12 heavily armed colonists, one raider with moltov cocktails. Guess who wins?

[AnActualDuck]

This game is incredibly stupid sometimes. I had literally 12 people with varying weaponry from minguns to charge rifles, to snipers, all blasting at this guy and he took shot after shot after shot without going down plus the majority of the time my guys couldn't hit him. All the other raids just wandered around outside for some reason, didn't bother coming in to fight, eventually he downed four of my colonists and they decided to kidnap who they could. All the raiders flooded in to base, and again my remaining 8 colonists could not take down a single one of them. They walked right past people, snatched up my colonists, and just left. The majority of the downed people were my melee guys because even though they had armor and weapons, the guy holding the moltov cocktails downed them all. Hoooooooow. HOOOOOOWWWW

Shooting scores 10+ for a huge chunk of my colonists, plus a number of good melee guys. Christ... Moments like this make me wonder why I waste so much time on video games.

[Fluffe]

3 questions
1. What did the Molotov dude have armor wise
2.Where the raiders behind cover
3.Did you try to just have the gun ppl melee the kidnappers or put them out of the Molotov's way?


Other wise I say RNG was not in your favor lol (also as a tip if you click one of your pawns then hover over a enemy you can see the hit chance lol)

[AnActualDuck]

The moltov guy just had a standard vest on. No power armor. As far as meleeing the people kidnapping I kept being like "Okay they'll definitely hit him this time, definitely, 100%, no way they are going to just walk in, grab someone, and walk out unscathed, they have plenty of time." Until it was too late to catch up to them. Some of them even came in and then chose to dig there way out rather than exiting through the opening they made, giving my guys even more time to blast at them. The moltov guy did have cover, as he came through a hole he dug in my wall, but yeesh even with cover, that was a lot of fire concentrated on him from multiple directions, and the raiders that came in to take people were definitely wide open.

As you said, RNG was not on my side to a point of, "K, time to put this down and go vent on the forums a bit."

[Boston]

Vanilla combat sucks hard. Sorry Tynan.

I would expect an "amateur" to be able to hit a human-sized target 9/10 times at 50 meters, so long as it is standing still. Much less someone with 10+ Shooting.

Plus, I would reasonably expect that, if someone were to get shot at with multiple firearms, they would duck back into cover, until the bullets stopped flying at them. Suppression is a big thing in real-world firefights, but in-game? NOPE, they don't care.

Plus, if someone got shot, I would reasonably expect them to be downed, or at the very least incapacitated, depending on the size/velocity of the bullet and where they got shot. In-game? HAHAHAHA no. Raider and Tribals tank bullets like stone walls.

The above reasons are why I loved me some Combat Realism. The game is almost literally unplayable for me without it.

[Shurp]

One question: what time was it?  Hard to hit in the dark.  Especially if it's foggy/rainy/etc.

Once again, this is why you need turrets to stand out in front and soak up damage so your pawns don't get trashed.

And one other question -- why was the Molotov guy able to hit your colonists at all?  The range on those things is pitiful.  Any colonists in range should turn around and run while those further out should be plinking him.

[carbon]

Miniguns are an indirect fire weapon. They are near useless against a lone target. If you are relying on them heavily, that would explain the problem.

Shurp also makes a good point, grenade based weapons are quite easy to evade if you try.

[BetaSpectre]

Sounds like a glitch or poor combat tactics.

I normally have 3 shooting, and I used to deal with raids with over 50 Pawns against 8-10 colonists normally.

You can literally use your fists to melee that molotov guy down if he were alone.

[AnActualDuck]

Well I did state that I had a bunch of weapons so I'm not sure why anyone would get the impression that I was relying on miniguns. I also stated he downed my melee guys, not my ranged guys. Since he wasn't going down and my ranged guys were mostly missing I just sent four melee guys in to overwhelm him. Tanked it all and downed them despite them having weapons.

I appreciate the responses but I'd encourage people to please read things first. Responding in such a way would give other people reading who also just skimmed a false notion of events if they just catch what you say.

As for things I hadn't explained before, I had about 10 turrets set up, estimating. They were sappers so they went through the walls and even though I did have turrets scattered around, naturally they went for the spot that was still vulnerable cause that's what sappers do. But I'd argue that that still is no excuse for one guy tanking all that melee and gun fire no problem.

As for fog/darkness. I simply can't remember at this point. Again, there is a point where these kinds of factors should be outweighed by excessive force. Cover your eyes and throw 500 darts at a target and I bet a few of them hit.

[AnActualDuck]

Sounds like a glitch or poor combat tactics.

I normally have 3 shooting, and I used to deal with raids with over 50 Pawns against 8-10 colonists normally.

You can literally use your fists to melee that molotov guy down if he were alone.

Again, please, I beg of people, read things first. I said I sent in melee.

[BetaSpectre]

Well I did state that I had a bunch of weapons so I'm not sure why anyone would get the impression that I was relying on miniguns. I also stated he downed my melee guys, not my ranged guys. Since he wasn't going down and my ranged guys were mostly missing I just sent four melee guys in to overwhelm him. Tanked it all and downed them despite them having weapons.

I appreciate the responses but I'd encourage people to please read things first. Responding in such a way would give other people reading who also just skimmed a false notion of events if they just catch what you say.

As for things I hadn't explained before, I had about 10 turrets set up, estimating. They were sappers so they went through the walls and even though I did have turrets scattered around, naturally they went for the spot that was still vulnerable cause that's what sappers do. But I'd argue that that still is no excuse for one guy tanking all that melee and gun fire no problem.

As for fog/darkness. I simply can't remember at this point. Again, there is a point where these kinds of factors should be outweighed by excessive force. Cover your eyes and throw 500 darts at a target and I bet a few of them hit.

You can melee without a melee weapon I do it more often than using my guns nearing the tipping point of raids.

[AnActualDuck]

How is not using a melee weapon more beneficial besides being more likely to incapacitate other than kill? Actual curiosity, since you're recommending it.

[BetaSpectre]

How is not using a melee weapon more beneficial besides being more likely to incapacitate other than kill? Actual curiosity, since you're recommending it.

This is for your shooters, it's a bad idea to use melee against a gun don't you think? Also a bad idea to let the enemy be allowed to shoot back.

Melee is more reliable than shooting at times, and when you engage in melee you slow down a target. When a pawn is fleeing melee is more likely to capture/kill the pawn if you have anyone who can move faster than him. Also the rate of attack is higher so if you have 12 pawns against one guy backed into a corner just run up to him. Incap' also means that his equipment dropped has higher durability for reuse. New non cotton shirts are always welcome.

Do keep in mind that usually my colonists have low shooting stats usually. But capturing gives you better equipment, and you can abuse a prisoner for organs, or more colonists. Almost always worth it.

I don't normally equip melee weapons, rather they always have ranged weapons and I reposition as needed before enemies fire/send off grenades often. Quick shots regroup fire another salvo out of their line of fire.

Honestly not sure how if you were attentive that molotov guy got your melee guys. The throw range is low, and if you micromanage you can literally tell the pawn to walk away from the molotov before it hits because you can see how he's about to throw them. If you send 4 melee at the same time some will engage in attack canceling moves before he can toss his molotovs.

You have to keep in mind that the way I play is probably completely different than how you do. Like making use of cover, watching fire times of your pawns vs the enemy, and taking into account collat damage. In a literal sense melee weapons are better than fists. But I don't use melee or fists. I use ranged. Then depending on my guys vs their guys situation I engage in melee. If they're outnumbered 3 to 1 I run up to melee to capture them, and to prevent them from using their guns/bombs you can't slowly run up to them or they'll pick you off you have to zerg rush them if you go for something like that.

[RawCode]

it's possible to beat anything by kiting enemy around, try some micromanagement.

[AnActualDuck]

As I said, he engaged them in melee combat and won... All of them... As in he downed them all with his fists and they had weapons. And if your guys have shields, no I don't think using melee against guns is a bad idea, especially if you have overwhelming numbers.

My point hasn't been, "What is the best possible result to get the best possible reward/prisoners/loot" it's "How the hell did this one guy down four of my guys in melee combat and then those guys got taken by the raiders, and my gunfire completely missed everyone constantly."

I'm also not sure what you mean by saying "This is for your shooters, it's a bad idea to use melee against a gun don't you think." It seems like you've been saying I should have sent my guys with guns in to attack him with melee and at the same time saying that's a bad idea? I wouldn't typically use a person with a gun for melee since they can't wear shields. Unless I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.

[BetaSpectre]

As I said, he engaged them in melee combat and won... All of them... As in he downed them all with his fists and they had weapons. And if your guys have shields, no I don't think using melee against guns is a bad idea, especially if you have overwhelming numbers.

My point hasn't been, "What is the best possible result to get the best possible reward/prisoners/loot" it's "How the hell did this one guy down four of my guys in melee combat and then those guys got taken by the raiders, and my gunfire completely missed everyone constantly."

I'm also not sure what you mean by saying "This is for your shooters, it's a bad idea to use melee against a gun don't you think." It seems like you've been saying I should have sent my guys with guns in to attack him with melee and at the same time saying that's a bad idea? I wouldn't typically use a person with a gun for melee since they can't wear shields. Unless I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.

To be fair you just weren't clear on what you said. so more or less one raider beat 12 of your guys by dodging gunfire then tanking shots, after which in melee downed 4 of your people all at once.

It sounded like he tossed nades into a clump of your 12 then walked off unharmed.

It's possible he had abnormally high stats. 20 Melee gives you the ability to dodge bullets or some other stat raised it possibly only in a mod. But I do recall that there is dodging in my game. RNG also means that all the shots just grazed him doing basically no damage.