Gamey or legit tactics?

Matrix Games Forums

Command Ops gets a Massive Update!

Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41

War in the East: Lost Battles is here!

Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! Let's Play video

Lost Battles Scenario Manual excerpts available!

A sneak peek from Allied Corps!

Harpoon 3 ANWs Free Ultimate Update!

All good Deals always come in threes

Distant Worlds: Shadows Approaches!

Lost Battles AAR: Moscow 41

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Gamey or legit tactics?

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Gamey or legit tactics?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 10:47:04 AM

sanderz

Posts: 332
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline

Hi

I am playing as the Japanese versus the AI and i am wondering if the following are OK or if considered a bit gamey:-

1) Ship upgrades : i have been changing repairing ships back to pierside to free up repair yard space

2) Troops in the territory near the Russian border (am at work at the moment and can�t recall the HQ) : Can you move these troops into the main fight against China without paying PPs. I haven�t been doing this (just assumed you couldn�t), however reading some AARs some seem to have a lot more troops in China than I do. (I am aware there are garrison requirements)

many thanks

PS - any other things like this?

Post #: 1

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 10:50:23 AM

Puhis

Posts: 1627
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

1) Everyone does that.

2) Usually people pay PPs to move units across borders. AI doesn't care, but do you really need extra help vs. AI?

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 2

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 10:51:46 AM

tigercub

Posts: 1350
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: chiang mai ,thailand
Status: offline

1. not gamey many times and a lot of time ship were repaired that way but it slower anyway.

2.not sure

_____________________________

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 3

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 10:59:28 AM

sanderz

Posts: 332
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline

thanks guys

i'm trying not to get into bad habits playing the ai and only use those that would be acceptable in a PBEM game

with regard to paying PPs to move units into China are you saying this is a very common house rule?

thanks

(in reply to tigercub)

Post #: 4

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 11:28:39 AM

fcharton

Posts: 729
Joined: 10/4/2010
From: Nemours, France
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz
with regard to paying PPs to move units into China are you saying this is a very common house rule?

It is pretty common, but by no means a standard. You will find many PBEM games without this restriction.

Usually, it is formulated as : restricted troops cannot cross borders (maybe with a few exceptions for Thai units), and it cuts both ways. You can't move the Kwantung army into China (and you will be short of artillery, tanks, and engineers in China) or the China Expeditionnary force into Indochina and Burma. On the other hand, the Allies can't retreat Chinese troops into Burma, or move restricted Commonwealth troops into Burma.

Francois

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 5

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 12:26:44 PM

Empire101

Posts: 1896
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

thanks guys

i'm trying not to get into bad habits playing the ai and only use those that would be acceptable in a PBEM game

with regard to paying PPs to move units into China are you saying this is a very common house rule?

thanks

If you get into the habit of paying for your units, it makes it much easier to play against a human Allied opponent who wishes to impose this more than reasonable HR to the game.
I always apply it to my games whether the Allied player wants it or not.

_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy. - Michael Burleigh

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 6

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 12:36:18 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 4422
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcharton

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz
with regard to paying PPs to move units into China are you saying this is a very common house rule?

It is pretty common, but by no means a standard. You will find many PBEM games without this restriction.

Usually, it is formulated as : restricted troops cannot cross borders (maybe with a few exceptions for Thai units), and it cuts both ways. You can't move the Kwantung army into China (and you will be short of artillery, tanks, and engineers in China) or the China Expeditionnary force into Indochina and Burma. On the other hand, the Allies can't retreat Chinese troops into Burma, or move restricted Commonwealth troops into Burma.

Francois

+1

I only play against AI and always use the HR. Of course, my opponent blithely ignores all of our HR's.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to fcharton)

Post #: 7

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 3:43:41 PM

witpqs

Posts: 12396
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

Against the AI of course you can do what you want, but against a human opponent:

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi

I am playing as the Japanese versus the AI and i am wondering if the following are OK or if considered a bit gamey:-

1) Ship upgrades : i have been changing repairing ships back to pierside to free up repair yard space
I do not do this as I consider it gamey. The answers above are the first that I have heard "everyone does that." My view is that the upgrade requires a shipyard of a certain size and that implies it should be carried out there, not just triggered or started there. When you play a human consult with your opponent to gain a mutual understanding.
2) Troops in the territory near the Russian border (am at work at the moment and can�t recall the HQ) : Can you move these troops into the main fight against China without paying PPs. I haven�t been doing this (just assumed you couldn�t), however reading some AARs some seem to have a lot more troops in China than I do. (I am aware there are garrison requirements)
Most opponents would consider this gamey, but it depends on the agreemnt with your opponent and certainly any specific HRs. Many of us restrict ourselves on some things without explicit HRs, like your first question above.
many thanks

PS - any other things like this?

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 8

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 4:50:52 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 6143
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi

I am playing as the Japanese versus the AI and i am wondering if the following are OK or if considered a bit gamey:-

1) Ship upgrades : i have been changing repairing ships back to pierside to free up repair yard space

2) Troops in the territory near the Russian border (am at work at the moment and can�t recall the HQ) : Can you move these troops into the main fight against China without paying PPs. I haven�t been doing this (just assumed you couldn�t), however reading some AARs some seem to have a lot more troops in China than I do. (I am aware there are garrison requirements)

1. I have done real life ship upgrades and not only is what you suggest not "gamey" (I hate that word), but it is common in real navies. The requirement to have a certain size shipyard to trigger an upgrade is so the shop facilities and skilled trades are present, not drydocks. Unless hull work or work which compromises watertight integrity is planned any work can usually be done pierside if crane services are there. Certainly AA and sensor work can be. The same yard workers who would work in drydock simply walk down the pier and board the vessel to do tthe job. The upgrade can't be done on some remote island without the skilled workforce, but very few of the upgrades in the game would in real life require a drydock.

2. I would never play a game with HRs, although out of all the standard set this rule is the one with the most reasonable dev-level underpinnings. Border code was a feature set never finished. But as has been said here it works pro and con for both players, and the Allies can lose all of China and still handily win the game. Every move has an opportunity cost.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 9

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 5:05:18 PM

witpqs

Posts: 12396
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

1. I have done real life ship upgrades and not only is what you suggest not "gamey" (I hate that word), but it is common in real navies. The requirement to have a certain size shipyard to trigger an upgrade is so the shop facilities and skilled trades are present, not drydocks. Unless hull work or work which compromises watertight integrity is planned any work can usually be done pierside if crane services are there. Certainly AA and sensor work can be. The same yard workers who would work in drydock simply walk down the pier and board the vessel to do tthe job. The upgrade can't be done on some remote island without the skilled workforce, but very few of the upgrades in the game would in real life require a drydock.

I appreciate hearing this, Moose. I can modify my play on that point.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 10

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 5:29:12 PM

Empire101

Posts: 1896
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

But as has been said here it works pro and con for both players, and the Allies can lose all of China and still handily win the game. Every move has an opportunity cost.

I've never seen one of my opponents come back from the dead after the loss of China....Auto Victory kicks in and the Allied player usually comes to the 'Negotiating Table'.....

_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy. - Michael Burleigh

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 11

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 5:43:52 PM

SpitfireIX

Posts: 263
Joined: 1/9/2003
From: Fort Wayne IN USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

1. I have done real life ship upgrades and not only is what you suggest not "gamey" (I hate that word), but it is common in real navies. The requirement to have a certain size shipyard to trigger an upgrade is so the shop facilities and skilled trades are present, not drydocks. Unless hull work or work which compromises watertight integrity is planned any work can usually be done pierside if crane services are there. Certainly AA and sensor work can be. The same yard workers who would work in drydock simply walk down the pier and board the vessel to do tthe job. The upgrade can't be done on some remote island without the skilled workforce, but very few of the upgrades in the game would in real life require a drydock.

And those that would are the ones that cause damage that requires a drydock in the game.

_____________________________

"I know Japanese. He is very bad. And tricky. But we Americans too smart. We catch him and give him hell."

--Benny Sablan, crewman, USS Enterprise 12/7/41

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 12

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 6:02:58 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 6143
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

1. I have done real life ship upgrades and not only is what you suggest not "gamey" (I hate that word), but it is common in real navies. The requirement to have a certain size shipyard to trigger an upgrade is so the shop facilities and skilled trades are present, not drydocks. Unless hull work or work which compromises watertight integrity is planned any work can usually be done pierside if crane services are there. Certainly AA and sensor work can be. The same yard workers who would work in drydock simply walk down the pier and board the vessel to do tthe job. The upgrade can't be done on some remote island without the skilled workforce, but very few of the upgrades in the game would in real life require a drydock.

I appreciate hearing this, Moose. I can modify my play on that point.

For further info, in the USN the type of upgrades seen in the game are done under two "regimes"--SHIPALTS and ORDALTS. The relevant command level, usually NAVSEA but sometimes a specialized command such as that for SSBNs, issues the package and specs and schedules around operational commitments to do the work. Sometimes it's depot level (tenders and shoreside IMAs), and sometimes it's shipyard. Very often "tiger teams" of senior shipyard wokers travel to the ship and do the work in a rapid manner while pierside in a port with limited shop support. We had all of our missile compartment middle level berthing ripped out and reinstalled in a new configuration, down to bunk lights and curtains, by a tiger team from Newport News Shipbuilding while alongside the pier in Port Canaveral, Fla. Took them less than 48 hours to strip the area down to hull ribs and build it back. The most efficient team I have ever seen build anything in any environment. And really nice guys too. They did some unfunded side jobs in the galley just for some off-the-books chow; they were almost all retired fleet sailors.

SHIPALTS and ORDALTS can be something as simple as changing electrical connectors because the old ones deteriorated faster than the prime contractor claimed up to installing a new defense system or a whole new sonar.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 13

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 6:03:40 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 6143
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

But as has been said here it works pro and con for both players, and the Allies can lose all of China and still handily win the game. Every move has an opportunity cost.

I've never seen one of my opponents come back from the dead after the loss of China....Auto Victory kicks in and the Allied player usually comes to the 'Negotiating Table'.....

Talk to Greyjoy.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Empire101)

Post #: 14

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 6:05:33 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 6143
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpitfireIX

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

1. I have done real life ship upgrades and not only is what you suggest not "gamey" (I hate that word), but it is common in real navies. The requirement to have a certain size shipyard to trigger an upgrade is so the shop facilities and skilled trades are present, not drydocks. Unless hull work or work which compromises watertight integrity is planned any work can usually be done pierside if crane services are there. Certainly AA and sensor work can be. The same yard workers who would work in drydock simply walk down the pier and board the vessel to do tthe job. The upgrade can't be done on some remote island without the skilled workforce, but very few of the upgrades in the game would in real life require a drydock.

And those that would are the ones that cause damage that requires a drydock in the game.

I haven't done a complete census. I have seen radar and AA upgrades default into Shipyard on the first day of the upgrade. Neither needs a drydock.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to SpitfireIX)

Post #: 15

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 6:21:01 PM

SpitfireIX

Posts: 263
Joined: 1/9/2003
From: Fort Wayne IN USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I haven't done a complete census. I have seen radar and AA upgrades default into Shipyard on the first day of the upgrade. Neither needs a drydock.

I should have clarified what I meant. I was trying to say that some upgrades cause damage that can only be repaired at a shipyard (or in some minor cases, more slowly by an AR).

_____________________________

"I know Japanese. He is very bad. And tricky. But we Americans too smart. We catch him and give him hell."

--Benny Sablan, crewman, USS Enterprise 12/7/41

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 16

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/15/2012 8:20:17 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 6143
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpitfireIX

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I haven't done a complete census. I have seen radar and AA upgrades default into Shipyard on the first day of the upgrade. Neither needs a drydock.

I should have clarified what I meant. I was trying to say that some upgrades cause damage that can only be repaired at a shipyard (or in some minor cases, more slowly by an AR).

Oh, OK. I completely agree. Where speed is changed and main engines need to accesssed, usually endurance upgrades (new tanks), and very major superstructure alts you'd need a drydock. Probably a lot of the carrier stuff too just for height. In WWII it was fairly normal for drydocks to have the major overhead cranes and piers less so. (Building yards an exception.)

I think the devs did a fantastic job inside the engine of stratifying mode capabilities and making drydocks a bottleneck as they should be. But I also think a lot of players who don't put a lot of attention into ship repair underutilize their assets by just sticking everything in the drydock and walking away. Even ship's force/readiness repairs have a major role in the overall models. Just because it will go in the drydock doesn't mean it should.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 12/15/2012 8:21:22 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to SpitfireIX)

Post #: 17

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/16/2012 12:06:00 AM

dr.hal

Posts: 1358
Joined: 6/3/2006
Status: offline

If an upgrade requires the compromising of water tight integrity of a vessel, such as removing under water torpedoes (something WW1 era BBs had) then I would expect that there would be "flotation" damage that would require drydocking to fix. However I think it is to be expected that most upgrades are above the waterline and extracting the ship from the "shipyard" status is more than realistic, it is expected. Bullwinkle, you mentioned NAVSEA etc. Did these organizational aspects of the navy exist at the time the game covers? My understanding is that the Naval Ship Systems Command was established in 1966 replacing the Navy's Bureau of Ships (BuShips)which was established in 1940. But I'm thinking you are using modern terms to describe WW2 organizations. Hal

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 18

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/16/2012 1:54:30 AM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 6143
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

If an upgrade requires the compromising of water tight integrity of a vessel, such as removing under water torpedoes (something WW1 era BBs had) then I would expect that there would be "flotation" damage that would require drydocking to fix. However I think it is to be expected that most upgrades are above the waterline and extracting the ship from the "shipyard" status is more than realistic, it is expected. Bullwinkle, you mentioned NAVSEA etc. Did these organizational aspects of the navy exist at the time the game covers? My understanding is that the Naval Ship Systems Command was established in 1966 replacing the Navy's Bureau of Ships (BuShips)which was established in 1940. But I'm thinking you are using modern terms to describe WW2 organizations. Hal

Yep, BuShips in WWII. I think there was a BuOrd too. And a BuMed and a BuPers and others. The BUs were mostly in the Main Navy building in D.C. on the Mall. My dad took me there when he was up on Navy business in the 1960s. They were falling apart and mostly had been vacated out to Crystal City with new names.

Some organizational structures in the USN were born during WWII and survive. The type commander structure (SurfLant/Pc, SubLant/Pac, AirLant/Pac) on the non-operations side of the house for example. Most people who watch movies think fleet structures do everything, but in reality they do very little. Most of the Navy is on the non-ops side of the house. Building, fixing, arming, training, recruiting.

An alteration to a class would have come out of D.C. from the Bureau structure. It wouldn't be decided by the CO, or locally by a yard CO, or even by someone like Nimitz or his staff. Too much real naval architecture work by the slipstick boys needed.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 19

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/17/2012 9:57:00 AM

sanderz

Posts: 332
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline

A couple more questions....

What about the troops that assult Hong Kong that start in China? I have left them in China but they belong to the Southern Army and haven't paid any PPs.

What if i pay PPs but transfer the unit to say the Southern command as opposed to the China command - so technically i have paid the PPs but can then transfer anywhere after that for free.

As a more general point and relating to play balance - in the original game design where it was decided what the daily PP would be, what sort of assumptions were made about use of PP i.e. are things getting out of balance with the way the game is evolving?

Is this part of the game (HQ's/PPs) ever likely to be patched so resolve these issues?

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 20

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/17/2012 11:48:49 AM

Puhis

Posts: 1627
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

A couple more questions....

What about the troops that assult Hong Kong that start in China? I have left them in China but they belong to the Southern Army and haven't paid any PPs.

What if i pay PPs but transfer the unit to say the Southern command as opposed to the China command - so technically i have paid the PPs but can then transfer anywhere after that for free.

People pay PPs to buy out restricted units. It would be totally silly to use PPs to put units under restricted command.

This game does not have realistic command structure for land units. Unit HQs does not matter at all. I believe everyone playing Japan is using Southern Army HQ when they buy out land units, no matter where they are going to use those units.

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 21

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/17/2012 1:00:14 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 6143
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

A couple more questions....

What about the troops that assult Hong Kong that start in China? I have left them in China but they belong to the Southern Army and haven't paid any PPs.

What if i pay PPs but transfer the unit to say the Southern command as opposed to the China command - so technically i have paid the PPs but can then transfer anywhere after that for free.

As a more general point and relating to play balance - in the original game design where it was decided what the daily PP would be, what sort of assumptions were made about use of PP i.e. are things getting out of balance with the way the game is evolving?

Is this part of the game (HQ's/PPs) ever likely to be patched so resolve these issues?

The answer you got on buying out was good. Once you pay PPs you own the unit and can do anything you like. Don't pay PPs to make the unit less capable.

The daily PP budget for the Allies is designed to make decisions difficult but doable. You won't have enough PPs for many months to do everything, and in the first six months you won't feel you have enough to do anything. Buying out a whole division means eating beans for many weeks. But late in the war playing the AI I've had thousands in the bank unused.

I played one AI GC where I used the editor to up the daily budget from 50 to 70. It was far too easy. But since you can set PPs to whatever you like there's no need to patch anything. I would argue that going to maybe 40/day after you've played one full AI GC would help improve the game for the Allied human player.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 22

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/17/2012 2:10:43 PM

sanderz

Posts: 332
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

People pay PPs to buy out restricted units. It would be totally silly to use PPs to put units under restricted command.

ok - i think i may have missed some of the finer points of this

so, as long as a unit is not in a "restricted" command i can move it anywhere and not be considered gamey (i was tieing commands, whether restricted or not, to specific areas and paying PPs to leave the area

when i'm next in game i'll have a closer look at the commands and figure it out

thanks to all for the comments

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 23

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/17/2012 3:31:53 PM

dr.hal

Posts: 1358
Joined: 6/3/2006
Status: offline

In the air war, the command actually means something from what I understand. Those under the same command have a better chance at coordination. Other than that, I don't know of any direct advantage there is for having troops all under the same command. If others advantages exist, I invite folks to post them, we all need to learn the game! Thanks, Hal

PS, of course to combine divided units, they all need to be under the same command, sorry, forgot about that one!

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 24

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/18/2012 2:33:48 AM

linrom

Posts: 30
Joined: 2/20/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

A couple more questions....

What about the troops that assult Hong Kong that start in China? I have left them in China but they belong to the Southern Army and haven't paid any PPs.

What if i pay PPs but transfer the unit to say the Southern command as opposed to the China command - so technically i have paid the PPs but can then transfer anywhere after that for free.

People pay PPs to buy out restricted units. It would be totally silly to use PPs to put units under restricted command.

This game does not have realistic command structure for land units. Unit HQs does not matter at all. I believe everyone playing Japan is using Southern Army HQ when they buy out land units, no matter where they are going to use those units.

Southern Command Units in China

The 38th Division attached to Southern Command, participated in the invasion of Sumatra, Java and Timor after Hong Kong. It consists of 228,229 and 230 Regiments. The 229 is the main unit to invade Palembang. The 230 was the main unit invading Java, east of Batavia. The 228 went to Timor. Then it went to Guadalcanal. It is one of the key Japanese divisions in the war.

The artillery units in Hong Kong go to Bataan in February, 1942 after 48 Div is removed to get ready to invade Java.

The 21st in Shanghai sends infantry group to Bataan in late February 1942.

Southern Command Units in Japan

The 4th Div in Osaka gets send to Bataan while 2nd Div units go to invade Java, Merak.

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 25

RE: Gamey or legit tactics? - 12/18/2012 4:56:31 AM

gradenko_2000

Posts: 568
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz
ok - i think i may have missed some of the finer points of this

so, as long as a unit is not in a "restricted" command i can move it anywhere and not be considered gamey (i was tieing commands, whether restricted or not, to specific areas and paying PPs to leave the area

when i'm next in game i'll have a closer look at the commands and figure it out

thanks to all for the comments

That's generally correct - some units are placed in restricted commands as a way of preventing them from being shipping willy-nilly across the Pacific. PPs are then spent to place some units into unrestricted commands, so that they can be moved elsewhere, and then the strategy comes in the form of which unit do you "buy out", when do you do it, and where do you send the unit to once you do.

There's some historical and realism impetus towards placing units in cohesive commands, but no real gameplay mechanics to support it if you don't want to.

(in reply to sanderz)

Post #: 26