Mountain hexes . . . (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command: World War I



Message


stockwellpete -> Mountain hexes . . . (1/22/2021 3:11:23 PM)

Are they too benign in the game? Thousands of soldiers froze to death up them in WW1 - the Caucasus, the Alps, the Balkans. In the winter months should there be a chance of a "typhus" or "mutiny" type event for units that are on purely mountainous hexes? Maybe Mountain Corps would be exempt? Perhaps the event could fire every winter month with moderate effect each time so that an attritional cost is introduced?

In addition, cavalry, artillery and tanks should not be able to enter purely mountainous hexes. If there is a road (a valley) then fine, otherwise no.

In the Editor there are "mountain" hexes and "high mountain" hexes, but there are no "impassable mountain" hexes, Should there be?




Chernobyl -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (1/22/2021 6:01:00 PM)

Perhaps in combination with winter weather mountain units in supply less than X could have a 10% chance to take 1 strength damage at the end of your opponent's turn.




stockwellpete -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (1/22/2021 6:15:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

Perhaps in combination with winter weather mountain units in supply less than X could have a 10% chance to take 1 strength damage at the end of your opponent's turn.


Yes, that is a good idea.




OldCrowBalthazor -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (1/22/2021 6:31:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Are they too benign in the game? Thousands of soldiers froze to death up them in WW1 - the Caucasus, the Alps, the Balkans. In the winter months should there be a chance of a "typhus" or "mutiny" type event for units that are on purely mountainous hexes? Maybe Mountain Corps would be exempt? Perhaps the event could fire every winter month with moderate effect each time so that an attritional cost is introduced?

In addition, cavalry, artillery and tanks should not be able to enter purely mountainous hexes. If there is a road (a valley) then fine, otherwise no.

In the Editor there are "mountain" hexes and "high mountain" hexes, but there are no "impassable mountain" hexes, Should there be?


You know, I've been thinking about this subject more and more while tinkering with the Trento edit thing. Also, I remember reading your consternation about tanks rolling through the Alps :)

I don't think Tanks should be allowed at all unless its on a road, which implies a valley at least. The Cavalry maybe just on the regular mountains (most of the cavalry is just mounted infantry anyway) but not on the high mountain hexes.

Interestingly, since we've been placing 'High Mountain' tiles on the Alpine Front project, and I started moving units around and on them..I was wondering if those hexes should be restricted to Mountain Corps only. That would give even more value to both this special unit and the high mountain location.

In some old school wargames, Mountain Troops would be invulnerable to attack or have a big defense and/or attack modifier against non-Mountain type units. Anyway...its just a musing, but if something like that could be adapted, it could give even more flavor to mountain operations in general.




Pocus -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (1/23/2021 3:00:52 AM)

Definitively a +1 for no tanks in mountains, unless road.




stockwellpete -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (1/23/2021 11:33:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

Interestingly, since we've been placing 'High Mountain' tiles on the Alpine Front project, and I started moving units around and on them..I was wondering if those hexes should be restricted to Mountain Corps only. That would give even more value to both this special unit and the high mountain location.



Yes, that is another interesting angle. I have been looking at the map in the game and the Swiss Alps seem to be the only area near the main theatres that is classified "high mountains" at the moment. So for your idea to work I think it would mean identifying other hexes that could be classified in the same way - in the Balkans, the Caucasus and so on. The first thing I have done is look in Wikipedia to find a list of the highest mountains of each country in Europe (2020 borders) and it is quite interesting . . .

Albania - Mt Korab, 9068 feet
Armenia - Aragats, 13,419
Austria - Grossglochner, 12461
Bosnia - Muglic, 7828
Bulgaria - Musala, 9596
Croatia - Dinara, 6007
France - Blanc, 15778
Greece - Olympus, 9570
Italy - Bianco, 15,778
Kosovo - Velika Rudoka, 8720
Montenegro - Zia Kolata, 8314
Poland - Rysy, 8199
Russia - Elbrus, 18510
Spain - Teide, 12198
Switzerland - Dufourspitze, 15203
Turkey - Ararat, 16854
Ukraine - Hoverla, 6762


You can see there that there are some mountains of a similar size to the Swiss Alps, e.g. in Turkey, Armenia, Austria and France and there are others approaching 10,000 feet. They may not all be in big mountain ranges, of course, but it does suggest there could be more "high mountain" hexes on the map. It all depends on what the dividing line between "mountains" and "high mountains" is. In terms of moving cavalry and artillery up mountains (tanks are a definite no unless using a road), is altitude the only factor to consider? For example, some mountains are more "rugged" (i.e. difficult to traverse) than others




OldCrowBalthazor -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (1/23/2021 12:01:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

Interestingly, since we've been placing 'High Mountain' tiles on the Alpine Front project, and I started moving units around and on them..I was wondering if those hexes should be restricted to Mountain Corps only. That would give even more value to both this special unit and the high mountain location.



Yes, that is another interesting angle. I have been looking at the map in the game and the Swiss Alps seem to be the only area near the main theatres that is classified "high mountains" at the moment. So for your idea to work I think it would mean identifying other hexes that could be classified in the same way - in the Balkans, the Caucasus and so on. The first thing I have done is look in Wikipedia to find a list of the highest mountains of each country in Europe (2020 borders) and it is quite interesting . . .

Albania - Mt Korab, 9068 feet
Armenia - Aragats, 13,419
Austria - Grossglochner, 12461
Bosnia - Muglic, 7828
Bulgaria - Musala, 9596
Croatia - Dinara, 6007
France - Blanc, 15778
Greece - Olympus, 9570
Italy - Bianco, 15,778
Kosovo - Velika Rudoka, 8720
Montenegro - Zia Kolata, 8314
Poland - Rysy, 8199
Russia - Elbrus, 18510
Spain - Teide, 12198
Switzerland - Dufourspitze, 15203
Turkey - Ararat, 16854
Ukraine - 6762


You can see there that there are some mountains of a similar size to the Swiss Alps, e.g. in Turkey, Armenia, Austria and France and there are others approaching 10,000 feet. They may not all be in big mountain ranges, of course, but it does suggest there could be more "high mountain" hexes on the map. It all depends on what the dividing line between "mountains" and "high mountains" is. In terms of moving cavalry and artillery up mountains (tanks are a definite no unless using a road), is altitude the only factor to consider? For example, some mountains are more "rugged" (i.e. difficult to traverse) than others




Was thinking on the same lines. [8D]

Thanks for the list..I will use it in the future. (Currently my spare time is slowly running through the turns for the Trento-Alpine Front edit)

The map will certainly look more realistic too...our Alpine Front one does!

Edit: I live in the Cascade Mountains, some parts of which would be considered high mountains, but the greater portion mountains or hills. There are areas of 'hills' around here that I would consider to be nearly impassable due to the roughness of the terrain, and 'mountains' in game where cavalry would have no problem at all to traverse.

So, it's an interesting problem of what defines which kind of terrain denotes which for movement and combat purposes. Altitude, however, would probably be the best factor when considering a terrain type for a hex (tile) in this game.




mdsmall -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (1/23/2021 3:31:26 PM)

A different question that occurs to me reading this interesting thread is: historically, what exactly made mountain troops better able to fight in mountains? Was it equipment? Fitness? Training? Recruitment from mountain regions? Perhaps the combat benefit they currently receive in the game is too modest compared to their actual capabilities versus regular troops in mountain terrain. It would be good to know what made them different from other formations in most WW1 era armies.




stockwellpete -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (1/23/2021 4:04:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

A different question that occurs to me reading this interesting thread is: historically, what exactly made mountain troops better able to fight in mountains? Was it equipment? Fitness? Training? Recruitment from mountain regions? Perhaps the combat benefit they currently receive in the game is too modest compared to their actual capabilities versus regular troops in mountain terrain. It would be good to know what made them different from other formations in most WW1 era armies.


A part of the answer is provided here in this Wikipedia page about the Austrian mountain troops. Their equipment is very important . . .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial-Royal_Mountain_Troops




stockwellpete -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (3/1/2021 3:45:33 PM)

Can I just ask either Bill or Hubert to explain the current thinking behind mountain hexes in the game? At the moment we have "mountains" and "high mountains" so where is the dividing line between these two categories? 10,000 feet (in old money)? And what about mountains that might be only 5,000 feet but are extremely difficult to traverse? These might be called "rugged mountains", I suppose.

I have been looking at the Caucasus and there are a number of mountain ranges identified on the maps that are over 10,000 feet (e.g. Mount Ararat, which is marked on the map). I have started to edit the map for my mod and these changes are much less intrusive to gameplay than, say, in the Alto Adige on the Italian front, or Mount Lovcen in Montenegro, because the troop density in these areas is not so high.

Are you interested at all in modelling the mountains in a bit more detail in the game? And maybe raising the profile of mountain troops in the process? I think there might be a reasonable case for having mountain detachments in the main campaign.




BillRunacre -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (3/2/2021 7:25:36 PM)

The base map was designed about 5-6 years ago, and took about a year to do, and I don't remember all my thought processes from the time, but I think I was mainly adding High Mountains when the areas are (generally) snow covered, as that's how they will appear graphically, rather than following a rule about altitude.




stockwellpete -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (3/3/2021 8:23:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

The base map was designed about 5-6 years ago, and took about a year to do, and I don't remember all my thought processes from the time, but I think I was mainly adding High Mountains when the areas are (generally) snow covered, as that's how they will appear graphically, rather than following a rule about altitude.


OK thanks.

I take it then that you are not interested in changing the way mountains are represented in the game? Some impassable hexes; a greater role for mountain units; and attritional weather effects? And that we will have to mod these ourselves?

I also think that a very simple change in the right direction would be to increase the transport penalty for both types of mountains by +1.




BillRunacre -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (3/3/2021 12:40:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete
I take it then that you are not interested in changing the way mountains are represented in the game?


I do read all the suggestions posted on the forums and many do end up in the game, it all depends on many factors including the time to implement them.

Bearing in mind that any changes made would almost certainly have to be implemented in at least one of the WWII games too, and each of those contains 6 campaigns where the changes would need to be made, it could be quite a bit of work.

Some changes are very quick and easy to make, but others can be far more time consuming and/or require engine changes, and bug fixes or gambit fixes (e.g. Montenegro) come first.

All I can really say is that if you make proposals and post them here for others to comment on and contribute to, then there's a chance they may end up in the game. [:)]




stockwellpete -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (3/3/2021 1:01:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

I do read all the suggestions posted on the forums and many do end up in the game, it all depends on many factors including the time to implement them.

Bearing in mind that any changes made would almost certainly have to be implemented in at least one of the WWII games too, and each of those contains 6 campaigns where the changes would need to be made, it could be quite a bit of work.

Some changes are very quick and easy to make, but others can be far more time consuming and/or require engine changes, and bug fixes or gambit fixes (e.g. Montenegro) come first.

All I can really say is that if you make proposals and post them here for others to comment on and contribute to, then there's a chance they may end up in the game. [:)]



Yes, that's fine, Bill. Until recently I didn't appreciate that any changes had to be compatible with the WW2 games as well.

I take the view that some of the terrain features could be "beefed up" a bit. Especially mountains, but maybe marshes and some rivers too. Just increasing the movement costs in my mod helps a bit, although I think there are other more complex and interesting things that might be considered (including attritional losses in winter in mountain regions, in the same way that you have typhus outbreaks in the game right now). I am not sure if things like that would require engine changes as some are just changing numerical values and others are using mechanisms that already function in the game.




Hubert Cater -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (3/3/2021 1:29:10 PM)

Hi Stockwellpete,

Yeah, it's a fine balance between giving one game exactly what is needed versus having a lot of consistency between games so that players can seamlessly go from one game to the other.

Of course we don't have to do that, and we don't always do it, but if we can keep the games as consistent as possible without too many special rules that differentiate between games, then on the average we find that this works out quite well overall as a strength for the series.

Hubert




Hubert Cater -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (3/3/2021 1:59:33 PM)

One thing I can add/confirm here, e.g. an example of implementing a specific change for the WWI game only, will be that tanks will no longer be able to enter mountain hexes unless along a road for the next update [:)]




stockwellpete -> RE: Mountain hexes . . . (3/3/2021 2:48:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

One thing I can add/confirm here, e.g. an example of implementing a specific change for the WWI game only, will be that tanks will no longer be able to enter mountain hexes unless along a road for the next update [:)]


[&o]




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.101563E-02