It also naturally leads to the enemy clumping up. I wonder if building long corridors without roofs would be a good idea since your guys can shoot from doorways and retreat if melee get too close and its impossible to be flanked in a corridor. This makes burst fire weapons a really nasty present for receivers in tight quarters. So if the enemy is close together even missed shots can still do damage to the attackers. Also if someone shoots and misses, the bullet has a chance of hitting structures or people in neighboring tiles. Raiders seem to have no concept of conservation.Īnother thing is that its better to force the enemy to clump up for the same reason. For this reason putting autonomous weapons slightly ahead of your humans is preferable to use up the enemy munitions. So spread out your guys according to their ideal weapon range. Spacing is really important in defensive, especially if the enemy has explosives or a lot of melee. I think the wall and sandbag firing line is good against bullets but later raids have a lot of grenades and rockets those can be really bad if you clump your guys up and put walls right next to them since the rocket is more likely to impact nearer to them. I also only really perfected it recently, and since then raiders have just become a caravan of sorts - I trade a bit of medicine and a small amount of land(graves) for more colonists, armor, and weapons. The combination of this being mad expensive/time consuming and my lack of colonies that I've really put quite a bit of effort into means that I've seen limited use of this "turtle" strategy, but it seems to be very effective, despite the fact that raids will and have gotten insane from the wealth boost. This strategy of creating artificial choke points and then armoring them to the absolute extremes rarely fails from the few times I've gotten them up and running. This means that unless sappers are brought in, the raiders have to go through the sandbags to get to my colonists - they aren't too keen on busting down walls by hand if they don't need to. My bunkers don't really allow for flanking - they are double, sometimes if overkill is required then triple thick walls, with the hardest stone of my map tile on the outer layer and the most common/second strongest, typically sandstone or limestone, being the majority of the rest. The only exceptions to the "no offense" rule is when the enemy is retreating and injured/elderly raiders fall behind and get killed/downed, and the unlikely chance that I get a shield belt, which has only happened once because even 5 years in not a single pirate has acknowledged shields exists on Cassandra Rough. So what I do with my melee guys is put them behind my ranged attackers, and when any fool tries to hop into my bunker, if they aren't cut to pieces by traps/gunfire then they are typically finished off by my ikwa wielding colonists. But melee people seem to be offensive by nature - you usually don't put melee guys behind sandbags to eliminate an enemy force. Offense is a last resort used only when the sake of the whole colony is a stake. I ALWAYS try to go on the defensive side of things. There's a reason my profile picture is a terrapin. If you stick to static cover such as a wall or a sandbag, then you're allowing your target to get a good firing solution, possible flank and of course there's the shielded melee coming to lop off your limbs. You shouldn't plan on having your pawns fixed behind cover anywhere unless it's in a doorway that they can duck behind. Originally posted by Neuromancer:What defensive structure are better, wall or sandbag?Neither.īecause they will only be temporary cover more often or not.
0 kommentar(er)
