There are useless unit models (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback



Message


Hazard151 -> There are useless unit models (7/10/2020 5:12:27 PM)

Well okay, that's a little harsh to say, but it's not exactly untrue. Let's get to the point.

There's a number of models who are not integrated in the general formation OOBs. These units can be integrated through the use of battlegroups, but that's inconvenient and labour intensive. You basically have to handcraft every single battlegroup.

That can work for the construction of a small number of formations for best effect of precious resources, but having to do that for an entire army is... annoying. Using the OOBs is much more convenient.


The useless models are the Mechanized Quad Machinegun, Mechanized Artillery, AT Gun, Assault Gun, Walker, Heavy Walker, Recon Buggy and Motorbike Infantry. All of these can fill roles already in use in the various formation OOBs described in the game.

The Mechanized Quad Machinegun and Mechanized Artillery, for example, can easily replace Machinegun and Artillery units in motorized and mechanized formations. They would also then not require a vehicle to carry or tow them around, which saves a bit on resources.

AT Guns offer substantially more hard attack and defense than RPGs, and could work as an alternative there. Assault Guns and its bigger brother the Tank Destroyer could be an option for this role as well in mechanized or motorized battalions.

The Walker and Heavy Walker are mountain capable equivalents to the Light and Medium Tank models, which on some maps would be quite useful. Dislodging an enemy formation from a mountain you can't outflank is rather painful without vehicle support. Or even with vehicle support, if you've got a road you can use, but the Walker and Heavy Walker do away with those requirements.

Early game, the Recon Buggy is a fast moving raiding and support vehicle, which could be paired with a motorized infantry unit or with Motorbike Infantry for a punchy rapid response unit. Sure, that formation would definitely be replaced over time as effective counters to the lightly armoured buggies become more available and front lines more defined, but Motorbike Infantry would remain an effective option for Mechanized and Motorized forces. An Armour Infantry formation could easily be made up of tanks with motorcycle infantry for escorts, instead of trucks hauling around infantry.



I am deliberately leaving aside Jetpack Infantry, Monitor Tanks, Shield vehicles, the various very long range artillery options and the Automated MG and Turret, the last two of which probably should have a dedicated automated OOB combining them with Robotic Infantry and equivalent to Grenadier Infantry. They're just excellent for creating a stationary defensive line.

I'm leaving them aside mostly because I've no experience with the Jetpack Infantry, Monitor Tank and Shield Vehicles, while the very long range artillery options would not get involved in anything other than an artillery duel unless something has gone horribly wrong or an aircraft focused expansion has arrived, and as such do not require mixing with other models at this time.




GodwinW -> RE: There are useless unit models (7/10/2020 5:52:58 PM)

Maybe for your play style, and your current circumstances and the research path taken etc., but I disagree in general.




Negev1812 -> RE: There are useless unit models (7/10/2020 8:19:44 PM)

I agree that AT guns, mechanized quad MGs and mechanized artillery could/should be an options for OoBs, but not so much for the other types.

AT guns would be a good alternative to RPG units, with more punch at the cost of more resources, but fulfilling the same role.

Mechanized quad MGs are a little more tricky, since they would be a good fit in mechanized / armored OoBs but they don't offer much or could be even worse than the regular plus APCs/trucks. For example, a regular quad mg carried by an APC with good engine and a machine gun would offer more mobility and firepower than a single mechanized quad mg, and would probably cost less fuel. Would look good for roleplay tough.

Mechanized arty vs towed arty would really be useful against counter-battery fire only, and that is a fairly niche usage. An other option would be to allow assault guns to act akin to a direct fire artillery, striking multiple times with low attack values instead of massive single-target damage, but that would make the whole concept of artillery in an armored OoB irrelevant.

Walkers are rather special since they are natural tank killers. I don't really see them anywhere but specialized units, and they can't synergize with conventional vehicles anyway.

For buggies and bikers, I think they would be more useful as embedded scout sub-units rather than a poor man's mechanized battalion, and simply bringing a recon battalion would do the job so I'm not really convinced either.




Hazard151 -> RE: There are useless unit models (7/10/2020 8:59:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Negev1812

I agree that AT guns, mechanized quad MGs and mechanized artillery could/should be an options for OoBs, but not so much for the other types.

AT guns would be a good alternative to RPG units, with more punch at the cost of more resources, but fulfilling the same role.

Mechanized quad MGs are a little more tricky, since they would be a good fit in mechanized / armored OoBs but they don't offer much or could be even worse than the regular plus APCs/trucks. For example, a regular quad mg carried by an APC with good engine and a machine gun would offer more mobility and firepower than a single mechanized quad mg, and would probably cost less fuel. Would look good for roleplay tough.

Mechanized arty vs towed arty would really be useful against counter-battery fire only, and that is a fairly niche usage. An other option would be to allow assault guns to act akin to a direct fire artillery, striking multiple times with low attack values instead of massive single-target damage, but that would make the whole concept of artillery in an armored OoB irrelevant.

Walkers are rather special since they are natural tank killers. I don't really see them anywhere but specialized units, and they can't synergize with conventional vehicles anyway.

For buggies and bikers, I think they would be more useful as embedded scout sub-units rather than a poor man's mechanized battalion, and simply bringing a recon battalion would do the job so I'm not really convinced either.



Agreed on AT, but they suffer penalties when attacking, much like machineguns. Very useful for a little extra punch against vehicles, but if you aren't defending with those units an armoured vehicle with a heavy gun is probably a better choice.

Mechanized Quad MGs are a little more manpower efficient for the same firepower. Likewise Mechanized Artillery. It's definitely a matter of preference though.

I can see that role for Walkers, but I think that tanks are superior in that role for the same resources. To me a Walker is definitely a specialist in difficult terrain warfare.

By the time you have the resources to field solid combat lines you've no real need for bikes and buggies in a recon role, unless you want to send them haring off into the distance to be cut off from supplies. I very much consider them a stopgap or manpower saving measure for when you don't want to spend double the resources to get a motorized force in play. IIRC an infantry force without transportation has a 50% combat penalty, so an independent Bike battalion is equal to an equally equipped battalion of foot infantry, although the foot infantry has more casualty tolerance in combat.




Jdane -> RE: There are useless unit models (7/10/2020 9:38:34 PM)

In my opinion, the problem with anti tank guns is that one can only raise at the minimum a battalion of them, 80 pieces if I'm not mistaken. It's a significant amount of manpower and metal for a unit that is best used being static and entrenched, hoping the enemy will attack there with armor.

In the end, I'm almost never using them. Were they to be included in a mixed defense oriented OOB, I could see some use for them, but in the current state of the game, they feel somewhat like a waste to me.

I'm definitely al for giving the player more agency in defining unit compositions, and would agree with Hazard151 on this.




lloydster4 -> RE: There are useless unit models (7/10/2020 9:49:26 PM)

There's no need to stoop to ridiculous click-bait thread titles




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0234375