Stacking
Moderators: MOD_Strategic_Command_3, Fury Software
Stacking
Greetings,
I have a question regarding this new game.
What I have always found fascinating in this type of WW2 grand strategy game is that it is impossible to stack an air unit with a ground unit.
What is approximately the scale of the map? A hexagon is about what? 50 kilometers? 100 kilometers?
Is it not enough to stack an air unit plus an army corps?
I have always found this is leading to strange things for Malta or for Overlord (when we have plenty of strategic bombers in England and plenty of corps ready for D Day to enter in a small space).
I am not disturbed by the fact it is impossible to stack two ground units. Why not? But, air and ground… this is disturbing…
Is it planned to be done with this new iteration?
Thanks
I have a question regarding this new game.
What I have always found fascinating in this type of WW2 grand strategy game is that it is impossible to stack an air unit with a ground unit.
What is approximately the scale of the map? A hexagon is about what? 50 kilometers? 100 kilometers?
Is it not enough to stack an air unit plus an army corps?
I have always found this is leading to strange things for Malta or for Overlord (when we have plenty of strategic bombers in England and plenty of corps ready for D Day to enter in a small space).
I am not disturbed by the fact it is impossible to stack two ground units. Why not? But, air and ground… this is disturbing…
Is it planned to be done with this new iteration?
Thanks
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
RE: Stacking
I have the same thoughts. Its what put me off TOW and the others of the same company. I think its just lazy programming to be honest. Tiller games and GG games and many others can program a stack.
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:34 pm
RE: Stacking
This came up often on the original forum. The reply was always "simplicity", which resonates, but certainly stacking an air unit, or other micro-footprint units (e.g., rockets), should be possible and is a modest compromise to enhance realism and to leverage a handful of hexes / squares.
Graphically, this would be easy with the symbols, less easy with the 3d unit representations.
Graphically, this would be easy with the symbols, less easy with the 3d unit representations.
RE: Stacking
Simple for the programmer , not so much the players who have to figure out ways to place air units, fleets etc so they don't screw with the front lines of ground units.
RE: Stacking
Yes exactly. I hope this one will change things but seeing the first screenshots, looks like I am again dreaming. [:(]
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
- AlvaroSousa
- Posts: 11642
- Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:13 pm
- Contact:
RE: Stacking
Stacking is a lot tough to design than someone thinks it is. To implement stacking so it functions easily in a computer game even more trickier. On a board game stacking is easy. We use our hands to manipulate the stacks. In a computer game how many click you have to perform to make an action work is completely different. Now add in what if this? what if that? The variables start stacking up for situations. That's why you don't see many stacking games.
I know this because I program games. I designed a stacking system for an engine I am designing. There are always compromises
I know this because I program games. I designed a stacking system for an engine I am designing. There are always compromises
Creator Kraken Studios
- WarPlan
- WarPlan Pacific
Designer Strategic Command
- Brute Force (mod) SC2
- Assault on Communism SC2
- Assault on Democracy SC2
- Map Image Importer SC3
- WarPlan
- WarPlan Pacific
Designer Strategic Command
- Brute Force (mod) SC2
- Assault on Communism SC2
- Assault on Democracy SC2
- Map Image Importer SC3
RE: Stacking
That's why you don't see many stacking games.
I really don't want to argue with the designer, but really this remark is ludicrous.
Here is small list just for starters of guys/companies who have been stacking for years.
John Tiller
Norm Koger
Ron Dockal
Gary Grigsby
Frank Hunter
Victor Reijkersz
AGEOD
Even Avalon Hill, the old boardgame company had stacking in their very first PC games (WAW) back in the 90's
Not sure who made HOS, but it has stacking as well. I would think there are easily as many games with stacking as without, I think probably more with stacking actually.
But its a simple equation for me. If this game has stacking I will try it. If not I won't.
- AlvaroSousa
- Posts: 11642
- Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:13 pm
- Contact:
RE: Stacking
I am speaking of certain types of games, not all games in general. I should have specified better.
Creator Kraken Studios
- WarPlan
- WarPlan Pacific
Designer Strategic Command
- Brute Force (mod) SC2
- Assault on Communism SC2
- Assault on Democracy SC2
- Map Image Importer SC3
- WarPlan
- WarPlan Pacific
Designer Strategic Command
- Brute Force (mod) SC2
- Assault on Communism SC2
- Assault on Democracy SC2
- Map Image Importer SC3
RE: Stacking
ORIGINAL: StratComAl
In a computer game how many click you have to perform to make an action work is completely different. Now add in what if this? what if that?
Actually, I just would like to treat two cases. Is it an air unit or a ground unit?
I am not even talking of moving a stack. Again, as I said earlier, I am not against the impossibility to stack two or more ground units. You have decided in your rules that two ground units (don’t know if you call them a corps or an army) cannot be stacked together. I am fine with that if and only if you have implemented a Switch command allowing changing a front line unit per another one behind the front without penalties on the entrenchment of the previous one. As such, we will have the possibility to disengage a tank unit per an infantry unit instead of keep it stuck on the front line.
The way I would like to see it implement is basically two mouse clicks to switch between the two units of a stack. If the ground unit is selected, you have all the actions possible for this unit. Clicking again, you have all the actions possible for the air unit. And, moving a stack of an air unit plus a ground unit is forbidden.
This is simplicity for players, perhaps not for you designers. I understand. I do not know where you are in your development process but I have always complained about the lack of space in England to put strategy bombers and ground units before D-Day in all games that does not implement such stacking.
ORIGINAL: StratComAl
The variables start stacking up for situations.
And, for the next questions adding variables to your design, do we need to allow stacking a naval unit and a ground unit; I do not know how your convoy system is implemented. But, my answer would be not necessarily if you have a combined counter to handle this.
Do we need to allow stacking a naval unit and an air unit? Again, I do not know but my guess would be not necessarily. It depends on how you implement a carrier. Do you represent its air assets by a counter?
Do we need to stack a ground / air / naval unit? Depending on the two above answers, I would say no.
What does others think? Looks like the forum is pretty quiet. Is it the official forum for this game?
Cheers
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:34 pm
RE: Stacking
1) on a humourous note, having toppled many stacks in board games, I'm not so sure it's easyORIGINAL: StratComAl
On a board game stacking is easy. We use our hands to manipulate the stacks.
[...]
In a computer game how many click you have to perform to make an action work is completely different.
2) here is a design suggestion: no clicks at all. Hover over the hex/square/what have you, and scroll the mouse wheel. Now I call that a UI improvement.
As envisioned, there wouldn't be much stacking. Just tiny-footprint units allowed. So no multiple armies. It would, however, be a significant increase in realism with no decrease in playability (if my UI suggestion is taken in).
- Hubert Cater
- Posts: 5862
- Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 11:42 am
- Contact:
RE: Stacking
ORIGINAL: Michael T
That's why you don't see many stacking games.
I really don't want to argue with the designer, but really this remark is ludicrous.
Hi Michael T,
Thanks for your interest in SC3 [:)]
I just wanted to quickly say that StratComAl is a moderator for this forum and not an official designer for our latest project. I'm just mentioning this as a point of clarification and only to suggest that his posts here are simply an expression of his own point of view and not the official word when comes to SC3.
That aside, I can say that Bill and I have discussed the possibility of limited stacking (Bill Runacre is the campaign designer for SC3) and this would include stacking air units with regular land units and so on.
Not necessarily the more thorough stacking as seen in the games you've listed in this thread, but something to better protect air units and so on in game.
solipsismMatrix is correct that in the past we would argue against it for simplicity, and while this still applies, the scale of the current SC3 map also helps in making it less necessary, i.e. the map is at a pretty good size right now where it works pretty well without requiring stacking... and we've kept that in mind since we always have so much to do and often have to pick and choose the additions that will have the biggest/most important impacts to the new game.
However, since SC3 is fully customizable, including the maps and map scales, it is not to say that this should never be an option, and that is primarily why it is still something that may or may not be included in the end.
Probably not the straight answer you might be hoping for, but it honestly is the best answer I can give at the moment and I hope this helps,
Hubert
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware
We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/
Join our Steam Community:
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/strategiccommand3
We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/
Join our Steam Community:
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/strategiccommand3
RE: Stacking
For me it is quite simple...SC has evolved over the years where one would think we can finally see the day where air units will no longer clog up hexes...my goodness, if my original version of PANZER GENERAL can manage this on my 3DO gaming console, don't waste my time with reasons why it is difficult to do now...lazy programming is how I see it...
RE: Stacking
Like I promoted in the beginning, there should be a density of deployment mechanism that allows multi units to combine and breakdown with a mathematical restriciton for each hex based upon the terrain and logistical potentials. Now I'm not a coder, so I have no idea if "Eiffel" or "C++" or whatever computer languages are available could adequately incorporate such a procedure. I have programmed in "Basic" and have written macros and functions in Excel and it seems to me that the possibilty exists as it all has to be incorporated using algorithms.
Yes, it requires thought and testing and probably some pretty complicated mathematical equations, but for some reason the contemplation of "impossible" escapes me. Perhaps, Bill and Hubert need an advanced mathematician on staff, like someone with a strong physics and differential equation background. Just a suggestion.
Hope this helps.[;)]
Yes, it requires thought and testing and probably some pretty complicated mathematical equations, but for some reason the contemplation of "impossible" escapes me. Perhaps, Bill and Hubert need an advanced mathematician on staff, like someone with a strong physics and differential equation background. Just a suggestion.
Hope this helps.[;)]
RE: Stacking
ORIGINAL: J P Falcon
For me it is quite simple...SC has evolved over the years where one would think we can finally see the day where air units will no longer clog up hexes...my goodness, if my original version of PANZER GENERAL can manage this on my 3DO gaming console, don't waste my time with reasons why it is difficult to do now...lazy programming is how I see it...
I agree completely. Brand new engine and we still don't have stacking of air units? Incredible!!
-
- Posts: 2846
- Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 1:35 pm
RE: Stacking
Ron Dockal games have some of the worst stacking rules I ever tried. It reminded me of Kampfgruppe back in the 80's when it first came out. You could stack every unit into one hex and run around the map slaughtering everything in sight because the AI didn't do that cheatin/exploity stuff. Then they fixed it in Battlegroup an only allowed 2 units per hex and that was a good game. Later came Panzer Strike and Typhoon of Steel and I think they dropped it back to just 1 unit per hex. Steel Panthers later came out and I forget how many units could bunch up in that game but I'm pretty sure it had limits as well.
I don't like Dockal games and I don't like large stacks. Games like Panzer General and Panzer Corp do it right. One infantry and one plane. I think that is enough. Whoever heard of guys getting up on their comrades shoulders so they all could stand on one piece of dirt? [:D]
I don't like Dockal games and I don't like large stacks. Games like Panzer General and Panzer Corp do it right. One infantry and one plane. I think that is enough. Whoever heard of guys getting up on their comrades shoulders so they all could stand on one piece of dirt? [:D]
RE: Stacking
I have been playing Time of fury lately and the biggest problem I see with no stacking is that numerical power disappears from the battle calculation. It all comes down to "is your unit better or worse - then you win/lose" and that feels too simple. For example whenever your enemy has a higher unit level you can't hold the front, you already know it from the start.
If we had some stacking (I agree there should be a limit though) numbers would also play a role in the battles and it wouldn't be just about "is your unit higher or lower level?"(I know there are other things that's also affects the outcome of the battle).
Also no stacking creates weird situations some times, like not being able to move a unit, 1 inf division defending an entire city etc etc.
I hope there will be stacking but made in a good and simple way, not like hoi3 which I stopped playing because i found stacking to be too complicated and huge (can stack like 10-20 units or smt). It should be simple to see stacked units and understand what is stacked and how powerful the stack is.
If we had some stacking (I agree there should be a limit though) numbers would also play a role in the battles and it wouldn't be just about "is your unit higher or lower level?"(I know there are other things that's also affects the outcome of the battle).
Also no stacking creates weird situations some times, like not being able to move a unit, 1 inf division defending an entire city etc etc.
I hope there will be stacking but made in a good and simple way, not like hoi3 which I stopped playing because i found stacking to be too complicated and huge (can stack like 10-20 units or smt). It should be simple to see stacked units and understand what is stacked and how powerful the stack is.
- MasterChief
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:29 am
- Location: The Hundred Fathom Curve
RE: Stacking
Thanks for clarifying the thought process as you move forward. This would be a deal breaker for me though. I have loved the SC series but have always hated the stacking limitations (especially regarding air units). It seriously limits moding scenarios and that is one of the features I most admire in this game system.ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater
ORIGINAL: Michael T
That's why you don't see many stacking games.
I really don't want to argue with the designer, but really this remark is ludicrous.
Hi Michael T,
Thanks for your interest in SC3 [:)]
I just wanted to quickly say that StratComAl is a moderator for this forum and not an official designer for our latest project. I'm just mentioning this as a point of clarification and only to suggest that his posts here are simply an expression of his own point of view and not the official word when comes to SC3.
That aside, I can say that Bill and I have discussed the possibility of limited stacking (Bill Runacre is the campaign designer for SC3) and this would include stacking air units with regular land units and so on.
Not necessarily the more thorough stacking as seen in the games you've listed in this thread, but something to better protect air units and so on in game.
solipsismMatrix is correct that in the past we would argue against it for simplicity, and while this still applies, the scale of the current SC3 map also helps in making it less necessary, i.e. the map is at a pretty good size right now where it works pretty well without requiring stacking... and we've kept that in mind since we always have so much to do and often have to pick and choose the additions that will have the biggest/most important impacts to the new game.
However, since SC3 is fully customizable, including the maps and map scales, it is not to say that this should never be an option, and that is primarily why it is still something that may or may not be included in the end.
Probably not the straight answer you might be hoping for, but it honestly is the best answer I can give at the moment and I hope this helps,
Hubert
Chief of the Watch... Over the 1MC, pass the word... "DIVE!" "DIVE!"... sound two blasts of the Diving Alarm ... and pass the word, "DIVE! "DIVE!"
RE: Stacking
ORIGINAL: Mrslobodan
I have been playing Time of fury lately and the biggest problem I see with no stacking is that numerical power disappears from the battle calculation. It all comes down to "is your unit better or worse - then you win/lose" and that feels too simple. For example whenever your enemy has a higher unit level you can't hold the front, you already know it from the start.
If we had some stacking (I agree there should be a limit though) numbers would also play a role in the battles and it wouldn't be just about "is your unit higher or lower level?"(I know there are other things that's also affects the outcome of the battle).
Also no stacking creates weird situations some times, like not being able to move a unit, 1 inf division defending an entire city etc etc.
I hope there will be stacking but made in a good and simple way, not like hoi3 which I stopped playing because i found stacking to be too complicated and huge (can stack like 10-20 units or smt). It should be simple to see stacked units and understand what is stacked and how powerful the stack is.
Ah Time of Fury...such a missed opportunity. Almost was a classic. They got most elements right. Just a few programming challenges left and it would have been golden. So fricking close...
RE: Stacking
I know that Hubert and Bill, probably Al too rationalize that with the map being so spacious that stacking may not be of concern.
But, I want to remind them that eventually we will be expanding the SC3 scope to include Pacific Islands and some other remote reaches of the WW2 geography as SC3 goes global.
Remember, an island is an "island", its own little world and somewhat limited in its deployment options.
But, I want to remind them that eventually we will be expanding the SC3 scope to include Pacific Islands and some other remote reaches of the WW2 geography as SC3 goes global.
Remember, an island is an "island", its own little world and somewhat limited in its deployment options.
RE: Stacking
ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey
I know that Hubert and Bill, probably Al too rationalize that with the map being so spacious that stacking may not be of concern.
But, I want to remind them that eventually we will be expanding the SC3 scope to include Pacific Islands and some other remote reaches of the WW2 geography as SC3 goes global.
Remember, an island is an "island", its own little world and somewhat limited in its deployment options.
SC2 had many Pacific Islands, and some were multiple hex. Regardless, I never found it difficult to provide air cover from an adjacent island. My problem was more to do with how to keep that air unit at high readiness. Something I would love to see is an HQ having influence within its range, even across water. That way,for example, Dugout Doug could sit in Correigidor but provide readiness for air and ground units on the big island.
How you doing by the way? Haven't talked to you in about 2-3 years it seems...
Chance favours the prepared mind