Commando's "Storm"

DxC wrote:

I understand that the commandos ignore the defense bonus from fortifications. Does it also ignore the 20% homeland defense bonus? The description is: "Storms fortifications and ignores the enemy defence bonus." The "and" is what has me wondering.

I've used them to infiltrate core provinces, and yes, it does appear that they ignore the core province bonus.

The do not ignore state-based damage efficiency or damage-induced efficacy reduction however.

Lord Crayfish wrote:

20%? I thought it was 15% but anyway.

Commando's are expensive, and it is strange that a "steatlhy unit" is unable to scout themselves but ok, they are expensive.

Gen. Smit wrote:

Commando's are expensive, and it is strange that a "steatlhy unit" is unable to scout themselves but ok, they are expensive.

Destructo the Great wrote:

Gen. Smit wrote:

Commando's are expensive, and it is strange that a "steatlhy unit" is unable to scout themselves but ok, they are expensive.

but they are hidden and good damage

This is really not a unit of choice IMHO

Gen. Smit wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

Gen. Smit wrote:

Commando's are expensive, and it is strange that a "steatlhy unit" is unable to scout themselves but ok, they are expensive.

but they are hidden and good damage

With AC,, mot Inf or interceptors around they ar e not so hidden anymore due "low level", and then, if there is nothing to absorb damage, the combat power will quickly diminish, Commando's are niche en not economic, and you need economic units. it is not about doing damage but how to avoid damage, it is a war of attrition. The only way you can keep on using Commando's as a main battle force is to add fresh units all the time, and that will double each time they participated in major battles.

This is really not a unit of choice IMHO

Destructo the Great wrote:

Gen. Smit wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

Gen. Smit wrote:

Commando's are expensive, and it is strange that a "steatlhy unit" is unable to scout themselves but ok, they are expensive.

but they are hidden and good damage

With AC,, mot Inf or interceptors around they ar e not so hidden anymore due "low level", and then, if there is nothing to absorb damage, the combat power will quickly diminish, Commando's are niche en not economic, and you need economic units. it is not about doing damage but how to avoid damage, it is a war of attrition. The only way you can keep on using Commando's as a main battle force is to add fresh units all the time, and that will double each time they participated in major battles.This is really not a unit of choice IMHO

you can avoid being damaged but you need to kill the enemy troops not everyone would have mot infantry and AC everywhere and patrol all their interceptors. If your enemy got a giant stack with HT, anti air, artillery’s you will eventually need to kill it or else it will charge though your whole country. So you can’t avoid damaging forever. You will need hard hitting units like HT or commandos.

More specifically on the stack with HT (heavy tanks) a few AT of good level among soft targets will decimate HT, look at the stats, HT isnt really great against infantry, and the AT guns will grind the HT to pieces, you dont need to attack it, your artillery will just kill them, so the HT need to do something,

Gen. Smit wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

Gen. Smit wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

Gen. Smit wrote:

Commando's are expensive, and it is strange that a "steatlhy unit" is unable to scout themselves but ok, they are expensive.

but they are hidden and good damage

With AC,, mot Inf or interceptors around they ar e not so hidden anymore due "low level", and then, if there is nothing to absorb damage, the combat power will quickly diminish, Commando's are niche en not economic, and you need economic units. it is not about doing damage but how to avoid damage, it is a war of attrition. The only way you can keep on using Commando's as a main battle force is to add fresh units all the time, and that will double each time they participated in major battles.This is really not a unit of choice IMHO

you can avoid being damaged but you need to kill the enemy troops not everyone would have mot infantry and AC everywhere and patrol all their interceptors. If your enemy got a giant stack with HT, anti air, artillery’s you will eventually need to kill it or else it will charge though your whole country. So you can’t avoid damaging forever. You will need hard hitting units like HT or commandos.

nah I use a meat shield (soft target) and terrain to my advantage. so the artillery will do the damage and we back up bit by bit, ensuring that the units take routes that ensure we are on friendly soil hindering movement of enemies, and once they are under 50% they become like snails. I also love fork in the road constructions around the province center, allowing the artillery to pound for long time without any danger on the enemy.

Destructo the Great wrote:

no. What most people do it use mot infantry to capture the province so your army would not escape and shoot and scoot tactics won’t work. Another way is let tac bombers destroy the artillery. I mostly split my army to go on either side of road to find enemys

Tac bombers can be INTERCEPTED, so no that is not working on vigilant people, first you dont approach with your tactical bombers a stack protected with AA and (patrolling) interceptors around, plus that interceptors can gain a second strike, and they are cheaper than bombers, sure you can add protecting interceptors, but they are less efficient in defense. Plus you forget terrain effects, mot.infantry is worthless in mountains and less so on hills and forests, they are still quick but a lot of the bonus speed is lost, and artillery shoots and damages for free. Reg Infantry is in timeline almost as good in defense as the mot. infantry is in offense, that is not taken in consideration the forest, mountain and city bonusses, Mot.Infantry also comes at a different price and in the end its all about being economical with your resources, taking damage is not my favourite way of spending resources. Then you have fortifications and and bunkers, underestimated but at chokepunts they are brillant to retreat in.

Gen. Smit wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

no. What most people do it use mot infantry to capture the province so your army would not escape and shoot and scoot tactics won’t work. Another way is let tac bombers destroy the artillery. I mostly split my army to go on either side of road to find enemys

Tac bombers can be INTERCEPTED, so no that is not working on vigilant people, first you dont approach with your tactical bombers a stack protected with AA and (patrolling) interceptors around, plus that interceptors can gain a second strike, and they are cheaper than bombers, sure you can add protecting interceptors, but they are less efficient in defense. Plus you forget terrain effects, mot.infantry is worthless in mountains and less so on hills and forests, they are still quick but a lot of the bonus speed is lost, and artillery shoots and damages for free. Reg Infantry is in timeline almost as good in defense as the mot. infantry is in offense, that is not taken in consideration the forest, mountain and city bonusses, Mot.Infantry also comes at a different price and in the end its all about being economical with your resources, taking damage is not my favourite way of spending resources. Then you have fortifications and and bunkers, underestimated but at chokepunts they are brillant to retreat in.

Destructo the Great wrote:

Gen. Smit wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

no. What most people do it use mot infantry to capture the province so your army would not escape and shoot and scoot tactics won’t work. Another way is let tac bombers destroy the artillery. I mostly split my army to go on either side of road to find enemys

Tac bombers can be INTERCEPTED, so no that is not working on vigilant people, first you dont approach with your tactical bombers a stack protected with AA and (patrolling) interceptors around, plus that interceptors can gain a second strike, and they are cheaper than bombers, sure you can add protecting interceptors, but they are less efficient in defense. Plus you forget terrain effects, mot.infantry is worthless in mountains and less so on hills and forests, they are still quick but a lot of the bonus speed is lost, and artillery shoots and damages for free. Reg Infantry is in timeline almost as good in defense as the mot. infantry is in offense, that is not taken in consideration the forest, mountain and city bonusses, Mot.Infantry also comes at a different price and in the end its all about being economical with your resources, taking damage is not my favourite way of spending resources. Then you have fortifications and and bunkers, underestimated but at chokepunts they are brillant to retreat in.

no one would not use interceptors. For example I always have 20 interceptors to 10 bombers. Also I will certainly pair and artillery or two in my stack so If you fired at me I will fire back

Gen. Smit wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

Gen. Smit wrote:

Destructo the Great wrote:

no. What most people do it use mot infantry to capture the province so your army would not escape and shoot and scoot tactics won’t work. Another way is let tac bombers destroy the artillery. I mostly split my army to go on either side of road to find enemys

Tac bombers can be INTERCEPTED, so no that is not working on vigilant people, first you dont approach with your tactical bombers a stack protected with AA and (patrolling) interceptors around, plus that interceptors can gain a second strike, and they are cheaper than bombers, sure you can add protecting interceptors, but they are less efficient in defense. Plus you forget terrain effects, mot.infantry is worthless in mountains and less so on hills and forests, they are still quick but a lot of the bonus speed is lost, and artillery shoots and damages for free. Reg Infantry is in timeline almost as good in defense as the mot. infantry is in offense, that is not taken in consideration the forest, mountain and city bonusses, Mot.Infantry also comes at a different price and in the end its all about being economical with your resources, taking damage is not my favourite way of spending resources. Then you have fortifications and and bunkers, underestimated but at chokepunts they are brillant to retreat in.

no one would not use interceptors. For example I always have 20 interceptors to 10 bombers. Also I will certainly pair and artillery or two in my stack so If you fired at me I will fire back

I think I have never been in the luxury of having such wealthy stacks, I always have to make choices so yeah numerous stacks of bombers yes, but such an amount of fighter stacks in a 2:1 ratio seems very ineffective to me, I would temprary ground bombers and focus interceptor stacks to kill off other planes or create moments of oopportunity by bombing/rocketing air strips allowing a safe take off and return for the bombers, that would seem more effective way to spend resources. In any case, in a good coalition one could make and share responsibilities, also with respect to research, but really this would be of a higher order gaming, mostly people just benefit from shared borders and focus of troops on fronts.