Page 1 of 1

Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 8:20 pm
by Ballacraine
I really don't see why we seem to have this game limitation of not being able to fire & then move.

It is particularly unfortunate when using an AA attack on a ship & then not being able to move.

:?

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 8:52 pm
by Myrddraal
AA fire is more effective if you don't move. The sequence matters.

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 9:32 pm
by Ballacraine
The point I was meaning is with some unit types firing ends their move.

I have noticed this particularly with naval units.

:)

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 9:46 pm
by Erik2
Earlier ships that were attacked would fire in defense. Not any longer.
If ships could fire and move a ehip could fire and then move out of range.
I have played many naval battles and they work pretty well now in my opinion.

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 10:09 pm
by Ballacraine
Well, there is a fixed range of movement & the ability to fire one salvo a move.

I don't see why there should be limitations in what should be done first?

Firing AA should not mean a vessel cannot move that turn.

:?

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 10:30 pm
by Myrddraal
Moving a ship reduces the effectiveness of firing. So if you allow a unit to move after firing, how do you reduce the effectiveness of the (already completed) attack?

This, combined with the fact that ships don't fire back automatically, make it quite important that ships don't move after firing.

I hope this makes sense, it just takes a little getting used to.

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 10:35 pm
by Ballacraine
Surely a way around that would be to reduce the accuracy of the salvo?

Or would that be too complex?



:?

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 10:41 pm
by Myrddraal
The salvo has already happened, and you decide to then move. How do you reduce the accuracy of something which has already happened?

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 10:47 pm
by Ballacraine
Yes, I see your point.

How about making all AA fire automatic then?

It just struck me as odd that selecting AA fire at the start of a move ended it.

I could see the reasoning refering to selecting the sonar ability.

;)

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 10:53 pm
by Myrddraal
It's not just AA fire, normal naval attacks and torpedo fire is also affected by how far the unit has moved this turn. Well, even between us we could think of a better way to simulate these things, it's a bit late to make these kinds of gameplay changes ;). I think it does work though, it just might take you by surprise if you're used to other games' rules.

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 10:55 pm
by Ballacraine
True enough.

It is far from a game breaker.

:)

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sun May 03, 2015 3:22 am
by FroBodine
Then, why can't infantry and tanks/vehicles move after firing?

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sun May 03, 2015 7:18 am
by Kull
FroBodine wrote:Then, why can't infantry and tanks/vehicles move after firing?
I'll bet it would break the AI.

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sun May 03, 2015 7:27 am
by Rood
FroBodine wrote:Then, why can't infantry and tanks/vehicles move after firing?
For me this is quite logical as they have been commited to battle. They can move to the battlefield, and when they have fired/attacked they can no longer move.
Actually if the defending unit retreats the attacking unit can move into the previously occupied hex.

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sun May 03, 2015 7:54 am
by Erik2
After an attack the unit is engaged, located next to the enemy (except ranged units of course). Any movement after attacking should in any case come with a penalty while the unit is disengaging.
Towed artillery should never be given this option, Self-propelled artillery maybe (shoot & scoot).

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sun May 03, 2015 6:48 pm
by gunnergoz
Turn-based games have certain conventions, I've noticed. This PG/PC paradigm uses the idea that you either move then attack, or attack and stay in place, but not attack, then move. It would be nice if certain units had the ability to attack then move but it has not been implemented in the game, beyond the attacker being able to occupy the hex the defender retreated from or was annihilated in.

I'd be curious to try a full-fledged attack-then-move freely (within zone of control constraints) concept in a game like this, myself. It would be a great way to demonstrate mobile warfare, i.e. cavalry and tank/motorized units in the breakout and exploitation phase of an assault. Perhaps too much for most AI's to cope with? I don't really know.

Re: Why Not Fire & Move?

Posted: Sun May 03, 2015 8:18 pm
by Horst
I’m fine with the minor-move after attack, deciding if you like to occupy the attacked hex or not. I sometimes mess up the chance though when I’m tired watching the animation and select a different unit meanwhile.
What I truly love is the possibility of aircrafts to move in any direction after attacking ground units, so you can use several aircraft waves in one turn to attack a single target. It’s a very important feature if you want to stay out of AA range too, like the cruisers in the Pearl Harbor scenario while you attack the battleships.
It’s also fair that you can push away aircrafts above ground/naval units, so you can’t block units below from air attacks like in PG games.