Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Oddities

 
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] >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Oddities Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Oddities - 2/4/2017 8:03:56 PM   
gravyface_

 

Posts: 140
Joined: 4/21/2007
Status: offline
Tanks, heavy or otherwise, seem woefully inadequate, with limited usefulness unless in a clean-up role against weakened units with no entrenchment value. I get it, kind of, but I think I'd rather spend money on a good ol' Army or Tactical Bomber (see below).

Tactical bombers, on the other hand, are bringers of pain, on a scale that's almost comical. I honestly think I could take Mother Russia with Garrisons and Tactical Bombers, they're so effective at level 3 and higher.

What's with the surprise-but-not-surprised behaviour? In other games of this ilk, you generally get a surprise penalty moving into a hex occupied by an enemy unit, not adjacent to it.
Post #: 1
RE: Oddities - 2/6/2017 4:21:41 PM   
William049

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 1/18/2017
Status: offline
I totally agree. The best use for Axis tanks, I have found, is to encircle units or groups of units to cut off supply.
They need to be "punched up" a bit in attack value.

(in reply to gravyface_)
Post #: 2
RE: Oddities - 2/6/2017 4:48:52 PM   
KorutZelva

 

Posts: 56
Joined: 2/4/2017
Status: offline
Actually maybe we needs lower defense stats across the board?

I mean, it feels like WW 1 at time.

(in reply to William049)
Post #: 3
RE: Oddities - 2/6/2017 4:59:45 PM   
Bylandt11


Posts: 43
Joined: 9/19/2011
Status: offline
I don't agree at all. I don't know how other people use their tanks, but for me they are the spearhead of each attack. They move fast, have two attacks and can smash most of the opposition. Entrenchment lowers their damage, but that goes for all atackers.

(in reply to KorutZelva)
Post #: 4
RE: Oddities - 2/6/2017 10:16:33 PM   
oxford_guy


Posts: 321
Joined: 7/1/2012
From: Oxford, United Kingdom
Status: offline
Tanks are not meant to be that powerful in non-clear terrain, surely? Tac bombers do seem a little overpowered at higher tech levels, though perhaps less so if the opponent has upgraded the AA capabilities of their units?

(in reply to Bylandt11)
Post #: 5
RE: Oddities - 2/6/2017 11:31:03 PM   
Seminole


Posts: 1472
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline
quote:

The best use for Axis tanks, I have found, is to encircle units or groups of units to cut off supply.


"Der Motor des Panzers ist ebenso seine Waffe wie die Kanone."

(in reply to William049)
Post #: 6
RE: Oddities - 2/7/2017 6:21:09 AM   
oxford_guy


Posts: 321
Joined: 7/1/2012
From: Oxford, United Kingdom
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Seminole

quote:

The best use for Axis tanks, I have found, is to encircle units or groups of units to cut off supply.


"Der Motor des Panzers ist ebenso seine Waffe wie die Kanone."


https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Heinz_Guderian

(in reply to Seminole)
Post #: 7
RE: Oddities - 2/7/2017 6:58:34 AM   
Mrslobodan

 

Posts: 286
Joined: 11/29/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gravyface_
What's with the surprise-but-not-surprised behaviour? In other games of this ilk, you generally get a surprise penalty moving into a hex occupied by an enemy unit, not adjacent to it.


Exactly! If this would change maybe axis players could reach objectives on time...

In many cases it's impossible to move forward because you know there will be an enemy but you can't move up to it because you will be "surprised".... It feels so wrong and really hinders ones ability to use spearheads correctly...
You basically just keep running into "surprise walls"... The frustrating thing is when you know there is an enemy but you will still get surprised...

So I completely agree, "surprise"/ambushes should only happen if you actually move into the same hex as an enemy.

< Message edited by Mrslobodan -- 2/7/2017 6:59:56 AM >

(in reply to gravyface_)
Post #: 8
RE: Oddities - 2/7/2017 1:07:18 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 5678
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
I don't like the surprise mechanic either, but we can't move into enemy occupied hexes so I don't know why that is being discussed ?
Again not defending surprises, but aren't we supposed to use our recon assets to uncover these hidden units ?

Gameplay-wise, these surprise attacks kinda ruined the game for me back at the beginning. As Slobo put it so well they stop advances, plus leave the most important units exposed to quick elimination as a unit that is surprised takes casualties and ends it movement [leaving it prime for counterattack during the opponents turn]. So I went into the editor and gave HQ's a spotting range of 6, and Carriers and Capital Ships that had spotter planes also a spotting range of 6. This works fairly well on land, but as spotting does not occur until a unit moves it does not work so well at sea [with a spotting range of 6 units can move 5 hexes at at time, which is kind of silly].

I feel that the real culprit is the Fog of War, which completely hides most units normally unless they are adjacent, which doesn't seem proper for a strategic game at this scale.

(in reply to Mrslobodan)
Post #: 9
RE: Oddities - 2/7/2017 1:09:34 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8981
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
move close wait andwatch if you dont use all your action points you can move again without a penalty.. its a bug imo

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 10
RE: Oddities - 2/7/2017 2:34:36 PM   
johnvmcnichols

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 1/12/2010
Status: offline
Agreed, I have come to anticipate that EVERY city will have a unit in it on the Russian front. SO I have to tread carefully otherwise every one of my many armored units gets stopped cold. I dont even intend to attack the city, just encircle it.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 11
RE: Oddities - 2/7/2017 4:17:21 PM   
William049

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 1/18/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KorutZelva

Actually maybe we needs lower defense stats across the board?

I mean, it feels like WW 1 at time.


That could be it. It doesn't seem plausible that attacking a Corp with zero entrenchment could result I loss of a third of your tanks. Especially when they are full strength with full upgrades.

(in reply to KorutZelva)
Post #: 12
RE: Oddities - 2/12/2017 2:04:44 AM   
gravyface_

 

Posts: 140
Joined: 4/21/2007
Status: offline
I think units retreating more often or units surrendering (particularly when surrounded) would be a big improvement and far more realistic.

I'm still enjoying the game, but there are definitely some head-scratchers with play balance and mechanics here; it's like it wasn't really play-tested enough while in beta, particularly when there's so much Strategic Command legacy gameplay to lean on.

(in reply to William049)
Post #: 13
RE: Oddities - 2/12/2017 9:11:17 AM   
Mrslobodan

 

Posts: 286
Joined: 11/29/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I don't like the surprise mechanic either, but we can't move into enemy occupied hexes so I don't know why that is being discussed ?


Yeah, but what I mean is if you want to move into hexes covered by FOW, then you can order your units to move there even if there are enemies occupying it. Your unit will of course get stopped in the adjacent hex, and that is what I call a real "surprise". When you thought you could move into a hex but it turns out there was already an enemy unit, so you got surprised and possibly ambushed. Right now you get surprised even if you just move into an empty hex next to an enemy unit, and that is what I think is wrong.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 14
RE: Oddities - 2/12/2017 5:56:03 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 5678
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
Ah, thanks for the clarification Slobo, now I get it [sometimes I am too dense]. But I still think the whole thing is wrong, probably mainly because a land unit can spot an enemy and avoid surprises, but only if it moves one hex at a time. This doesn't make sense to me [a corp or army not knowing of the existence of an enemy corps or army in its path]. And why is only the mover surprised? Why can't the enemy be surprised ? And why does spotting only occur after movement instead of during ? If spotting occurred during movement then a friendly unit could stop when an enemy was spotted, avoiding casualties, lost movement and almost certain elimination.

(in reply to Mrslobodan)
Post #: 15
RE: Oddities - 2/12/2017 6:53:04 PM   
gravyface_

 

Posts: 140
Joined: 4/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Ah, thanks for the clarification Slobo, now I get it [sometimes I am too dense]. But I still think the whole thing is wrong, probably mainly because a land unit can spot an enemy and avoid surprises, but only if it moves one hex at a time. This doesn't make sense to me [a corp or army not knowing of the existence of an enemy corps or army in its path]. And why is only the mover surprised? Why can't the enemy be surprised ? And why does spotting only occur after movement instead of during ? If spotting occurred during movement then a friendly unit could stop when an enemy was spotted, avoiding casualties, lost movement and almost certain elimination.


To me I just don't understand why they're messing with a mechanic that's tried and true, like surprise. I mean, it worked for Panzer General 25 years ago, why mess with it now?

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 16
RE: Oddities - 2/12/2017 7:33:13 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 5678
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

why mess with it now?

Because, it sucks.
quote:

it worked for Panzer General 25 years ago

Human Sacrifice used to work quite well also.


(in reply to gravyface_)
Post #: 17
RE: Oddities - 2/12/2017 8:48:12 PM   
gravyface_

 

Posts: 140
Joined: 4/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

why mess with it now?

Because, it sucks.
quote:

it worked for Panzer General 25 years ago

Human Sacrifice used to work quite well also.




Care to elaborate?

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 18
RE: Oddities - 2/12/2017 11:44:18 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 5678
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
Not really, it takes too long to type and I've said it all before in other posts. But as you ask, I will give a little. Move one hex at a time and after each unit moves it 're-spots', revealing enemy units nearby. Moving two hexes at a time there is no spotting from the first hex, only from the second hex when movement has ended. This isn't logical, and I end up playing by moving each unit one hex at a time, land and naval units. It's tedious and unnecessary.

Each unit on the map should be represented by something. Depending on the level of recon, either a fully revealed unit, a unit showing only the type, or something in between. It's a Strategic game and how are we supposed to plan our strategy if we don't have a clue what we are facing. Plus, if this were the mechanic then no more surprise attacks. YAY !

Just my opinion

(in reply to gravyface_)
Post #: 19
RE: Oddities - 2/13/2017 3:04:46 PM   
Bill Runacre

 

Posts: 1695
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Not really, it takes too long to type and I've said it all before in other posts. But as you ask, I will give a little. Move one hex at a time and after each unit moves it 're-spots', revealing enemy units nearby. Moving two hexes at a time there is no spotting from the first hex, only from the second hex when movement has ended. This isn't logical, and I end up playing by moving each unit one hex at a time, land and naval units. It's tedious and unnecessary.


Just to clarify that it's based not on how far you move, but when you commit a move, so it will re-spot after the first commitment, but not after any subsequent ones.

So if your unit charges off into the hinterland without any prior reconnaissance then it may well collide with a previously unspotted unit. But a more cautious advance, or one that follows a reconnoitered route, won't do so.

_____________________________


(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 20
RE: Oddities - 2/13/2017 4:26:34 PM   
TheBattlefield


Posts: 426
Joined: 6/11/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I feel that the real culprit is the Fog of War, which completely hides most units normally unless they are adjacent, which doesn't seem proper for a strategic game at this scale.

As much as I can understand your position, the depths of intervention of a FOW remains more than just a question of taste, even in strategic games, which are supposed to portray a modern warfare. I personally would find a basic exposure of troops positions on the global map and a reduced fog of the war only to the unit strength and the unit names rather boring. As a result, many strategic/tactical game variants are abandoned without need and are almost inevitably a certain chess feeling. If someone like to play strategy chess, he can also disable the FOW at all. I remember past campaigns of the first SC games, which often started to annoy me when the enemy aircraft carriers had turned into passive satellite reconnaissance by research, and you had play on practically without FOW. My first mod contained a drastic reduction of the passive reconnaissance ranges of air units. But, all just a personal impression.

Actually helpful and probably also strategically meaningful could be a background routine, which work according to the old principle: If you do not want the enemy to know your positions, keep moving! So a (abstracted) gradually passive reconnaissance, which varies with the length of stay in a position. There would be no surprising encounters for such "garrison-like" units.


(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 21
RE: Oddities - 2/13/2017 9:30:37 PM   
bobarossa

 

Posts: 203
Joined: 6/11/2002
From: Columbus, Ohio USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Runacre


quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Not really, it takes too long to type and I've said it all before in other posts. But as you ask, I will give a little. Move one hex at a time and after each unit moves it 're-spots', revealing enemy units nearby. Moving two hexes at a time there is no spotting from the first hex, only from the second hex when movement has ended. This isn't logical, and I end up playing by moving each unit one hex at a time, land and naval units. It's tedious and unnecessary.


Just to clarify that it's based not on how far you move, but when you commit a move, so it will re-spot after the first commitment, but not after any subsequent ones.

So if your unit charges off into the hinterland without any prior reconnaissance then it may well collide with a previously unspotted unit. But a more cautious advance, or one that follows a reconnoitered route, won't do so.

And yet I've tried to move a unit multiple hexes and it chose a path that went through unspotted enemy hexes instead of the ones I owned. It got surprised and damaged. It shouldn't work that way.

(in reply to Bill Runacre)
Post #: 22
RE: Oddities - 2/13/2017 9:54:19 PM   
Patrat


Posts: 82
Joined: 11/17/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Move one hex at a time and after each unit moves it 're-spots', revealing enemy units nearby. Moving two hexes at a time there is no spotting from the first hex, only from the second hex when movement has ended. This isn't logical, and I end up playing by moving each unit one hex at a time, land and naval units. It's tedious and unnecessary.


I agree it is a little tedious having to move units one at a time to avoid being surprised. And it doesn't make a lot of sense that moving your unit one hex at a time is superior to moving multiple hexs, its the same move so why make it tedious?

That being said, I got to say I love the fact that you can be surprised and have no problem with paying a high price if I'm dumb enough to advance without recon. It's like that in real life, even at the high level of strategy this game represents. I just think it shouldn't make a difference whether you move one hex at a time or 4 hexes.

I'm not sure what the solution is, or even if there is one. I guess its a case of I want my cake and eat it too.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 23
RE: Oddities - 2/13/2017 10:03:51 PM   
crispy131313


Posts: 599
Joined: 11/30/2013
Status: offline
One thing which is not mentioned is even when you are certain that you may be "surprised" it is sometimes to your benefit to just march into battle to gain the extra hex in which you wood not have gained by spotting one hex at a time due to movement rules. So there is a trade off by moving multiple hexes at a time.


(in reply to Patrat)
Post #: 24
RE: Oddities - 2/14/2017 12:09:04 AM   
bobarossa

 

Posts: 203
Joined: 6/11/2002
From: Columbus, Ohio USA
Status: offline
This is a strategic level game with corps and armies. I'm sure both of those size units have integral recon that should prevent this stuff. The rational thing would be to create two movement speeds where you can move faster without recon occurring (sort of a strategic movement without rails) and 'advance to contact' movement where recon is constantly occurring. I'm sure I've seen this in other games.

(in reply to crispy131313)
Post #: 25
RE: Oddities - 2/14/2017 1:09:19 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 5678
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

If someone like to play strategy chess, he can also disable the FOW at all.

Both good true points, maybe I am desiring strategy chess without realizing it. I have also played some games with FOW OFF, and while I feel it is better than FOG ON, I don't feel it is necessary to know everything.

quote:

it doesn't make a lot of sense that moving your unit one hex at a time is superior to moving multiple hexes, its the same move so why make it tedious?

Thank you !

quote:

The rational thing would be to create two movement speeds

We already have that - select a unit then left click on it

I have more respect for Bill and The Battlefield than I do for my own opinions/views based on their years of experience with SC. I have not yet been here a year! However, I still feel this needs a little more looking at, so I will move it to a separate thread.

(in reply to bobarossa)
Post #: 26
RE: Oddities - 2/14/2017 7:54:24 PM   
bobarossa

 

Posts: 203
Joined: 6/11/2002
From: Columbus, Ohio USA
Status: offline
Except the second speed is forced march and hurts morale. Let's call it three speeds then.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 27
RE: Oddities - 2/17/2017 2:56:15 PM   
gravyface_

 

Posts: 140
Joined: 4/21/2007
Status: offline
I think some are missing my original point and that is, the surprise event happens when moving into an adjacent hex to an enemy unit, not the hex that the enemy unit occupies. This to me is the oddity, as it goes against conventional mechanics that we've been playing with for years, with no complaint (at least not that I've heard).

(in reply to bobarossa)
Post #: 28
RE: Oddities - 2/18/2017 1:56:53 AM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 1263
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
I've made a bit of an explanatory post behind some of the rules and reasons of what we currently have in game in this thread:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4235840&mpage=1&key=�


(in reply to gravyface_)
Post #: 29
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Oddities Page: [1]
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

0.354