Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Axis Minors force pool

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Gary Grigsby's World at War: A World Divided >> RE: Axis Minors force pool Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/24/2008 7:17:50 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: runyan99
I wouldn't make the Chinese a minor because they are already handicapped by their inability to afford tech and improve their units. 


What I mean is do all three:
  • make China a minor
  • increase Chinese start evasion by 1
  • increase Chinese start land attack by 1.
So the net effect in most cases is roughly zero.

I'm just trying to address some of the oddities of the fact that (in the current implementation, without the changes under discussion) all technology status is entirely determined by Player identity and not Nation identity.

Perhaps this is a subtletly much more on my mind as the (current) programmer. What the implementation means is that the Nation China is does not have bad tech levels, the Player China does. A different Player can build Chinese National units, if they take Chinese factories and are not hostile to China.

Example:
WA infantry are Ev=9 LA=9
CH infantry are Ev=4 LA=5

The WA capture Chungking from the Japanese. Now the WA can build Chinese units with Ev=9 LA=9. These units are Chinese Nationality, but WA Player.

With this "minor nation" penalty, a similar funky thing happens if Player China takes an Indian factory. Player China would be building these Indian units with cruddy China tech levels, and on top of that they would suffer the minor penalty for being of Indian Nationality.

If you make China minor PLUS add 1 to Chinese evasion PLUS add one to Chinese land attack, then it actually makes the oddities less odd.

But it is rather subtle, and almost never comes up in a game. Maybe it has never come up at all yet, I don't know.

Long explanation, hope it makes sense.

(in reply to runyan99)
Post #: 31
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/24/2008 7:47:25 AM   
rjh1971


Posts: 3841
Joined: 12/13/2005
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
Good thread, Brian are these changes going to affect all scenarios or just global glory?

Bty I would definetely make Spain a minor, I never understood why Spain can produce fighters and not Italy, we didn't have the industry to do so, nor models of our own.
Spain was just out of a Civil War with most of it's infrastructure damaged or destroyed.

As always if you send me the new exes I'll try testing Brian (internetrjh@telefonica.net).

_____________________________


GG's AWD, GG's WBTS, GG's WitE Beta Tester
Beta Tester: Panzer Corps, Time of Fury, CtGW, DC CB

(in reply to runyan99)
Post #: 32
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/24/2008 9:22:57 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rjh1971
Good thread, Brian are these changes going to affect all scenarios or just global glory?


Just Global Glory. Joel stated long ago that he didn't want to change things after players were used to it, but I've always said Global Glory is a "living scenario". Not ossified yet!

Also, I still like to think of Total War as basic AWD, and Global Glory as "advanced". Learn on TW and move to GG once you want a little (not a lot) more depth and variety. That was my idea, at any rate.

I was, however, thinking of adding a 1942 Global Glory scenario. It gives folks something else to play with, but it is also just convenient for testing in development. For example, it makes it a lot easier to set up surrender events and try things out that are pertinent to mid-game instead of early-game.

I expect I'll have a test version of the national capabilities modifier sometime before the end of the year.


(in reply to rjh1971)
Post #: 33
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/24/2008 6:53:29 PM   
runyan99

 

Posts: 146
Joined: 7/21/2008
Status: offline
Speaking of Spanish fighters, I would remove the ability to build new subs from Italy, as someone else pointed out that they historically made very few, were short range, and if allowed in the scenario Italian boats will be just as good as German u-boats. Italy can keep the one sub unit they start with.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 34
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/26/2008 10:29:42 PM   
goodtimes

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 6/10/2007
Status: offline
Just adding to the pool of thoughts..  Could you use the regular/veteran/elite system to create inferior units?  (IE.  'under- strength'/regular/veteran/elite?)    [Some nations could start with some 'under strength' units that have attack or evasion penalties.]

I had some other ideas on this 'under strength' theme
say, 
          'green under strength':    new, or inferior unit, with opposite modifiers as Veteran. (15% or 30% chance to upgrade to Regular with battle success) [[as in American units early in operation torch]]

          'yellow under strength':    Units that suffer high suppression,(say 90+% of amount needed to damage unit), and/or  near damage,(say 90+% of attack roll needed to damage), would have a chance to be downgraded [elite to veteran, veteran to regular, etc.]-(a higher chance if both 'highly suppressed' and 'nearly damaged' conditions exist), (and say triple the chance if unit is unsupplied)  A downgrade from 'Regular' would be to 'Yellow Under Strength', and the unit could be brought back to 'Regular' by a penalty/repair of extra supplies [[as in the german army trapped in Stalingrad]]

          'blue under strength'    Units of 'minor' countries could be slow to get the major powers' tech advances (one turn behind), this handicap could disappear next turn. [[as in Canadian ships slow to get British radar technology onboard]]


Anyways, adding a lower level to the Veteran/Elite system might give you a way to add penalties to 'minor' nations simply.

< Message edited by goodtimes -- 3/11/2009 2:52:56 AM >

(in reply to runyan99)
Post #: 35
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/27/2008 6:11:50 PM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
Thanks for the suggestion goodtimes.

I went back to my orginal thinking in terms of code implementation ... fully flexible tech level modifiers which can be specified individually for each nation if desired. Only techs that impact combat are effected by this, however, because all offsets are computed only deep inside combat routines.

There is also a specifyable "lower limit" for each tech, so a modifier won't take effect if it makes the resultant level below that limit.

Unfortunately there was no way to sneak this in and preserve save compatibility. So save compatibility is out the window.

That is the code capability (for people interested in modding). In terms of the scenario, I will only include "Major" and "Minor" nations as indicated before. I will definitely not be individually tweaking every nation. And I will set the "lower limit" to be the same as the Neutral play capability. Which means two things: (1) the player can easily see what the lower limit is, (2) a neutral nation's capability will usually not become worse when it joins a major power (exception China, since China has base levels even below neutral).

The combat reports clearly display the modifier, like any other modifier. But I'm still trying to think of a good concise way to show this to the player outside of combat.

(in reply to goodtimes)
Post #: 36
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/27/2008 6:18:20 PM   
SGT Rice

 

Posts: 652
Joined: 5/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead

The combat reports clearly display the modifier, like any other modifier. But I'm still trying to think of a good concise way to show this to the player outside of combat.



Perhaps you could display the modifier in bold type as part of the flag icon that displays on each unit?

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 37
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/27/2008 11:52:12 PM   
rjh1971


Posts: 3841
Joined: 12/13/2005
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
Brian how difficult would be to be able to upgrade militia to infantry spending 5 supplies and one turn?
Think of it as a training program, what do you think?

_____________________________


GG's AWD, GG's WBTS, GG's WitE Beta Tester
Beta Tester: Panzer Corps, Time of Fury, CtGW, DC CB

(in reply to SGT Rice)
Post #: 38
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/28/2008 7:39:22 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rjh1971
Brian how difficult would be to be able to upgrade militia to infantry spending 5 supplies and one turn?
Think of it as a training program, what do you think?


I'd rather allow recapture of population when units are disbanded. Then if you have the excess production you could disband militia and put the pop into infantry.

(in reply to rjh1971)
Post #: 39
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/28/2008 7:44:33 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SGT Rice
quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead
The combat reports clearly display the modifier, like any other modifier. But I'm still trying to think of a good concise way to show this to the player outside of combat.


Perhaps you could display the modifier in bold type as part of the flag icon that displays on each unit?


Since there can be many modifiers of different values (e.g. evasion -1, land attack -2, ship attack -3, etc), this doesn't work universally.

Here is what I have come up with.
  • a light grey bullet if the lowest modifier is -1
  • a dark grey bullet if the lowest modifier is less than -1
  • full information in the unit view popup. Note that this is only available for the Player's own units (those he can select).
Here is what it looks like.

Note that for illustrative purposes I gave Italian armor -2 land attack so it has the darker bullet, all the other units shown have a minimum modifier of -1 so they have the lighter bullet.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by WanderingHead -- 12/28/2008 7:46:09 AM >

(in reply to SGT Rice)
Post #: 40
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/28/2008 6:26:23 PM   
runyan99

 

Posts: 146
Joined: 7/21/2008
Status: offline
I don't think anybody's militia stats should change or be penalized, since they are already nearly worthless and cannot improve. In the above screenshot I see the Italian militia has a grey bullet.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 41
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/29/2008 6:03:23 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: runyan99
I don't think anybody's militia stats should change or be penalized, since they are already nearly worthless and cannot improve. In the above screenshot I see the Italian militia has a grey bullet.


Agreed. That was intended to illustrate the graphic, not specifics.

At the moment, what I am thinking is as follows. Let me know what you think. For nations with reduced capability:
  • units that suffer -2: armor
  • units that suffer -1: carrier air, fighter, TAC, HB, airborne, artillery, flak, sub
  • units with no national capability penalty: militia, heavy fleet, light fleet, carrier fleet, transport fleet
When I say "suffer -1", I mean on all relevent combat tech attributes (e.g. for infantry it is AA, land attack, evasion). But note that the penalty will not make the levels lower than the Neutral player capabilities for a unit, so there is a floor on the levels.

Hence, for example, both German and Italian subs would start at torp=2, evasion=2. This is the Neutral level, so Italy is not penalized. If Germany techs up torp=3, then German subs will get better while Italians stagnate. If Germany techs up torp=4 then Italian subs will reach torp=3.

For subs, I could alternatively raise the Neutral level of torp to 3, then Italians could follow the German's to 3 then get stuck there until the Germans reach 5 and put Italy up to 4. Or something like that.

Thinking through the implications of it all, the reduction in Italian sub capability would be one of the most significant changes to the game. I think it is necessary in order to make this interesting (otherwise you'd still want to focus on fully capable subs from Italy instead of other Italian units) but it may jigger the balance a bit.



(in reply to runyan99)
Post #: 42
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/29/2008 6:19:13 AM   
runyan99

 

Posts: 146
Joined: 7/21/2008
Status: offline
Looks okay. I would not raise the neutral sub level to 3. Japan starts with level 3 torpedoes, reflecting the fact that they had the best torpedoes in the world at the time. Don't give them to everybody.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 43
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/29/2008 6:29:25 AM   
Lucky1

 

Posts: 383
Joined: 10/30/2006
Status: offline
Using your proposed bullet system, would it be possible (e.g., no bullet shows) to indicate that a unit is currently not penalized because it is at the unit neutral value?

In terms of balance, I think changes to subs will be offset by allowing comparatively meaningful builds. At least for me, there comes a point in most games where Germany does not invest signficant amounts in tech anymore - either because she is on the retreat or because she has simply reached a point where meaningful gains are no longer possible. At this point, the Italian ability to produce non-militia units will certainly come into play.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 44
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/29/2008 6:47:26 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: runyan99
Looks okay. I would not raise the neutral sub level to 3. Japan starts with level 3 torpedoes, reflecting the fact that they had the best torpedoes in the world at the time. Don't give them to everybody.


Just to be clear, the neutral level does not provide a floor to unit capabilities. It just prevents the national capability *penalty* from being assessed.

The result is

final_value = max( min(Player_value, Neutral_value), Player_value + National_modifier)

So, for example Player German Torp=2, Nation Italy Torp modifier=-1, Player Neutral Torp=3

Italian_torp = max( min(2, 3), 2-1) = 2 (which is less than Player Neutral's value of 3).



< Message edited by WanderingHead -- 12/29/2008 6:50:26 AM >

(in reply to runyan99)
Post #: 45
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/29/2008 6:50:04 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucky1
Using your proposed bullet system, would it be possible (e.g., no bullet shows) to indicate that a unit is currently not penalized because it is at the unit neutral value?


Not really, because it can be different for each kind of tech.

This is why I want to adopt only the simplest rules for this (like all combat capabilities are -1) and not tweak individually. Getting what seems (to me) an adequate UI here is rather difficult.

(in reply to Lucky1)
Post #: 46
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/29/2008 7:36:50 AM   
runyan99

 

Posts: 146
Joined: 7/21/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead

Just to be clear, the neutral level does not provide a floor to unit capabilities. It just prevents the national capability *penalty* from being assessed.



I'm not sure if I understand the formula correctly, but I would design it so that when German subs hit level 3, Italian subs are still at 2, and trail behind after that.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 47
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/30/2008 5:44:22 PM   
Marshall Art

 

Posts: 566
Joined: 8/6/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead

I'd rather allow recapture of population when units are disbanded. Then if you have the excess production you could disband militia and put the pop into infantry.



That is a fantastic idea - it would allow to shift manpower from one unit to another type. Since the nationalities are clearly marked, no possibility to upgrade hungarian militia men to German Panzer drivers. Also cheap units couls serve as training camps and pop pool for countries with low pop.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 48
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/30/2008 5:52:02 PM   
Marshall Art

 

Posts: 566
Joined: 8/6/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead

Here is what I have come up with.
  • a light grey bullet if the lowest modifier is -1
  • a dark grey bullet if the lowest modifier is less than -1
  • full information in the unit view popup. Note that this is only available for the Player's own units (those he can select).
Here is what it looks like.

Note that for illustrative purposes I gave Italian armor -2 land attack so it has the darker bullet, all the other units shown have a minimum modifier of -1 so they have the lighter bullet.






For those mentally or optically challenged like me -

is it possible to move the bullet to the left hand side of the unit screen, so that the stars and the bullets are in different positions? Also I would prefer a clearer distinction in color - like grey and another color, e.g. black, brown - whatever.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 49
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 12/30/2008 6:07:12 PM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Art
For those mentally or optically challenged like me -

is it possible to move the bullet to the left hand side of the unit screen, so that the stars and the bullets are in different positions? Also I would prefer a clearer distinction in color - like grey and another color, e.g. black, brown - whatever.


I think you are right - this display leaves something to be desired.

I'm thinking of changing the circles to numbers, like "-1", "-2". The catch is that only one number can be displayed (there is arguably not even enough room for one number on the icon), while every individual unit attribute is mod-able. So I would rely on the same thing as the grey circle - just display a single number corresponding to the worst capability offset.

In the context of Global Glory, I expect all capability offsets to be the same anyway, so it would be a relatively easy and intuitive interface.

I can also move the numbers around a little, try to find the best place. Next to the flag like SGT Rice suggested makes sense, since it is a national offset. When I tried that with the circles it looked bad, but maybe it will be ok with numbers.

(in reply to Marshall Art)
Post #: 50
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/6/2009 2:38:40 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead

final_value = max( min(Player_value, Neutral_value), Player_value + National_modifier)

So, for example Player German Torp=2, Nation Italy Torp modifier=-1, Player Neutral Torp=3

Italian_torp = max( min(2, 3), 2-1) = 2 (which is less than Player Neutral's value of 3).


I think I want to change this. If I use the Neutral value for the attribute, I either have to set the neutral values really low or the penalties won't take effect early in the game before units are tech'd up. As I ponder Italian versus Indian units in the deserts of North Africa in the early game this just doesn't seem right.

I don't want to set the Neutral values really low, because it doesn't feel right for Neutrals that are attacked.

I definitely want an extremely simple rule, and I propose that the modifier lower limit simply be "2" (universally applied) instead of the Neutral value.

final_value = max( min(Player_value, 2), Player_value + National_modifier)

In this way, the penalty is assessed only if the attribute base value for the player is 3 or greater. The main application for looking at these tiny attribute values is submarines. For land and air units, the lower limit won't matter much (except for some secondary attributes, like fighter land attack).

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 51
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/6/2009 3:24:49 AM   
Lucky1

 

Posts: 383
Joined: 10/30/2006
Status: offline
Maybe it might be explaining to us what role neutral attributes actually play in the game?  Where / when / in what circumstances do neutral troops actually exist (I have never looked or paid attention, I guess...) For example, when Spain is attacked by the WA, do her troops possess neutral attributes or German ones? I had always assued that they 'became' Axis troops and hence received the German attributes. I am wrong in this? If I am wrong, I find it a bit off (only intellectually, as I have never seen a real effect in practice) that neutral troops are often superior to player troops at the outset of the war. Similarly, if they actually have a chance of occurring in the game, should neutral values not reasonably evolve as the war progresses (perhaps using the lowest attribute of all playable powers but China)? Dunno....

As for your point about neutral values 'neutering' the country offset, I have noticed this as well. One of the first things I checked was how the modifiers affect things at the outset of the war. In the early game, infantry are not really offset at all (your point). Similarly, tac bombers are a good build choice for Italy (no actual penalties to naval attacks or evasion unless Germany researches these further).

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 52
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/6/2009 3:58:27 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucky1
Maybe it might be explaining to us what role neutral attributes actually play in the game?  Where / when / in what circumstances do neutral troops actually exist (I have never looked or paid attention, I guess...)


In most cases, neutral nations remain Neutral when attacked. They only join a Player if/when that player is prompted and accepts them into his alliance.

So, if you attack any Neutral then they will have the capabilities of Neutral during that combat.

The one exception is the Netherlands, which for some reason turns WA as soon as attacked by Germany. There were some funky gamey things that had to be addressed specially with the Netherlands, although I don't recall if I ever understood how this WA-immediately thing helped.

Of course, since the Netherlands is the most commonly attacked neutral, that could understandably cloud one's understanding.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucky1
Similarly, if they actually have a chance of occurring in the game, should neutral values not reasonably evolve as the war progresses (perhaps using the lowest attribute of all playable powers but China)? Dunno....


I've thought of this myself, because the problem really is that any value I pick for Neutral seems either too strong at first or too weak later. But with the proposed change to national capability offsets, at least Neutral capabilities can be independently adjusted.

Also, with this change the national capability offset would also apply to Neutrals, so different Neutrals could have different offsets while still neutral (in addition to applying after they are no longer neutral).

Bear mind that, in my view at least, the very low WA infantry start capability to some extent represents the loss of equipment by the BEF at Dunkirk. So in that context having some neutrals at or near WA can make some sense.

(in reply to Lucky1)
Post #: 53
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/6/2009 4:48:30 AM   
Lucky1

 

Posts: 383
Joined: 10/30/2006
Status: offline
Playing the devils's advocate, what are the specific disadvantages of using neutral countries' attributes as a floor value? Whether or not a floor is used, Indian and Italian units will be roughly comparable in the first couple of years. Indian infantry might be a little inferior because Germany will likely reach 7/7 inf faster than the WA. However, Indian arty will also tend to be superior given the relative ease of the WA to reach 5/8 or 5/9 values compared to Germany. If one makes the units too weak, this also makes it almost certain (it is already advantageous) that Italy / Romania will only produce units in the late game.  I would suggest that perhaps a few targeted tweaks of neutral values (e.g., tac bomber evasion -  no neutral tac bombers will be hurt anyhow) might acheived desired results.... Of course, in the late game, the differentials will likely become more pronounced depending on game choices and outcomes....

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 54
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/11/2009 7:01:52 PM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
Lucky1 - some interesting points. In a way you are saying they can start near the same place, but the lesser capability nations get a little left behind as technology advances.

I'm still not quite sure what is best to do here. I do think that some form of floor is desirable here, and I do think it needs to be something very simple so that players know what it is.

I've got some options in mind

[1] apply a single global floor to the level after capability offset, probably global_floor=2
    final_value = max( min(Player_value, global_floor), Player_value + National_modifier)

[2] set the Neutral unit capability as the floor after capability offset
    final_value = max( min(Player_value, Neutral_value), Player_value + National_modifier)

[3] set the Neutral unit capability minus 1 as the floor after capability offset
    final_value = max( min(Player_value, Neutral_value-1), Player_value + National_modifier)

[4] set the Neutral unit capability as the floor before capability offset
    final_value = max( min(Player_value, Neutral_value+National_modifier), Player_value + National_modifier)
    same as ...
    final_value = min(Player_value, max( Player_value, Neutral_value) + National_modifier)


Option [3] allows some differentiation of Neutrals (e.g. Fins over others), but is IMO a bit subtle for the player.

Option [4] is actually sort of similar to [3] (the same if the capability offsets are all 0 or -1). It extends the differentiation between neutrals beyond just -1, to whatever the modifiers are. But it is not supported in the current code, and is perhaps the most subtle to think about. It's kind of funky because it actually can't be defined as a floor, it is sort of a function of the National_modifier itself, so I don't actually want to implement this.

The last option I am loath to mention
[5] have the minimum value be configurable on a per unit per attribute basis, and display on the unit attributes screen, after the World Standard.

This is fairly flexible (although still can't support the funkiness of [4]) but of course the GUI constrains me.

Anyway, I'm just throwing this out there in case someone else has a stroke of genius.

< Message edited by WanderingHead -- 1/11/2009 7:05:52 PM >

(in reply to Lucky1)
Post #: 55
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/11/2009 9:35:05 PM   
Lucky1

 

Posts: 383
Joined: 10/30/2006
Status: offline
Well, since you mention it, I suppose option five might be of interest. That said, I personally do not see much of a problem with the current implementation (is this your option number two?). The lack of significant differentiation in some units will only last a year or so into the game. I would only suggest that a couple of the neutral values be tweaked (e.g., neutral evasion for tac bombers). If the neutral floor is too low across the board we are back to militia....

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 56
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/12/2009 9:10:19 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucky1
The lack of significant differentiation in some units will only last a year or so into the game.


Yeah, I think I am sold on [2] (the original implementation you've been playing with). The clincher for me is the observation that the reduced capability units still can't do combined arms. So if you want CA in Africa as Axis, for example, you still need German units.

(in reply to Lucky1)
Post #: 57
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/13/2009 12:27:44 AM   
Forwarn45

 

Posts: 718
Joined: 4/26/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead
The clincher for me is the observation that the reduced capability units still can't do combined arms. So if you want CA in Africa as Axis, for example, you still need German units.


I didn't read everything thoroughly - but are you saying reduced value units cannot contribute to a combined arms attack? In other words, if one of the components is a minor unit - it won't count and the Axis doesn't get the bonus (i.e., Germany infantry and tanks attack with support of Italian tac air)?

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 58
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/13/2009 12:54:56 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Forwarn45

quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead
The clincher for me is the observation that the reduced capability units still can't do combined arms. So if you want CA in Africa as Axis, for example, you still need German units.


I didn't read everything thoroughly - but are you saying reduced value units cannot contribute to a combined arms attack? In other words, if one of the components is a minor unit - it won't count and the Axis doesn't get the bonus (i.e., Germany infantry and tanks attack with support of Italian tac air)?


Yes.

Any unit that has a negative Land Attack national capability offset will not contribute to obtaining (or blocking) CA.

If you do obtain CA (via other units), the negative LA offset units still benefit from it.

(in reply to Forwarn45)
Post #: 59
RE: Axis Minors force pool - 1/14/2009 1:41:37 AM   
Forwarn45

 

Posts: 718
Joined: 4/26/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead
Yes.

Any unit that has a negative Land Attack national capability offset will not contribute to obtaining (or blocking) CA.

If you do obtain CA (via other units), the negative LA offset units still benefit from it.



This sounds good. What about on the other side - can minor Axis units count toward preventing the Allies from getting the CA bonus? If you have 2 German tanks and 1 Italian tanks for example, would the Russians need 3 tanks or only 2 to get the CA bonus? Or if you have one of each unit (infantry, tank, tacair, and artillery) - would it matter that one was Italian?

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Gary Grigsby's World at War: A World Divided >> RE: Axis Minors force pool Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.195