Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Massed paras the new super exploit?

 
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] >> WarPlan >> RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? - 7/1/2020 4:11:49 PM   
RoadWarrior

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 5/8/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

In my game vs Sveint he has done I think 10 para drops in 3 turns. See sveint's AAR. At least I assume it will show all the drops but obviously I can't check. I should also say all credit should go to him for coming up with this plan.

No way of intercepting them unless you have a lot more fighter than the Germans which will mean no ground troops to defend with. IRL paras suffered horribly on landing,even with air supremacy. They had only had very light equipment (in '41 they didn't even drop with their rifles) compared to normal inf but his para units have the same combat strength as my inf xxx and had no way of defending against tanks in the open. Even with air supremacy. IRL drops on bad terrain were impossible but here they can land anywhere at full strength and march 60 miles ( I think 1 hex = 30 miles) and/ before the enemy can react so they can cut off large areas.

I don't want to limit numbers because that doesn't fit with the game so my suggestions are:

1 There always has to be a significant risk of serious loss of cohesion/readiness and also of casualties. That will also stop them being ably to jump every couple of turns

2 No drops into cities, swamp, forest or mountain hexes (too many losses) or beach hexes because most of them would probably drown as drops were rarely accurate. The alternative would be greatly to increase the penalties in 1 for dropping into these terrain types, but that would be more complicated to sort out.

I know that paras aren't much help to a player who is on the defensive, and with some restrictions on where they can jump, there may be a case for reducing the unit cost but that must be the last part of any adjustment.



WAD

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 61
RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? - 7/1/2020 4:29:44 PM   
RoadWarrior

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 5/8/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Richard III

Surely this issue can be fixed with simple House Rules rather then risk breaking other areas of the game by tinkering with the code. Broken WITE being the poster boy for this code tinkering approach to minor gameplay issues.


Just a wild guess that this game is %5 of the code of WitE.

A simple game requires a simple fix that can be played out in a week or 2.

WitE required a game to go a year (RL) before it got to late 43-early 44 at which time a very minor tweak could snowball into a game ending bug.
Which is why it took 5 yrs before they figured out the game was unplayable past 43, logistics system was disaster. WitW has same issues, but have never been addressed.
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2792361
They then fixed 1.0 and the game was playable for 4 yrs, but they have now screwed it up again as it is now unplayable past 41.


WP is nothing like WitE very very few games are.

WP is a one man show and the guy knows his code and game play - unlike GG whos probably turning 2.0 into another coding/logistics disaster like 1.0/WitW.

This game is great dispite the fact I have lost most of the games I have played so far.





(in reply to Richard III)
Post #: 62
RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? - 7/1/2020 4:57:00 PM   
baloo7777


Posts: 941
Joined: 5/18/2009
From: eastern CT
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RoadWarrior


quote:

ORIGINAL: Richard III

Surely this issue can be fixed with simple House Rules rather then risk breaking other areas of the game by tinkering with the code. Broken WITE being the poster boy for this code tinkering approach to minor gameplay issues.



quote:

WP is nothing like WitE very very few games are.

WP is a one man show and the guy knows his code and game play - unlike GG whos probably turning 2.0 into another coding/logistics disaster like 1.0/WitW.

This game is great dispite the fact I have lost most of the games I have played so far.




I disagree with your view on changes to the paradrop play. The proposed loss of some cohesion of a parachute unit (~24% I think Alvaro mentioned) would neither "break other areas" or make gameplay a disaster that renders the game unplayable. It would also change the use of paratroops to a more historic ability for WW2. I welcome changes that allow unit types to perform with some historic abilities, especially when they don't overly complicate overall play.

_____________________________

JRR

(in reply to RoadWarrior)
Post #: 63
RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? - 7/1/2020 10:02:22 PM   
Jeff_Ahl

 

Posts: 66
Joined: 10/10/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

Sorry, I just don't buy the argument that the historically impossible use of paratroopers in this game should be allowed to continue simply because there are counters to it. It is like saying "It is OK that the paratroopers have plamsa rifles because you can counter them with your laser tanks." You should not have to garrison every city within 8 hexes of every paratrooper with a division for the simple reason that paratroopers could not drop into a major urban area, not could they drop into mountains, nor could they drop in anything less than 2 months (4 game turns) from a previous drop. As well in every large scale paradrop that was made in WWII (even into clear terrain) the dropping units were very disorganized. But in this game they drop with the same effectiveness (at least 100%) that they started with. I don't mind the use of paratroopers in a game in a non-historical manner, so long as it was historically possible. If the Axis want to build them in massive numbers and use them in Barbarossa that is fine with me. But I do object to the historically impossible use of them. I note as well that restricting paratroopers to there realistic abilities does not favour either the Allies or the Axis. So I repeat my opinion that paratroopers should be limited to dropping in historically realistic terrain and should suffer some loss of effectiveness in doing so. Now if someone wants to debate with me that the game does in fact realistically model the abilities and performance of paratroopers in WWII than please do so. But please do not respond by simply telling me that it doesn't matter if the game does this or not because there is a counter to it. To me it does matter.

As an aside, I will say that I think by and large this game does a much better job than most that I have played in simulating WWII on a strategic level. Well done Alvaro.




Firstly, the urban hexes is in my perspective not all urban, but urban area is a part of the hex. There for paradrops should be possible in them. We should also remember that there where para-commanders that rather wished to be dropped right over Arnhem rather then being dropped so far outside the city. They where ready to take the losses when being dropped, rather then being grinded down to bare bones trying to reach Arnhem. So why should drops over urban areas not be allowed?

But, I do see problems with paratroopers having to much organization when they have landed (the organization loss could be different by randomization and taking enemy air and AA capabilities in the vicinity into account - as IRL some landings went way better then others) and they should only be able to move the turn after being dropped. I have no problems if they have more OP/MP than regular infantry when being behind enemy lines, because they where meant to operate behind enemy lines. But I do not like that they can be moved after being dropped.

So why should they not be able to move after being dropped? It is very simple for me, this is a turn based game. In such games the passive player has no chance to react to surprising maneuvers as paradrops are. If a paradrop is performed they really should not be able to advance in the same turn, to give the opponent a chance of reacting. That would give som realism to it. In Operation Market Garden the resolut reaction from Student and other german commanders where a big factor that the allied operation failed. In this game you can paradrop 8 hexes away and then wreck havoc beyond that. That is just to much.

The paradrops can still be a pain in the ass and mess up the opponents defensive lines even if they can not be moved after being dropped.

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 64
RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? - 7/1/2020 10:47:19 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6240
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
Keep in mind when they drop they get 50% of their OPs. It is +2 to move in or out of ZoC. So if they drop between corps they can't move.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to Jeff_Ahl)
Post #: 65
RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? - 7/2/2020 7:23:47 AM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 1948
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

Keep in mind when they drop they get 50% of their OPs. It is +2 to move in or out of ZoC. So if they drop between corps they can't move.


That is not the case Alvaro. I have found that after dropping my paras they show as only having 2 OPs, but I can still move them one hex into an enemy ZOC,even though that move should cost at least 3 OPs. In fact that is what I did in the screenshot I posted above. I dropped two hexes from Moscow then moved my para adjacent to Moscow, even though as you can see there is a Russian army in Moscow. I just assumed this was WAD.

Also, I don't think it ever costs +2 OPs to move out of a ZOC, just to move into one.

< Message edited by Harrybanana -- 7/2/2020 7:28:30 AM >

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 66
RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? - 7/3/2020 2:53:34 PM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3111
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: online
I can't recall ever paying OPs to leave a ZOC either.

_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 67
RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? - 7/3/2020 4:03:50 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6240
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
Well then I have to set their flag as moved on so they don't have the min-move.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 68
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan >> RE: Massed paras the new super exploit? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
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

0.134