|
|
|
Notices |
Do you own this game? Write a review and let others know how you like it.
|
|
|
June 26th, 2017, 02:31 PM
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 23
Thanks: 11
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
Re: Question about bicycle troops
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisWarlord
Thoughts?
Or does this prevent loading troops, u are the expert on uc abilities.
|
Thanks Don,
The explanation explains the odd class usage precisely.
Makes sense now.
I think it was a fair query.
But I will try to remember to check out the workability in-game for future also.
Thats precisely why I had stated the above when originally questioning the unit class.
Regards,
|
June 26th, 2017, 06:29 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 12,268
Thanks: 3,817
Thanked 5,438 Times in 2,698 Posts
|
|
Re: Question about bicycle troops
**I** pointed it out.....it's been like that since **I** set it up that way about 4 years ago. It was an experimental formation in a minor OOB and nobody commented on it in all that time.Once in a blue moon bicycle troops suddenly become the issue du jour and I personally don't like the way they have been handled as infantry but for years at a stretch there is no mention of them then suddenly they are an issue and this experiment was a test to see who might notice and if they did what the reaction would be
__________________
If you find you are constantly reacting to your enemy's tactics instead forcing the enemy to react to yours, you are losing the battle....
|
July 1st, 2017, 05:20 AM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 183
Thanks: 8
Thanked 21 Times in 16 Posts
|
|
Re: Question about bicycle troops
I would like to point out that cyclists are not necessarily higher than walking infantry as they are sitting and there legs are bent to the pedal. There might be 4 inches in it whereas for cavalry the difference is 4 foot. I think because of this it would be possible to make the bicycle carrying class size 1. After all at size 1 they are already more visible than size 1 infantry as moving further/faster automatically makes them more visible, same as making them size 2.
|
July 1st, 2017, 09:28 AM
|
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dundee
Posts: 5,929
Thanks: 441
Thanked 1,855 Times in 1,219 Posts
|
|
Re: Question about bicycle troops
A man + bike is much longer than a man on foot, and cannot use terrain to sneak behind as does a man on foot. Bicyclists are far more noticeable than walkers.
|
July 1st, 2017, 11:28 AM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 12,268
Thanks: 3,817
Thanked 5,438 Times in 2,698 Posts
|
|
Re: Question about bicycle troops
.....and that has been, is and will continue to be our opinion on the matter and why this thread is now closed.
But the IMPORTANT thing to remember and that seems to be forgotten is that sizes in SP are 0 - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 etc etc
NOT 1.2 or 1.5
2 is a bigger target than 1 and 3 is bigger than 2 and men on bicycles were set to 2 because they ARE easier targets than men on foot and in giving them a speed of 9 it was decided a LONG time ago.......that if we didn't give the size penalty players would abuse the use of bicycle troops so they move faster but are bigger targets. At some point I *MAY* change all bike troops to the way they are set up in the Slovak OOB but it's low priority but anyone who feels it IS a priority to them has MOBHack to make whatever change makes you happy
__________________
If you find you are constantly reacting to your enemy's tactics instead forcing the enemy to react to yours, you are losing the battle....
Last edited by DRG; July 1st, 2017 at 01:31 PM..
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|