SW: Next RTS: Military

[FroZticles]

Windu you really need to experience games online to get the full concept on the matter. Things like limiting tactics to sides would be a balancing nightmare.

[Darth Windu]

FroZ - and here we have a problem. Do you want an easily balanced game with four generic civs, or a more difficult game to balance with four unique civs?

 

The Rebellion, Republic, Confederacy and Empire are very different to each other, and they should play that way. If they dont, there is no point in even bothering with the game, because there will only be one civ. Therefore, to have uniqueness you must have different playing styles. As i said, the Confederacy and even the Empire simply do not sneak around. The way they are portrayed in the films confirms this, and if you think about it, guys in bright white suits with huge vehicles really dont go well with being stealthy, nor do loud droids.

[lukeiamyourdad]

That is not the point. Uniqueness does not kill tactics.

If people want to use any particular tactic, they can with any civ. They will have a hard time pulling it off due to the civ's playstyle thus undermining attempts at doing so.

 

The player understand this, thus will not use a tactic he considers as too hard to pull off or simply useless.

[Darth Windu]

luke - certainly they could try, what i'm saying though is that they shouldnt be effective. Hence, they would not be used, hence that civ would not have that tactic.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Hence turret push is inneffective, hence tactic is inneffective, hence they wouldn't use it.

[FroZticles]

Balancing unit sets is one thing but balanacing the limited tactics each side is given is a whole different matter. I see where this is going. In BfME they sort of captured what your after, all they had to do was give isengard and mordor 400 pop to show the forces of good they are outnumbered but the good sides got castles.

 

So....

 

Empire,Confed ,Republic, Rebels could have different pop limits Confed having like 800 Empire 600, Republic 550, Rebels 500 as an example. But I still have no idea how they could limit rebels to sneak attacks unless they really lowered there pop to like 300.

[Darth Windu]

FroZ - thats basically what i'm talking about. As for the Rebels, a wayto get them to use sneak attacks would be to githem cloaking units, like Sniper's, and also deny them Vehicles and the ability to go head-to-head in ground battles.

[DK_Viceroy]

I really don't like the idea of different pops for different sides BFME has it and it can be pretty difficult for the Good Side to beat the Evil side when they're both at full pop since the evil side gets a full 200 pop more.

 

Windu they should always have the option to do those tactics because was Hoth not a head to head battle?

[lukeiamyourdad]

That's why you have to use the faster Rohirrim to pick off the enemy's troops slowly. I do admit Mordor is hell to beat since they can spawn so many Orcs.

[DK_Viceroy]

I play Isengard and Gondor those two take more skill and Isengard FU Uruk's do not go down easily, then again neither do Gondor Fully Upgraded Tower Guards in Defence formation.

[FroZticles]

Mordor is the hardest to master rohan is the easiest so you can see pop limit means nothing if the units are balanced right.

 

Rebels can have vehicles but rebels are not just hit and run they also use strategic air strikes and hit the heart of the enemy. Giving them light armored vehicles would also stop them from head on assults on ground because they would be no match for the other sides powerful mechs.

[Darth Windu]

Viceroy - no, it wasn't. The mission of the Rebel infantry was simply to hold off the Imperial forces long enough to get the transports into the air - they did not go head-to-head with the Imps.

[lukeiamyourdad]

So the AT-AT attacking the Rebel defense lines wasn't a head-on attack?

So technically, the Rebels used hit-and-run tactics by...staying in their trenches...yes...

[DK_Viceroy]

Luke said it Perfectly what more is there to say

 

LIAYD = Right

 

Windu = Wrong AGAIN

[FroZticles]

The Imperials used a head on assult but the Rebels sort of countered with a head on air attack. It was all in defensive measures.

[lukeiamyourdad]

It was still a head-to-head battle.

[DK_Viceroy]

Yeah it just had different area where one is defending the othering is attacking

 

Imperials = ground

 

Rebels = air

[Darth Windu]

luke-

So the AT-AT attacking the Rebel defense lines wasn't a head-on attack?

Correct. You have to remember that the Rebels weren't attempting to win the battle, they knew they couldn't. Instead, their ground forces and some combat pilots fought a delaying action which really never had a chance anyway.

 

The whole point of going head-to-head with an enemy is to defeat them on the field of battle, to break their army. The Empire was certainly trying to do that in ESB, but the Rebels were not. Instead of going head-to-head with the Imps, in which they knew they would lose, they chose to flee instead.

 

Incidently, while the Battle of Hoth was not head-to-head, the Battles of Yavin and Endor were.

[lukeiamyourdad]

You're just trying to justify that you're wrong. Once again, you make no sense. It was a head-to-head battle, whether or not the intentions of the rebels were to win or buy some time.

 

It shows how much you actually know, calling the Battle of Yavin a head-on attack, fighters trying to pass through enemy defenses to strike a small exhaust port.

[Darth Windu]

luke - why would I want to justify myself if I was wrong? The point is moot regardless considering i'm right.

 

The Battle of Yavin was a sizeable Rebel force going up against the Death Star with the objective of destroying it - gaining a military victory.

 

The Battle of Endor was a Rebel fleet attacking the 2nd Death Star with the objective of destroying it - gaining a military victory.

 

The Battle of Hoth was a Rebel attempt to hold off Imperial forces long enough to let the largest number of Rebels to escape. Notice here that the objective was not a military one.

 

Yavin and Endor were head-to-head because the Imperials and Rebels directly engaged each other, whereas at Hoth the Rebel ground forces did not engage. Basically luke, you cannot go head-to-head with an enemy if you dont attack them. If you knew anything about how military forces operate, you would have known that.

[FroZticles]

Endor was a sneak attack to secure the shield and blow it up. Head-to-head is 2 armies engaging each other directly like Battle of Geonosis but Endor where stealth tactics were used.

[lukeiamyourdad]

So basically, the Snowspeeders hovered sround, waiting for the AT-AT to attack them?

 

4.7.4.2 Charges. If a unit is charging a stationary unit, then move it straight ahead to its point of impact. If two units are charging each other then move each equal distances straight ahead to the point of impact. The result will be either a flank charge, head to head charge, or charge to the rear. Which of these occurs depends on the orientation of the two units prior to charge movement. See Figure 6 for illustrations of some possibilities

 

The Snowspeeder charged up against the AT-AT.

 

Like Froz said, the ground forces on Endor used stealth to destroy the bunker and so did the two squadrons of Starfighters that striked the first Death Star.If they had actually fought a head-to-head battle against the Death Star, they wouldn't have been trying to sneak past the defenses.

[Darth Windu]

FroZ - i was actually referring to the space battle, not the ground battle.

 

luke - no. But again, their attack was a delaying tactic. They would outnumbered and could not win, which is why the Rebellion sacrificed a few pilots to get the rest of the Rebels away.

 

I agree that the Endor ground battle used stealth, not head-to-head. However, how did you come to the conclusion that the Rebels used stealth for destroying the 1st Death Star? The whole point of an attack is not to engage every enemy unit or destroy all defences. The idea is to achieve your objective, which in this case was the destruction of the DS. As for stealth, how could there be anything stealthy about attacking a moon with 30 fighters??? The Empire clearly knew the Rebels were attacking, the lack of opposition was due to the Imperial overconfidence.

 

luke, you really need to accept that I am right here. On Endor, the Rebels used stealth and on Hoth they fought a delaying action. They have gone head-to-head with the Empire, but only above Yavin and Endor.

[lukeiamyourdad]

30 fighters is a rather small force. Their goal was to have their fighters sneak past the defenses all the way to the exhaust port.

 

As a matter of facts, through your logic, the Endor ground battle was a head-to-head battle because the Empire knew that the Rebel would attack and were in fact waiting for them.

 

Again, on Hoth, the Snowspeeders met the AT-AT head-on. The objective IS military. Gee, ever heard of tactical retreat? They saved their troops so they can regroup and restrike the Empire later on. Not every move you make must end in immediate victory.

 

 

Why the hell are we arguing about this anyway? This should be about tactics in SW RTS2 and there's only one person here who wants a limit on possible tactics.

[lukeiamyourdad]

I'll double post because this is on a different matter.

 

We cannot possibly consider a Rebel civ that relies on stealth. They should rely on quick strikes, hit-and-fade tactics but not stealth. It would be possible to have stealth in the campaign or in scenarios but in MP, it makes for very boring gameplay and un-epic battles.