how do you decrease

[scorehouse]

a units strength going into the next battle. I got an overstrength hero and amped up a unit and now I need the slots back. can I reduce the overstrength and keep the unit active at reduced slots or do I have to send it to reserve and hope I can use it in the future?

[Horseman]

a units strength going into the next battle. I got an overstrength hero and amped up a unit and now I need the slots back. can I reduce the overstrength and keep the unit active at reduced slots or do I have to send it to reserve and hope I can use it in the future?

You can reduce it the same way that you increase it.

"Upgrade" the unit then select what strength you want the unit to be. Its as simple as that

[scorehouse]

I had just figured it out. thanks

[scorehouse]

but it won't let me go below 15? or will it?

[scorehouse]

do you believe in over strength or more units? I get caught up in making these powerful over strengthened units but it doesn't seem to be working?

[Horseman]

Infantry can't go below 15 as that's their base strength. Everything else should go to 10 with no problem.

The question of OS V more units is more tricky. My (probably predictable) personal opinion is to find the right balance, some OS on key units.

If there's going to be a big bottleneck then OS becomes king, an extra dozen units aren't much use If they can't fight!

One thing to consider. Is it better to have two units at strength 10 or one at strength 15?

The two units advantage - they can be in two places at one whilst a single unit can't (ignoring splitting as that then becomes 4 places v 2 places) One can also provide the other with a mass attack bonus, this might be enough to reduce (or avoid) damage received.

On the flip side a single strength 15 unit might be ablento cause enough damage to lessen it's return damage as compared to two strength 10 units attacking one at time....

TLDR: OS V more units is not a strait forward question to answer!

Edit: if you get a no slot hero then OS that bad boy!

[scorehouse]

your answer is about what I was expecting. I have found on German Fighters to spend 1 for an OS from 10 to 12 seems to be good value? on bombers the OS seems to provide better defense than increased offense. is there anyway to attack the same unit with more than one bomber unit at a time?

[Horseman]

your answer is about what I was expecting. I have found on German Fighters to spend 1 for an OS from 10 to 12 seems to be good value? on bombers the OS seems to provide better defense than increased offense. is there anyway to attack the same unit with more than one bomber unit at a time?

Yeah - OS fighters really helps (especially when you come up against the Spitfire's!) For some units OS is more about survivability, more steps means they can take more damage.

The only way as far as I know to get two attacks from planes onto a ground target is if you are lucky enough that an enemy unit moves onto the tile that a plane is on when it returns to base. Then that plane could attack, move off and allow a 2nd in. I think I've seen that once so far in my first play through.

[scorehouse]

that's one feature that needs to be changed. there is no reason 2 to 3 groups of Stukas can't attack the same target back to back to back in the same turn.

[MickMannock]

that's one feature that needs to be changed. there is no reason 2 to 3 groups of Stukas can't attack the same target back to back to back in the same turn.

You couldn't do that in PG/PC1 either. It's just not part of the core mechanics of the series.

[Horseman]

that's one feature that needs to be changed. there is no reason 2 to 3 groups of Stukas can't attack the same target back to back to back in the same turn.

You couldn't do that in PG/PC1 either. It's just not part of the core mechanics of the series.

You could do it and far more reliably (well two attacks, not three) Especially if you were attacking static defences it was simple to "set up"

In regards to the mechanic needs changing - no I don't agree. Its a game balance mechanic more than anything.

[gunnergoz]

There's a hero that allows phased movement, i.e. you can move, attack, then move again if you have remaining movement points. That allows Stukas for example to attack then move off the target. In one playthrough I managed to get that hero combined with a twice attack hero and put them on a Stuka together, allowing me to attack two separate targets with one plane. I added the +5 anti-tank attack hero to that combination and had a Stuka that could bust up tanks like you would not believe. Yumm!

[Horseman]

There's a hero that allows phased movement, i.e. you can move, attack, then move again if you have remaining movement points. That allows Stukas for example to attack then move off the target. In one playthrough I managed to get that hero combined with a twice attack hero and put them on a Stuka together, allowing me to attack two separate targets with one plane. I added the +5 anti-tank attack hero to that combination and had a Stuka that could bust up tanks like you would not believe. Yumm!

What a combination! Utterly OP and broken... I like it

[scorehouse]

Gunner you got me psyched up about the Stuka with Heros. bet on an OS fighter you could do some damage too. I think if you choose the Killer Team, you should be able to choose your 3 heros to start? another question, in the advanced options "Combat Randomness". goes from 0-100. 0 states it's always as predicted? what the hell does that mean? can anyone give an example of a 0 result vs a 100 result and which you prefer and why? thanks

[scorehouse]

Horseman. I remember leaving bombers over targets, then attacking moving them off target or back to base, then attacking with another unit.

[Horseman]

Gunner you got me psyched up about the Stuka with Heros. bet on an OS fighter you could do some damage too. I think if you choose the Killer Team, you should be able to choose your 3 heros to start? another question, in the advanced options "Combat Randomness". goes from 0-100. 0 states it's always as predicted? what the hell does that mean? can anyone give an example of a 0 result vs a 100 result and which you prefer and why? thanks

At 0 randomness it means what you see in the combat prediction is exactly what you'll get.

At 100% random it means that a "dice" is rolled for each attack and that's the result you'll see and it can swing wildly!

As an example - lets say I attack an enemy infantry with my own - my Infantry is at 8 strength points, no XP on either side so an accuracy of 50 and for the sake of this my attack against my opponents defence means I have a 50% change of killing when I hit. Enemy infantry is identical to mine.

The attack target shows a 2v2 on losses (50% to hit means 4 hits, and then 50% to kill means 2 kills)

At 0% random that is the result you will see every time.

At 100% random You could see anything from I lose 8 and kill 0 to I kill 8 and lose 0 and everything in between. The RNG will literally roll a dice for each shot and then each hit.

At 50% random it takes the average of the two results. So lets say I get absurdly lucky and hit 8 times and each hit kills.....that gives an actual score of 8. That score is then averaged with the predicted result (2 in this case) to give me 5 kills. Still pretty good on a prediction of 2!

If say you set it to 75% random then the game would use 75% of the actual rolls and 25% of predicted. So again lets say I get absurdly lucky and roll 8 hits which all kill I'd get 75% of 8= 6 and 25% of 2 = 0.5. The half rounds up so I'd get 7 kills.

If you press the L key in game you'll get a combat log which shows this being worked out.

I play at 100% random but only because when I'm gaming I like to have to account for luck (mine or my opponents) but it does mean at times I get very lucky (a unit survives when it shouldn't or I wipe out a unit unexpectedly easy) and some times very unlucky (my attack stalls because I failed to make an easy kill or my unit suffers horrendous damage and is now vulnerable) It does mean I have to plan accordingly and have a back up plan in many instances. In my opinion it favours the AI more to play at 100% random but I'm sure others would disagree.

EDIT: I'm not a fan of 0% random because to me it becomes more a puzzle than a wargame.

[scorehouse]

ok thanks

[MickMannock]

that's one feature that needs to be changed. there is no reason 2 to 3 groups of Stukas can't attack the same target back to back to back in the same turn.

You couldn't do that in PG/PC1 either. It's just not part of the core mechanics of the series.

You could do it and far more reliably (well two attacks, not three) Especially if you were attacking static defences it was simple to "set up"

In regards to the mechanic needs changing - no I don't agree. Its a game balance mechanic more than anything.

Sorry, I should have pointed out that I meant the 3 attacks.

After all, the 2 attacks is still technically possible, even though it's harder to pull of this time around.