Can 100,000 Red Coats Kill 6 Million ZOMBIES!? - Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator 2 UEBS 2
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 05. 2022
- Cheap Games: www.instant-gaming.com/igr/Da...
Can 100,000 Red Coats Hold Off 5 MILLION ZOMBIES in a musket line battle in square formation while the zombies surround them!? - Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator 2 UEBS 2
SECOND CHANNEL:: / @daleyproductions
TWITCH: / daleytactics
PODCAST: anchor.fm/ben-daley
SECOND CHANNEL:: / @daleyproductions
PATREON: / daleytactics
MERCH: daleytacticsmerch.com
INSTAGRAM: / daleytactics
DISCORD: / discord
TWITTER: / daleytactics - Hry
it's really incredible how technology has advanced to the point where I can watch a bunch of british guys from the 18th century fight the entire zombified population of philidelphia
creative thinking
True. Basic quantity over quality.
practicing for the Boston massacare.
@@Sprogdl grand theft auto 1760
Well when you think of it that way, damn
When you increased the size of the square formation you actually gave the redcoats a massive disadvantage because the zombies had a much larger surface area to attack. In real life more surface area is good for ranged units because they can't shoot through each other but in this game a giant blob would be the most ideal formation.
Yeah, the "bumps" were where unit density was higher due to how the lines were layed out
His mistake was starting the zombies so close to the redcoats in the second battle. He should have left that alone.
I think I'm going to buy this game and do it properly because I'm just watching this youtuber do it wrong every time out of laziness.
I agree, the game seems to ignore friendly fire and only limits ranged units with distance and obstacles like terrain or pile of corpses so there's no point in spreading shooters into line or square formation. It only weakens them because once the breakthrough occurs, the battle is lost for redcoats... Maybe series of few smaller squares inside larger ones with gaps between them and one blob in the middle would be good strategy - the gaps would prevent continuos wall of corpses that seems to limit redcoats and more lines of defense with central blob would prevent encircling by the zombies...
Far too big a square..and zombies started too close; negating the initial range advantage..And the trickle factor was a red coat advantage that was also taken from them.
The redcoats only lost the second battle due to the zombies basically being spawned on them. Their range advantage never really came into play.
They are also down low. But, being this close was dumb.
60000 Roman Soldier VS 57000 Footman. Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator 2.
czcams.com/video/IkcJCPRQXwk/video.html
@@GameClasico812 what are you showing me? Melee vs melee? Close numbers? Means nothing
@@toddmaxon8767 agreed, they started on low ground but it was always going to be low ground as the zombies piled up.
I though it was red goats
I wonder how much of a difference a second square of maybe 5,000 to 10,000 additional troops inside the main square would be? Just so that, when the zombies break through, they aren’t attacking that side’s flanks completely uncontested and don’t have an uncontested fun through to the other side.
It’s a small number, sure, but formation is just as important as numbers.
I was thinking the same thing Banker.
Or what if dead red coats made more zombies
That would have been better. They would have acted like "reserves" that could slow breakthroughs.
0% of a chance. Once the zombie piles were over their heads they couldn't kill the zombies to be advantageous. That's why they lost cause the position they were in was stupid for any army.
The Samurai invented a Star formation that has never been defeated by any army, for this reason. The United States Army copied the design for their firebases in Vietnam. No firebase has ever fallen to the enemy as well, for exactly the same reason. The way it works is that no matter which part of the Star you take, you are always able to be fired upon by the remaining bunkers. In this manner it's actually better if you don't take any bunkers because once you do, you're in a perfect position to be annihilated by the other bunkers. This lets the defenders retake their own bunkers whilst simultaneously providing 360 degree arcs of fire outwards AND simultaneously hitting any fallen bunkers with suppressive fire so they can be retaken always.... It's neat. i.pinimg.com/474x/75/5e/14/755e14157d73209125fd2ff73f2ced83.jpg this is a picture of the firebases from vietnam, which the US copied from ancient Samurai. You can see... no matter where you attack the formation. You are fucked.
The sole advantage the redcoats had was a strong ranged attack, from a huge depth. The zombies had enormous numbers and when their entire front line came forth the redcoats couldn't stop them before hitting their lines, therefore the zombies were able to chew through a few at the outside. This reduces the sheer volume of firepower, allowing more zombies to reach the line, and so on.
I suspect the 200k redcoats may have seen victory if the zombie units had been in the same initial locations as the first run. That would have given them a slower build-up of zombie forces and a much longer time before taking any significant losses themselves.
I also think the terrain helped the zombies. As the had to crest a rise to attack the redcoats, this also meant the redcoats suffered reduced range, effectively granting the zombies a force multiplier. As the zombie losses piled up, this generated an artificial terrain advantage of similar nature, causing the redcoats to actually be hampered by their own initial successes, as they couldn't kill zombie troops until they got significantly closer.
Facts
Further hampering the Redcoats, in relation to their artificial hill...the zombies race over a hill of their fallen bretheren at the same speed they would over a dirt hill. If they slowed down significantly when climbing over the body-hill, it would actually help the British line.
This is my childhood imagination put into a pc game.
Those "bumps" of British soldiers are created because that is where you have your sections of British that you placed over lapping making it so that there are more British soldiers per square foot (stronger defences in those specific areas) so you will have a bump in each corner (anywhere your sections overlap) love your shows. Keep up the awesome and entertaining shows!
60000 Roman Soldier VS 57000 Footman. Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator 2.
czcams.com/video/IkcJCPRQXwk/video.html
I love how oblivious all the red coats look. 2:46 - "this man is about to be the first victim of the zombie apocalypse" - but he rather looks like he is super ready for a tea break
If you split the redcoats up into 2 squares, they could have won in that case. Back to back squares instead of open squares could have the same number of units make 2 formations.
So I think you shouldn't move the starting points each time you increase one side or the other. Do the exact same starting points each run so we can see what happens when you just change numbers and nothing else .
just discovered you yesterday and i've been binging all night xD love your UEBS2 videos
Hey Daley, how about 10 god archers scattered around the map each surrounded by a thousand spartans against a million zombies
God archers are too powerful. No point even putting anything around them and they would probably win
@@davidurban7346 they don’t too well when they can’t find a target since that’s when they go into reload animation
@@davidurban7346 they make small moutains
4:59 Great Borat impression ! 👍🏼
I think if you hadn't moved the zombies closer it might have gone the other way. The way they drip fed in at the start gave the redcoats a good advantage.
60000 Roman Soldier VS 57000 Footman. Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator 2.
czcams.com/video/IkcJCPRQXwk/video.html
I binged all of your UEBS2 vids and now I'm waiting for it to finish downloading lol
The redcoats could have won with a different formation. Put a solid rectangle of 100,000 within a hollow rectangle of 100,000 redcoats around it and the inner group will prevent the outer group from getting flanked. It's not just the numbers, but the formation. Also, you need to start the zombies further off so that the redcoats get their full range advantage.
Basic battle math's on redcoat formation loosing
Melee unit's damage output is equal to frontage the melee units can attack divided by the size of the melee unit. This only decreases when the melee units can't cover all thee frontage with units.
Damage output for ranged units is equal to frontage multipled by depth (up to max range of units)/size of ranged units.
This decreases whenever a unit is killed and there are no units behind it which previously could not fire.
So, when you increase only frontage, the damage output of both melee and ranged unit's increases. When you increase depth, the damage output of ranged units increases, or gets sustainability.
So, redcoats lost because you increased frontage, but didnt really increase depth. Additionally, the zombies could engage the full frontage earlier, which is another disadvantage to the redcoats.
I literally love these maps they're so large, I can just imagine putting a company of soldiers around and having groups of hundreds of zombies. Then spreading them across a map and controlling a unit.
The second match was a bit unfair because the zombies started out much close, also I do feel like the middle needs some troops
daley i love these videos keep them up bro 🙏🏻
if the zombies or other melee unit keeps trying to attack the corners. what would happen if you tried an octagon formation instead of a rectangle
Alternate video title: "Torture Testing my PC"
Really enjoyed this!! Keep 'em coming
1:15 Zombies got this... 100k isn't nearly enough maybe, 300k but 100k muskets aren't enough for total envelopment
Hey Daley! I’ve stopped watching for a while but recently came back and subbed. I remember your 100k subscriber special. I like your vids and one day hopefully I can play a game with you.
The zombies were spawned too close in the 2nd match. The redcoats were instantly firing at the start. That means they missed out on many kills they would have got at the edge of their range. Having every side hit by zombies at the same time kept them from being able double up on areas early on too. They were given extra handicaps on top of the numerical one. Should have done a big square and a smaller one inside it to act as "reserves" incase of a breakthrough. Maybe find some cannon units to place in the center or spread along the sides of the square.
60000 Roman Soldier VS 57000 Footman. Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator 2.
czcams.com/video/IkcJCPRQXwk/video.html
I love these videos man keep them up they make my day
Imagine a movie where a zombie outbreak happens sometime in the past. That would honestly be exciting to watch
I have craved a cowboy or civil war zombie movie since I was a kid. I want to see zombies getting taken out by cannons and/or old hand cranked Gatling guns, trains shoving aside zombies with their cowcatchers, frantic telegraphers signalling the next town that a horde is on its way, cavalry charges slashing zombies with their sabers, and ironclads idly shooting cannons at zombie hordes along the riverside. It would be beautiful 😍
Hello DaleyTacticts! I love your videos and channel, but I do have one question to ask. For your UEBS 2 videos could you up the video quality to 1440p or 2160p? I only ask this because with the high amounts of troops and lower video qualities the soldiers reguarly get a bit pixelated with the 1080p video quality. Thanks for your devotion to your content!
If you were to break the redcoats up in to smaller groups, array them with a frontage that zig-zags, and do this in several layers, they might just win. The zig zag draw the zombies in to and area of crossfire which increases casualties, brings the guns to bear.
It is also still good for ranged shooting. Having several layers of defense also means that even if there is a breakthrough it is immediately engaged.
Zombies:Ha British man yummy ew tasted like tea
Me:I'm offended
Using formations would help a lot.
I'd love to see a battle with the same number of defenders in varying deployments rather than just doubling numbers
A single block - as you note - breaks at the corners.
A ring, especially with inner blocks to respond to penetrations, and some outlying delaying lines might do better for the same numbers.
I feel like you set the red coats up. It was pretty obvious that they would lose. If one side of the redcoats was overrun it would mean the zombies gained at least 1/4 of the red coats troops at some point and could still have most of them
OH BOY!
Daley: For the purposes of this video I don't know geomatry.
Pt 2
Hey bro, great video! I think it would be a good idea to try a lined defence against the undead like you did in the desert. I never get tired of watching these , keep up the good work
one of the things i've observed is the ranged units can only engage using line of sight, so as the wall of dead increases in size the front line troops cannot engage because they don't see the enemy till the last second as they crest the top of the bodies.
DaleyTactics: 'That is going to be very scary for him, I imagine'
Soldier: Calm a.f.
Subbed today. Love the content.
Those little areas where the Redcoats had bumps in their formation are where the rectangles you drew overlapped, so the redcoats have higher body density in those areas.
The Redcoats could have won, they just needed a tighter formation.
You should read up on the 180 degrees rule in filmmaking. It is about making it easy for viewers to not lose track of directions. You repeatedly rotate the camera 360 degrees or more in just a second, and then a few times rotate 180 back in the opposite direction immediately after. In just a few minutes absolutely no one watching can keep up with which corner of the redcoats was the first one. You keep doing very fast camera movements to point at different things. You know what you point at, viewers do not and take a lot longer to lock on to new things. By then you started to point at a number of new things.
Imagine this as if you show something to someone using binoculars. If you keep pointing at new things all the time the person you are showing wont ever see anything.
Do your sweeps with the camera and zoom in, those works great. But be consistent. Pick a direction and keep going that direction. Dont change perspective and level of zoom as fast as you can all the time. Now it is like having a camera strapped to a ferret with ADHD and high on speed.
Round the corners and see if they are more effective for defense, love the vids.
Hey, Dailey!
I just came from your latest ArmA 3 clone wars video, and was wondering what mods you use, and if i need the CUP pack bought.
I really like those videos and wish you continue making content.
Have a great day!
If the redcoats could recede gradually to keep their lines thick, taking advantage of the empty space inside the square, they could compensate the losses and avoid the lines being broken too early. They should also change the formation a bit during the battle to reinforce critical spots.
Would love to see some cavalry and artillery as well. :D A proper 18th century army.
Why can’t I stop watching these videos 🤣🤣
Im from french and you made awsome video on UEBS 2 💪
The increased square size is a bit problematic. It means that the back of one line cannot support the other line. I wonder how the battle would have gone if the redcoats were packed solid? Or, if you want to use historical formations, split into multiple separate solid squares?
It would be interesting to see you do some more experimenting with formations in these redcoat v zombie videos. Like if you took the same amount of units on both sides but position them in ways that might be more advantageous for them.
So coo! Thanks!
Corners of formations are always the weakest points (It allows the attackers to form a killing pocket around them). Try bulking up the corners by placing additional units behind the corner sections, or make an Octagonal formation (This lessens the size of the killing pocket that can be formed by the attacker). Besides, an open center formation is meant to shrink on itself as it takes losses in order to keep its depth of fire in all directions as well as to prevent breakthroughs (This is called Defense In Depth)... But that's probably beyond the game's program parameters, so I'm guessing that your best bet would be a solid circular formation for non-maneuvering ranged fire units, so that maximum fire can be directed at the strongest points of the initial attacks (once they're surrounded, it's just a matter of attrition rates, but you eliminate the horror of a breakthrough).
Hell, you could even make a video trying out the different formations (Keeping everything else the same of course) and see what works better and by how much... Open Box... Open Box w/ reinforced corners... Open Octagonal... Solid Circle... You could even do an overhead view and run it in time lapse to fit it all in one video.
Unfortunately, You changed the start point of the zombies in the 2nd battle, so that the Red Coats didn't get the "trickle in" effect from the zombies in the beginning like they did in the 1st battle. Instead the Red Coats got mobbed from the get-go.
The lesson here is... If you're going to make a prediction on an outcome based on changing ONE factor, then you must keep all the other factors the same as the original.
In the end, you ran 2 completely different battles and then tried a direct comparison... That's just bad science.
Amazing video and good thinking very good
A smaller box inside the hollow square would plug the gaps of any that break through and make a massive difference - ie, a reserve force inside.
When you do squares you should place a second square inside where the range is about the edge of the main line. Or have a strong melee unit as the outer edge similar to like a pikemen. If the redcoats had a melee option when in close combat they probably would do better.
What truly determines who will win in these is whether the horde can maintain horde level offense vs the defender maintaining solid defense or effective DPS to counter the horde. Once one or the other is lost it's over for the losing side.
Do a square with no hole in the center! See if that will work! Cool video
What graphic quality do you use and what GPU? Thx for your answer
I'm really hoping soon we would select group and do a formation option instead of a click and drag and set ammo limits for ranged units and especially for muskets they would fix bayonets and charge if told to
you probably need to have an inner squire to counter breakthroughs or ( classically) grenadiers or some sort of heavy weapons in the center
Because you have stated before that the corners fold, you need to make the corners into small squares in the square. The reason is that the game ai is targeting those. But try different units vs a square formation to make sure. Great vids though!
You forgot that in the British Square they had Cannon firing Grapeshot on the corners which would have made a significant impact.
If you add a central box of troops in the middle of the square it would create a second line to defend the inner flanks
i am a huge fan of this game and u are the best player to watch it play !!!
It’s crazy tho seeing all those Bodies but then I think about ww2 and the casualties in the tens of millions how much space just our bodies take
It be interesting to see if a frontline of bayonet with muskets behind would fair better. Considering that would most likely be the tactics used.
yeh ton of people have already said it but the second match was totally different to the first. enemies spawned within firing range of the redcoats. and no slow trickle of units from all sides of the map at the start. still interesting. but in future when running comparisons, try keep them as similar as possible with only one variable changing. in this case the number of red coats.
You should up the redcoats accuracy as heaps of their shots fly way too high, also maybe more damage to make sure they’re 1 shotting them as those muskets would blow them to pieces in real life
as some have said, in this game the most optimal formation would be a perfect circle of redcoats, I think 150k could take on 5 million zombies.
Nah, a circle has lots of corners.
Increasing every redcoats field of fire won't work.
Well placed lines, Sir.
The true Englishmans' formation.
@@brucelownhole in real life the square is better, but here you want minimized surface area contact with the zombies, and british troops can shoot through each other doing no damage so there is no downside
Maybe the Red coats would be more effective when dealing with the corners using an oval formation, would be cool to see
Started watching yesterday, really enjoying it. Sad thing is UEBS 2 doesnt work on apple computers.. Watching you play makes me want to get it more and more though lol
U should have a layered square formation like 10 small squares and one group in the middle too fill any breakthroughs once they break one side the redcoats are getting surrounded and are fighting on two fronts and then it is over
oh this release to day
By my estimates, that's about...5,466,300.9418 gallons of blood spilled.
This would be about 8 Olympic swimming pools worth, or slightly less than the Killer Whale tank at Seaworld Orlando.
What’s your graphics card that you’re using to be able to have 6 million units and Graphic settings?
Nice video
One good thing about the undead… they make great kindling.
Most of the soldiers inside the square don't have line-of-sight. Three deep is optimum: front prone, middle kneeling, rear standing.
Can you do a circle formation? The problem is the lack of fire power on the edges.a circle would fix that
I'm 1 minute in and without even seeing a first shot yet, I think the zombies 🤣
what are the specs of your computer!? I would never be able to run this ever
Ive watched a couple of your red coat squares now. You forget the inner reserve. Where the officer in charge with a reserve force would direct the battle. This would help your battles with stopping breakthrough.
10 automatic Sherman’s vs. literally millions of troops. Try that out…!
Yeah I think the terrain was against the redcoats. I’d like to see a 300 style very narrow pass with long field of view defended and see what sort of kill ratios could be achieved.
next you should do the other way around. a big square with units inside the square trying to get out.
You gotta have it at a good ratio like 10:1 or 100:1 starting out if it’s something like this. A 600:1 ratio as the first scenario is just destined failure
its not the first he has done though, this video is a follow-up
Шикарное видео))) я ток и не понял что изменилось во второй раз и как поменялось количество убитых ..
Can you leave the kill count on for each team for the majority of duration during thing video?
I'd like to see same battle, but a heavy melee composition instead of zombies. Decagon formation for more field of fire
I think the problem is the square, the ombies always come at the corners. Maybe make them into a hexagon or circle (if that's possible). They might do better.
Can you do like Special Foces vs zombies on an urban setting? Entertaining vid btw.
Dude, it was totally obvious when both the zombies and the redcoats lost 50% of their respective forces that the redcoats were 100% dead. It's beyond me you could still believe in victory.
Less redcoats less firepower less kills every minute. While for the zombies, you have always as much contact (unless they're reduced to like 100k), even more if there's a breakthrough. To win, the redcoats have to kill far more than 50% of the zombies when the casualties reach 50%.
Instead of a hollow square/rectangle set up the redcoats in a patchwork of squares so zombie breakthroughs won't result in out flanking.
Could you do the Sharpe series battles?
I love your vids
I think a good video idea would be 100,000 Buffed up Persians vs. 1,000,000 regular attacking Spartans.
Great game. Would be nice to actually create your own map
Can you arrange the redcoats in a circle (not a ring)? They would have less surface this way and couldn't suffer a zombie breakthrough.
3 million is the max for me before the fps dips below 20. It's amazing to see that many on one screen.
At some point you have to give the lesser force a better vantage point. This one proves that the mounds of zombies takes away thier advantage.
The theory probably would have worked if you didn't move the zombies closer.