Matrix Games Forums

Just got into CS last week but now have about a dozen low complexity scenarios under my belt. Great fun working through the bootcamps on each front - you have to love the ski troops (swish..., swish...). Brings back old memories of PanzerBlitz / Leader but without the set up fuss and with a better opponent (I usually solo'd !). Anyway - a quick question ... by the way, the support on the boards is great with a clearly engaged community.

I select all units in a stack (say 3 rifle platoons and an MG) to fire on a unit. I expect each unit to use up its 'fire cost' of action points. On many occasions, however, only some of the units use up points, and several are left as fresh. Any idea why?

Fentum

ORIGINAL: fentum

Just got into CS last week but now have about a dozen low complexity scenarios under my belt. Great fun working through the bootcamps on each front - you have to love the ski troops (swish..., swish...). Brings back old memories of PanzerBlitz / Leader but without the set up fuss and with a better opponent (I usually solo'd !). Anyway - a quick question ... by the way, the support on the boards is great with a clearly engaged community.

I select all units in a stack (say 3 rifle platoons and an MG) to fire on a unit. I expect each unit to use up its 'fire cost' of action points. On many occasions, however, only some of the units use up points, and several are left as fresh. Any idea why?

Fentum

If one of the units in the stack cause the enemy unit to retreat, the units that haven't fired yet will retain their Action Points.

There are no advantages for mass firing, except for speeding up the attack process.

Jason Petho

Jason,

I am truly amazed ! I am sitting in the uk at 10.15pm. I write a comment up. TWO SECONDS later, a very dedicated gentleman from Canada gives me the answer. Just brilliant.

Your answer has really opened my eyes (and woried me !). I thought that a large stack (at least if each unit was activated) had cumulative firepower, as the strength numbers go up as you add units to the fire order. Are you saying that when multiple units are selected, each attacks individually? Maybe I should read the manual !!

Fentum

ORIGINAL: fentum

Jason,

I am truly amazed ! I am sitting in the uk at 10.15pm. I write a comment up. TWO SECONDS later, a very dedicated gentleman from Canada gives me the answer. Just brilliant.

<snip>

Truly, one of the best things about most of the Matrix forums. The direct level of support concerning anything about their games, some directly from the programmer/developers far exceeds any of the other game site support/forums on a regular basis.

ORIGINAL: fentum

Jason,

I am truly amazed ! I am sitting in the uk at 10.15pm. I write a comment up. TWO SECONDS later, a very dedicated gentleman from Canada gives me the answer. Just brilliant.

Your answer has really opened my eyes (and woried me !). I thought that a large stack (at least if each unit was activated) had cumulative firepower, as the strength numbers go up as you add units to the fire order. Are you saying that when multiple units are selected, each attacks individually? Maybe I should read the manual !!

Fentum

That is correct, even when multiple units are select and "fired", each one will fire in order as they appear in the stack.

Jason Petho

Hi guys,
&nbsp;
>>There are no advantages for mass firing, except for speeding up the attack process.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Correct me if I'm wrong, I think this is not completely true...if you fire all your units at once, the enemy cannot return fire with OpFire until after all your attacks are resolved or you get a retreat/elimination of the target....
&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Ariz
&nbsp;
&nbsp;

ORIGINAL: Arizonus

Hi guys,

>>There are no advantages for mass firing, except for speeding up the attack process.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, I think this is not completely true...if you fire all your units at once, the enemy cannot return fire with OpFire until after all your attacks are resolved or you get a retreat/elimination of the target....

                                                                                            Ariz

My apologies, I was refering to numerical attack bonuses.

Jason Petho

lol&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; you're awesome Jason&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [:)]

ORIGINAL: Arizonus

lol    you're awesome Jason    [:)]

I have my moments.. usually when I sleep!

Jason Petho

Jason et al,

Thanks for the very prompt answers and support !

I have another quickie, but I'll post a new thread ...

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

If one of the units in the stack cause the enemy unit to retreat, the units that haven't fired yet will retain their Action Points.

There are no advantages for mass firing, except for speeding up the attack process.

Jason Petho

Yes but ... if you do "mass fire" your enemy cannot return fire until all your units have fired (i applicable) - for example, three of your units in one hex are taking on 2 enemy units in the hex next to it.

One of your units fires, achieves no results but your enemy returns fire (OP fire), you canot interupt his op fire and as a consequence his two units fireing one at a time can actually take out all of your attacking units.

Fire your three units all at once and your enemy cannot interupt your fire - thus you get a much better chance of taking out one of his beore he gets to return fire. Of course there are tactical advantages and disadvantages to both methods and it's up to the player to decide what he wants to achive with his turn and what risks to chance.

(sorry just read the rest of the thread and now see you've made the same point) [>:]