Essentially, my idea is to disengage from an enemy, but with a 1-2 hour timer that allows representation of a fighting withdrawal, maybe with something like debuff to strength.
I don't like the possible ability to 'pass through' enemy armies using this mechanic, so I'd really appreciate some suggestions to improve on this idea.
Please log in to post a reply.
I like the sound of it, especially for naval battles. Nothing is worse than when your troops ships get attacked by subs and you can't run.
I don't think it's a good idea, especially with regard to subs. Their speed is higher than the speed of troop ships, the opponent cann't escape from them.
Whatever. Then the sub can chase it down.
How about inability to disengage units the enemy can outpace, that way you can ditch the slow units to save the faster ones.
Yes, like leaving a rearguard behind. Or ditching the AT guns or arty to stall the enemy while the more important stuff like the tanks retreat.
Butter Ball Bill wrote:
Yes, like leaving a rearguard behind. Or ditching the AT guns or arty to stall the enemy while the more important stuff like the tanks retreat.
As opposed to Kalantigos' suggestion of 1-2 for a full retreat of the entire force, do you think that your Delay Tactic (leaving some fighters behind) would be worthy of a lessor amount of disengagement time? It is arguable easier to retreat quicker when someone is giving you covering fire.
Yes, that does sound good.
Probably make it proportional to the strength of the units left behind compared to the total amount. It does take a ridiculous amount of skill to withdraw large formations from a pitched battle in a coherent manner
Yes, just look at Dunkirk or Market Garden.
I like it. It is necessary. Though I'm not sure you could do it with planes, unless you leave some behind.
Do you mean a dog fight? 'Cause we don't have those here.
Fighter battles (all plane actions really) take about 5-7 seconds and then they fly home to refuel..Pablo22510 wrote:
I like it. It is necessary. Though I'm not sure you could do it with planes, unless you leave some behind.
The only method I could see this working with is that the units auto-move to the nearest friendly point. Whether that be an ally-controlled town or one of your own. This stops you from abusing it.
Otherwise I could easily use this to bypass the enemy and take his towns:
Move in with a force, engage and then detach a unit, swiftly bypassing the enemy and taking the town behind him.
Overall though I think it would be too much trouble to implement this and then code that you can only flee one way, or some other counter-measure.
No, Kalantigos or someone said along the way we can only retreat backwards, otherwise that is infiltrating the enemy lines and advancing.
What he means is Air Combat Maneuvering. Called by the general public as 'Dogfights' because its two or more planes duking it out. However if you want to see crazy. Checkout the History Channel show 'Dogfights! Long Odds' Basically bombers vs. Fighters and the bombers win.Butter Ball Bill wrote:
Do you mean a dog fight? 'Cause we don't have those here.
Alright, sounds good.
Not sure what you mean by that, unless you mean retreating into enemy territory. Just add restrictions that prevent units from retreating to enemy territory, unless they're commandos (like Rambo who was deep in enemy territory). I like the idea of the strength/morale decrease, because if you had commandos retreat deeper into enemy territory they'd be less efficient. Maybe even add a speed decrease to units retreating into enemy territory.Kalantigos wrote:
I don't like the possible ability to 'pass through' enemy armies using this mechanic, so I'd really appreciate some suggestions to improve on this idea.
Please log in to post a reply.
