Desert missions too easy?

Real time World War II combat simulation
Post Reply
Quitch
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 8:56 am

Desert missions too easy?

Post by Quitch » Fri Jul 08, 2005 9:11 am

Just won another desert mission. I bought an all French tank force, one HMG and my HQ. I lost a tank to fire from an anti-tank emplacement which I quickly destroyed with my other seven tanks. Another anti-tank gun was taken out soon after.

I then swept onto the objective dune and won. It took me ten minutes. Sure, the opposition was light so I'd expect it to be short, but what shocked me was that 48 enemies survived. I'm betting they were infantry, nothing sucks at spotting infantry like a tank.

Problem is, why buy infantry in the desert? The only reason to not go all tanks all the time is that on many missions you've close quarters and a single piat team or Germans with panzerfausts in the squad, can take our your large investment. In the desert this isn't going to happen so you don't need infantry support (just like in the real war), but the AI always buys pretty much the same troops as it would for a mission in an urban area.

When it's a desert mission it should be buying field guns and tanks, and that's about it. The only reason I had an HMG was because I had 7 credits left over, and I thought it might be able to surpess a field gun crew or any infantry would came too close to my HQ (but the AI doesn't tend to leave its positions when on the defensive).

User avatar
Sean OConnor
Posts: 1299
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 7:47 am
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Post by Sean OConnor » Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:18 am

Yeah, I need to do some work on the desert missions.

User avatar
Fighter_Ace
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 4:36 am
Location: Sacramento, CA, United States of America - Also can be found somewhere in the land of 1's and 0's
Contact:

Post by Fighter_Ace » Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:07 pm

Ok, I have a very interesting question... has anyone ever seen the enemy use flamethrowers? I have never seen them being used by the AI. If the AI started getting smart and using flamethrowers, you couldn't just send all your tanks out... they'd get toasted! It baffles my why they are so dumb with tanks if they have no anti-tank guns! Did you not give them flamethrowers because that seems too hard? It makes it too "off" if you restrict flamethrowers to our team only and very, very unrealistic!
My thanks and best regards to all my former submitters.

User avatar
Garnier
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:11 pm
Location: America
Contact:

Post by Garnier » Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:40 pm

this applies here too: "Id say a good solution would be to do what they did in close combat 2, having the same troops carried through the battles, with a limit, being able to decide which ones out of the limited force pool to us, and to only be able to requisition a certain amount depending on how much points you have. This sets two limits. One on the total campaign, so you dont just waste troops, and another on each battle, so you dont simply get all the tanks and assault troops at the beginning of the campaign and end up fighting with replacement half teams at the end, because you already wasted all the better guys. Some form of carrying through with the same men would be superb. Maybe it would actually get me to play the game again."

Quitch
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 8:56 am

Post by Quitch » Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:05 pm

Yes, the campaign needs to become a little more campaign like.

Post Reply