fightin' Tigers
Status: offline
Roger you old thread highjacker u !

_____________________________

"Git thar fust with the most men" - Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest


(in reply to Roger Neilson II)
Post #: 23
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 4:54:01 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10583
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson II
If I fire on a unit, do they always fire back? I ask as my feeling is that firing on a unit does always get return fire, so this can multiply the response fire. One unit fires a specific amount of shots in any one move.... I have four units who all fire on an enemy unit, and it 'seems' to gain four sets of firing back at my units by virtue of me firing at it.... and is able to do so to front, both flanks and flanking rear.... if that is indeed the case then its daft to fire on the unit surely?


There always is return fire. Surrounding a unit gives you the flanking bonus, so it's worthwhile to gang-up on a unit.


_____________________________


(in reply to Roger Neilson II)
Post #: 24
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/21/2007 9:54:50 PM   
Roger Neilson II


Posts: 1515
Joined: 7/16/2006
From: Newcastle upon Tyne. England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: captskillet

Roger you old thread highjacker u !

I got carried away in the discussion.....

_____________________________


(in reply to captskillet)
Post #: 25
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/22/2007 12:18:21 AM   
Gray_Lensman


Posts: 640
Joined: 4/10/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

<snip>

[There always is return fire. Surrounding a unit gives you the flanking bonus, so it's worthwhile to gang-up on a unit.



ericbabe
re:flanking bonus

Is the flanking bonus applied only due to positioning or do you have to fire from more than one unit from a diff position? In other words if several units move up to an enemy unit in several of its adjoining hexes, but only one unit fires, is it going to get the flanking bonus by itself?


_____________________________

You've GOT to hold them back!

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 26
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/22/2007 12:25:14 AM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3032
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: online
Yes and no. There is a direct bonus in reduced effect from being of axis to flanking and direct bonus for firing into a flank/rear axis of a enemy unit. Think its called degree of attack in Attack reports working from memory here. This bonus is based purely on axis of attack between the 2 units in question and range is not a factor.

Seperatly from that. If u have several units all facing and adjecting to an enemy unit flanking, u get a bonus from that too. That bonus is seperate from the above bonus.
If only 1 unit fires it still gets bonus from that having friendly units being adjecting and facing to the enemy units.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 6/22/2007 1:18:41 AM >

(in reply to Gray_Lensman)
Post #: 27
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/22/2007 12:40:43 AM   
Gray_Lensman


Posts: 640
Joined: 4/10/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

Yes and no. There is a direct bonus in reduced effect from being of axis to flanking and direct bonus for firing into a flank/rear axis of a enemy unit. Think its called degree of attack in Attack reports working from memory here. This bonus is based purely on axis of attack between the 2 units in question and range is not a factor.

Seperatly from that. If u have several units all facing and adjecting to an enemy unit, not only flanking u get a bonus from that too. That bonus is seperate from the above bonus.
If only 1 unit fires it still gets bonus from that having friendly units being adjecting and facing to the enemy units.

Kind regards,

Rasmus


Thanks Rasmus, that was not so clear in the manual, and I had been meaning to ask but kept forgetting.


_____________________________

You've GOT to hold them back!

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 28
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/22/2007 12:54:19 AM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3032
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: online
To add 1 thing for total clarification.

Seperatly from that. If u have several units all facing and adjecting to an enemy unit flanking, u get a bonus from that too. That bonus is seperate from the above bonus.
If only 1 unit fires it still gets bonus from that having friendly units being adjecting and facing to the enemy units.


The firing unit here doesnt even have to be adjecting or facing to get the bonus. Its based on if friendly units that are adjecting and facing, to the target enemy. In pratice the firing unit can be any where with a LOS and fire oppertunity, but ofc for that unit to also get it self added to that bonus of more units adjecting and facing, it has to be that. U still get bonus even if u dont from other units tho.
Any one get that?

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 6/22/2007 1:19:12 AM >

(in reply to Gray_Lensman)
Post #: 29
RE: Whats the Dif............. - 6/22/2007 6:05:06 AM   
Gray_Lensman


Posts: 640
Joined: 4/10/2003
Status: offline
Sounds like they have this particular situation covered pretty thoroughly, then, which is good.

_____________________________

You've GOT to hold them back!

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> Whats the Dif............. Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.109