Orders per Phase

The new Cold War turned hot wargame from On Target Simulations, now expanded with the Player's Edition! Choose the NATO or Soviet forces in one of many scenarios or two linked campaigns. No effort was spared to model modern warfare realistically, including armor, infantry, helicopters, air support, artillery, electronic warfare, chemical and nuclear weapons. An innovative new asynchronous turn order means that OODA loops and various effects on C3 are accurately modeled as never before.

Moderators: WildCatNL, cbelva, IronManBeta, CapnDarwin, IronMikeGolf, Mad Russian

Post Reply
baldbrother
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:52 am

Orders per Phase

Post by baldbrother »

Dumb Question. I've forgotten. What's the reason my orders can drop down to as low as 2 per phase after a while?
User avatar
loki100
Posts: 11699
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:38 pm
Location: Utlima Thule

RE: Orders per Phase

Post by loki100 »

most likely your OOB has fallen apart - either too many lost HQs or HQs out of range.

review the OOB tab and look for HQs that are red, try to revise the attachments to give them a valid chain of command or move the higher HQs up to the front. Especially with the Soviets I find you need to move the overall HQ up after 4-5 turns if you are making decent progress.
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Orders per Phase

Post by wodin »

Keep everyone in command..I usually have around a 20 to 25 min order phase as NATO. Also the less orders you give help aswell. Keep your HQ's alive at least until their sub ordinate units are wiped out.
pzgndr
Posts: 3486
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:51 am
Location: Maryland

RE: Orders per Phase

Post by pzgndr »

Something that could perhaps be considered in a future enhancement was how the old Assault boardgame handled command points. NATO companies and Soviet battalions had some inherent points that could only be spent on their subordinate units. NATO battalions and Soviet regiments had TOCs that had additional points to be spent freely, but could also accumulate each turn to represent "planning." With a little effort, these features could be integrated into this game pretty well. Just a thought.
Bill Macon
Empires in Arms Developer
Strategic Command Developer
TheWombat_matrixforum
Posts: 466
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 5:37 am

RE: Orders per Phase

Post by TheWombat_matrixforum »

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

Something that could perhaps be considered in a future enhancement was how the old Assault boardgame handled command points. NATO companies and Soviet battalions had some inherent points that could only be spent on their subordinate units. NATO battalions and Soviet regiments had TOCs that had additional points to be spent freely, but could also accumulate each turn to represent "planning." With a little effort, these features could be integrated into this game pretty well. Just a thought.

Yeah, I've mentioned this before, and while I don't want to step on the designers' toes on a core game mechanic, I really think something like this would greatly enhance this game. Right now, it seems a bit odd that subordinate formations don't have much role in order generation or efficiency of use. I'd much rather have the brigade or task force level HQ generate points that could activate battalion HQs, or battalion points used to activate company HQs, with the option to use points on a one for one basis to give direct orders to platoons. This way, three points might activate three companies--each company with a single order (assault here, move there, etc.) or three individual units, or a mixture of these.

This way, if a unit is out of command, you HAVE to use an order to move it. If you keep your units in command, you can be much more economical. It would also give the Soviets, with their bulkier org structure, the ability to function with fewer orders but with less flexibility, while NATO would require a few more orders but would have more flexibility. Right now, the bulk orders system doesn't seem to really reflect differences in philosophy as much, and diminishes the value of subordinate HQs.

But, I emphasize, this might not be the direction they want to go, and I'm cool with that. I just keep thinking in game along the lines of formations, while the game forces me to think of individual units.
pzgndr
Posts: 3486
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:51 am
Location: Maryland

RE: Orders per Phase

Post by pzgndr »

ORIGINAL: TheWombat
Yeah, I've mentioned this before, and while I don't want to step on the designers' toes on a core game mechanic...
this might not be the direction they want to go, and I'm cool with that

Yeah, I'm in a wait & see mode. This is an intial release and compromises have been made here and there. But Capn Darwin has indicated there are planned improvements and enhancements down the road. These guys have mentioned that they've played Assault and TacOps and other similar games, so I suspect they know where they can go with this series. I think this is well done and provides a good game experience, and that's just initial impressions since I've only played through 3 scenarios (really 2; I still need to beat the third).

Anyways, another Assault feature I liked was unit facings. This game has its hasty and deliberate move postures, but you still don't get a sense of flank exposures. And TacOps had Orders pauses, unit SOPs and other changes allowed in the unit orders options. For example, move hasty to waypoint 1 and then move deliberate to waypoint 2. Can we do that now and I'm missing something? Again, let's wait & see what happens down the road. This game has a very good foundation to build on. [8D]
Bill Macon
Empires in Arms Developer
Strategic Command Developer
TheWombat_matrixforum
Posts: 466
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 5:37 am

RE: Orders per Phase

Post by TheWombat_matrixforum »

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

ORIGINAL: TheWombat
Yeah, I've mentioned this before, and while I don't want to step on the designers' toes on a core game mechanic...
this might not be the direction they want to go, and I'm cool with that

Yeah, I'm in a wait & see mode. This is an intial release and compromises have been made here and there. But Capn Darwin has indicated there are planned improvements and enhancements down the road. These guys have mentioned that they've played Assault and TacOps and other similar games, so I suspect they know where they can go with this series. I think this is well done and provides a good game experience, and that's just initial impressions since I've only played through 3 scenarios (really 2; I still need to beat the third).

Anyways, another Assault feature I liked was unit facings. This game has its hasty and deliberate move postures, but you still don't get a sense of flank exposures. And TacOps had Orders pauses, unit SOPs and other changes allowed in the unit orders options. For example, move hasty to waypoint 1 and then move deliberate to waypoint 2. Can we do that now and I'm missing something? Again, let's wait & see what happens down the road. This game has a very good foundation to build on. [8D]


We can't give waypoint orders like that yet, but it's been discussed. I do not know if it will happen but they're certainly aware of the desire for this feature.
User avatar
DoubleDeuce
Posts: 1235
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Crossville, TN
Contact:

RE: Orders per Phase

Post by DoubleDeuce »

ORIGINAL: TheWombat
Anyways, another Assault feature I liked was unit facings. This game has its hasty and deliberate move postures, but you still don't get a sense of flank exposures. And TacOps had Orders pauses, unit SOPs and other changes allowed in the unit orders options. For example, move hasty to waypoint 1 and then move deliberate to waypoint 2. Can we do that now and I'm missing something? Again, let's wait & see what happens down the road. This game has a very good foundation to build on. [8D]
I am thinking facings might not be an issue at the platoon level but that's IMHO. The variable waypoint setting thing would be a really good thing to have especially when on the offense. I think this would enhance the Soviet doctrine concerns since you could plan ahead and set units to change modes as they near the enemy FEBA.
pzgndr
Posts: 3486
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:51 am
Location: Maryland

RE: Orders per Phase

Post by pzgndr »

ORIGINAL: Double Deuce
The variable waypoint setting thing would be a really good thing to have especially when on the offense. I think this would enhance the Soviet doctrine concerns since you could plan ahead and set units to change modes as they near the enemy FEBA.

This is kinda implemented already, where Move-Hasty changes to Move-Deliberate if attacked by a ground unit or if an enemy unit is spotted. But having more explicit control would be better.
Bill Macon
Empires in Arms Developer
Strategic Command Developer
Post Reply

Return to “Flashpoint Campaigns Classic”