Close Combat Series :: View topic - Is merging battlegroups really any good?

Is merging battlegroups really any good?

through

[^/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Last Stand Arnhem

#1: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: mooxe,

Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 4:31 pm
—
From Skystrike at Matrix...

Quote:

If you merge battlegroups this happens:

-you lose other battlegroup
-you will have a lesser maximum number of teams than you would with 2 BGs.
-you lose the units of the smaller BG to the forcepool.
-even an elite SS BG will merge to an reservist BG if it is smaller.
-you get no or very little points in return of the merge
-you would have to BUY back the merged teams from the force pool, with points that you dont have!

So assuming thats all true, I dont have the game yet, this new strategic feature is actually no good at all? Southern_Land, you said merging battlegroups works quite well?

#2: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: pagskier,

Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 4:55 pm
—
I have no idea
I merged one and haven't used it yet

but it seems I lost all my BG unit to 1 bazooka and 1 piat on the screen

But i haven't figure out yet

#3: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: 7A_Woulf, Location: Sweden

Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 6:03 pm
—
The soldiers from the merged unit ends up in the FP of the new unit, not sure about what happens to their points... Rolling Eyes

Personally I used merging as little as possible, but on the other hand; -Reserve units are just borrowed and then returned for half their initial cost, not really good either (from a pure gaming-viewpoint...)

#4: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 8:33 pm
—
It would depend at what point you merge them.

When both BG's are strong and healthy merging would not be a good idea.

if one Bg is depleted and verging on useless merging it into another BG can be worthwhile..... thnk late in the campaign.

#5: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: Priapus,

Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 9:25 pm
—

schrecken wrote (View Post):

It would depend at what point you merge them.

When both BG's are strong and healthy merging would not be a good idea.

if one Bg is depleted and verging on useless merging it into another BG can be worthwhile..... thnk late in the campaign.

Precisely. This would be great in TLD for integrating beaten up beach BGs into reinforcement BGs, rather than leaving them to the wolves.

#6: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 11:33 pm
—
Would have been be a cool new feature...too bad you can't un-merge BGs later on.

#7: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: soldat,

Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:21 am
—
In most Cases, Merging is a very bad idea. When two battle group merges,the points of the merged BG just disappeared, the merging BG could have the force pool of another BG, but they cannot afford any of these units, because the points are too few.

And when an ordinary german BG encounters a static BG, it absorbs it, even the static BG have a lot of points in active roster.

#8: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 6:02 pm
—

schrecken wrote (View Post):

Shouldn't the player be the one to choose what merges and what doesn't?

#9: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:38 pm
—
The player get's to choose if he wants to merge battle groups.

#10: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:39 pm
—
But Static BG's are required to merge with mobile BG's.

So you have to drive around the Static BG if you don't want it to be merged.

#11: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: southern_land,

Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:35 am
—
Nope i said the ability to have two BGs co-existing on a map, and strike out in different derections, or one leaving, the other defend was good.

I only merged a couple of nearly spent Para BG's which worked fine. Lets face it, whats the point of merging fully active units?

#12: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:27 am
—

schrecken wrote (View Post):

The player get's to choose if he wants to merge battle groups.

Is that a response to what I wrote? If so, maybe I didn't make myself clear:

Shouldn't the player be able to choose what units merge into the final bg?

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:36 am; edited 1 time in total

#13: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:50 am
—
Then don't use it.

waaaaaa

#14: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:03 am
—

Quote:

Shouldn't the player be able to choose what units merge?

hey you should have full control of your BG make up as well... make up your own teams.

#15: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:05 am
—
even decide what weapon each man carries... and his armour etc...

oh wait you're not in the marines .. so you miss out

#16: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: Priapus,

Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:45 am
—

Troger wrote (View Post):

schrecken wrote (View Post):

The player get's to choose if he wants to merge battle groups.

I can't believe you guys left it to be done automatically, shows incredible shortsightedness. Why wouldn't that be something the player controls? You've practically made the feature worthless.

He's right

#17: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:13 am
—

schrecken wrote:

hey you should have full control of your BG make up as well... make up your own teams.

even decide what weapon each man carries... and his armour etc...

oh wait you're not in the marines .. so you miss out

Youched a nerve did I? Sorry I have to call out the junk you're apparently paid to market and defend (troll) on forums.

I know it's hard to imagine the fantasy world were commanders moved pieces of a division, or a piece of a regiment, or a piece of a battalion or pieces of several battalions, companies, regiments from a several divisions and made them into a battlegroup.

If I remember correctly the Germans did that quite a bit and even had a name for it, kampfgruppe: battlegroup? couldn't be!

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:37 am; edited 1 time in total

#18: Re: Is merging battlegroups really any good? Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:36 am
—
You are correct, user options abound.

"Battlegroups" in LSA represent many if not most of those formations you list... gve it a try you'll love it.

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Last Stand Arnhem

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1