Warplan 2 wishlist

[ncc1701e]

Separate manpower for air vs land, historically Germany and Japan had the edge in air power initially due to having excellent pilots but quickly lost that edge because they couldn't replace their lost aces, so to simulate this wp2 could have separate manpower for air units, (pilots) with Axis having less than allies thus quickly losing quality if they take heavy losses. i think this would be better and simpler then having pilots like wif

This is already possible and existing in WPE. Germany is starting with a based air experience of 50% and their initial air units have experience of 60% / 70%. So, taking losses, their air units are losing experience from time to time.

I did not check what was done in WPP.

[ncc1701e]

Reporting it here. WP2 suggestion for the weather in the new game engine.

A distinction must be made between the state of the ground (dry, muddy, snowy, ...) and the weather (clear, overcast, light rain, heavy rain, snow, blizzard, ...).

A dry ground will become muddy after several turns of rain. And a muddy ground will become dry after several turns of hot clear weather.

What is important is not if the weather is good on top of the ground. What is important is the state of the ground.

[ncc1701e]

Here are the values used by WITE2 by the way for ground and air.

---

Weather WITE2.JPG (117.87 KiB) Viewed 839 times

[AlvaroSousa]

A "free agency" option (only as an option!) where all major powers are free to declare war on anyone at any time. No artificial/historical restrictions. UK can declare war on Soviets, Soviets can declare war on Germany, etc etc

In a way you can already do this. UK USA can DOW on the USSR. The USSR cant DOW on anyone because it is neutral but if it hits 100% it can.

[AlvaroSousa]

For Pacific, I also find that the Marines division lacks punch. If we could form a Marines corps with three divisions, it would be better. All my games where ending the same way with infantry army corps doing the naval invasion instead of the Marines.

Also, I am not sure Division is the standard unit of Japanese and US forces on each Pacific islands. I think Regiment is more at the good scale.

Marines aren't supermen. They already have 50% more strength and I think added values. Don't remember.

[AlvaroSousa]

Yo Alvaro,
Easy with the rules, the player base is aging and it's hard anough memorizing all this stuff, thanks. Excuse me, I have to find my car keys.

This is a wishlist not an include list.

I look at all wishlists and requests then decide the following.
#1 does it increase strategic thinking?
#2 is it a micromanagement min-max feature?
#3 does it over complicate the rules?
#4 can I implement it easily?
#5 what value does it add to the game?

You can have ideas that fit the 1st 4 then flop on the 5th.
Like water rations in North Africa. #1 Yes? #2 doesn't have to be #3 not really #4 sure #5 nope.

[ncc1701e]

Something I was asking myself while playing, there is absolutely no incentive to upgrade HQ from Anti-Tank X to Anti-Tank Y. For HQ, there should be an improvement in C&C with 1939, 1940, 1941, ... Maybe a better command range and additional bonuses for units in command of this specific HQ.

[havoc1371]

A way of automating allocation of resources like oil, so that it is evenly distributed to all units unless they are specifically identified not to receive or use. Micromanaging oil allocation is tedious and not very realistic as the logistics of an entire nation isn't funneled through the supreme commander to allocate to individual commands. They have huge staffs for this, gamers do not. Make it a game option so those who like to play supply clerk can do so.

[Nirosi]

A way of automating allocation of resources like oil, so that it is evenly distributed to all units unless they are specifically identified not to receive or use. Micromanaging oil allocation is tedious and not very realistic as the logistics of an entire nation isn't funneled through the supreme commander to allocate to individual commands. They have huge staffs for this, gamers do not. Make it a game option so those who like to play supply clerk can do so.

I am not sure I understand. Oil is preaty much allocated without any player intervention. Actually, it is not really allocated, as there simply is a pool and some units consume it when they move/attack. The other consumption is also automatic (for supply and for ship). Players have little to do except "watch the gage" go up or down.

[AlvaroSousa]

Supply system will be kept simple. It is one of the most important aspects of the game but I don't want players having to micromanaging it.

Players that have issues with oil need to be aware you can't move everything, everywhere, all the time unless you are the Allies pretty much. Allies never have to worry about oil as it should be.

For the Axis it is one of the balancing factors. You can't buy 25 armor, you will run out of oil. You can't buy 25 planes you will run out of oil. You can't move the Italian fleet every turn and keep them at see.

It is all reasonable historical restrictions with flexibility.

[havoc1371]

Supply system will be kept simple. It is one of the most important aspects of the game but I don't want players having to micromanaging it.

Players that have issues with oil need to be aware you can't move everything, everywhere, all the time unless you are the Allies pretty much. Allies never have to worry about oil as it should be.

For the Axis it is one of the balancing factors. You can't buy 25 armor, you will run out of oil. You can't buy 25 planes you will run out of oil. You can't move the Italian fleet every turn and keep them at see.

It is all reasonable historical restrictions with flexibility.

What I mean is having the game AI automatically and evenly distribute resources like oil so I don't have to calculate how many ships, air, or mech I use to make sure I don't run out of oil with half my panzers in Russia sitting idle. In other words, by default, all units have a percentage of the available oil allowing some limited action, unless I prioritize by restricting them further to give it to another unit or command. The way it works now is you have to crunch numbers each turn to determine how many of what you can move or you will end up out half way into a turn. The way it is now, this is a logistician's game, require tedious tracking and calculations before beginning each turn. If that is the intent, then okay, I will move on to another game and give up on this one, writing off the money spent.

[ncc1701e]

Supply system will be kept simple. It is one of the most important aspects of the game but I don't want players having to micromanaging it.

Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics.

[havoc1371]

Supply system will be kept simple. It is one of the most important aspects of the game but I don't want players having to micromanaging it.

Players that have issues with oil need to be aware you can't move everything, everywhere, all the time unless you are the Allies pretty much. Allies never have to worry about oil as it should be.

For the Axis it is one of the balancing factors. You can't buy 25 armor, you will run out of oil. You can't buy 25 planes you will run out of oil. You can't move the Italian fleet every turn and keep them at see.

It is all reasonable historical restrictions with flexibility.

That's the problem. It isn't "simple" if you have to spend time each turn adding up your units, figuring out which ships can put to sea, what air unit can strike, or which armor can move, so you don't run out before the end of your turn. I play computer wargames because of interest in the subject and enjoyment, not to test my math skills and keep a pad of paper next to my computer to calculate oil supply at the beginning of each turn. Obviously this appeals to some, so I will move on to something else.

[AlvaroSousa]

WP2 will have an easier oil system based on ratios so even if you 100% run out you can do things with less effectiveness. There were enough complaints to justify the change. It is also more fun for the game.

The port supply is fairly easy. When you see all "!" you have too many units where ever you are to supply them all.

[RocketMan]

Most garrison units did not have mobile heavy weapons or the ability to transport the weapons they did have, so when a garrison unit moves from one enemy ZOC to another, or is forced to retreat, it should lose some of it's combat effectiveness as some of it's weapons are left behind. All the manpower should stay with the unit, but the unit could have a new type set to "Moved Garrison" (or preferably a more clever name) that gives it different attributes. For instance, the Guns/Artillery/Anti-Air could all be reduced significantly (to zero perhaps), with Firearms/Defense staying the same as a Garrison unit. Switching a "Moved Garrison" to non-garrison should cost at least 50% of the unit's production cost (2x normal).

This change makes garrison units more brittle (as they were in reality), and could be combined with additional rules like making the switch from garrison to non-garrison take 2 turns, making it risky to leave your front line units (France) on garrison. Another option is to have a Garrison unit Shatter when forced to retreat, which happened frequently with garrison units during the war.

The number of units that can be switched from garrison to non-garrison in a turn should also be limited so a country can't switch most of it's army in one turn.

Implementing this change (or something similar) into the current version of Warplan would help to mitigate the difficult France problem, forcing France to make tough decisions to get that bonus approximately Large Infantry Coprs worth of production from changing their whole army to Garrison.

Edit: When a unit is reduced to a "Moved Garrison", the opposing side should get PP worth 5-10% of the cost of the unit to simulate capturing the heavy weapons left behind.

[RocketMan]

Since my previous suggestions were so well revived [/s] I would like to propose another idea.

I would like to see some effect from having Air Superiority (AS). AS would be defined for each hex on the map and could be displayed like supply level. AS could be defined as a comparison between each side’s Air Superority units, with 0 (or a range on either side of zero) being contested and positive numbers meaning that side has AS in that hex. An Air Superiority unit projects AS from its location out to some percentage of its maximum range (80%? 90%?). The number of AS points an air unit exerts should be maximum at range zero (its hex) and 0 at its maximum AS range (probably decreasing in some kind of exponential fashion).

Having Air superiority would impact certain parameters with the strength of the impact increasing with increasing AS. These parameters could include:

• Decrease in effectiveness recovery
  Increased movement cost (or possibility of increase movement cost in clear terrain)
  Increased movement effectiveness loss for clear terrain hexes
  No strategic movement
  Decreased on map supply levels
  Combat effects (e.g. increased effectiveness loss for side without AS)

There are probably other (and better) ideas for this impact. For more complexity, some effects of having AS could require having some Bomber units in the area.

[AlvaroSousa]

It's a good idea but might be difficult to implement due to balance.

A player hoards all their planes in one area dropping effectiveness on troops blowing it open with all its armor as well.

As is players group all their armor in one spot int he game, especially on the Russian Front.

[RocketMan]

It's a good idea but might be difficult to implement due to balance.

A player hoards all their planes in one area dropping effectiveness on troops blowing it open with all its armor as well.

As is players group all their armor in one spot int he game, especially on the Russian Front.

I wouldn't make the impacts game changing. For instance, even with complete Air Superiority a unit would still recover some effectiveness. Or a unit would not suffer any additional effectiveness loss from moving if it only uses half of it's movement allowance (moving at night). And the impacts could be less severe if there is some friendly Air Superiority units in the area even if the other side has overwhelming air superiority.

Of course all of this takes time to program and playtest, but it should have a minor impact overall. The allies had massive air superiority from D-Day on, but the Germans still managed to fight on for almost a year and even go on the offensive from time to time, but it did impact their ability to move freely, their supply, readiness, etc.

It would make the air war real feel more "real" and it would present the player with interesting choices. The AI could be programed to have some Air Superiority in each area that is contested based on some priority rating, with some minimum reserved for the offensive (50% maybe).

Not a game changing mechanic, more of a flavor one, with a realistic basis and impacts on the battlefield.

[ncc1701e]

Having Air superiority would impact certain parameters with the strength of the impact increasing with increasing AS. These parameters could include:

• Decrease in effectiveness recovery

• Increased movement cost (or possibility of increase movement cost in clear terrain)

• Increased movement effectiveness loss for clear terrain hexes

• No strategic movement

• Decreased on map supply levels

• Combat effects (e.g. increased effectiveness loss for side without AS)

Simulating Air Interdiction too, good idea indeed.

[RocketMan]

Having Air superiority would impact certain parameters with the strength of the impact increasing with increasing AS. These parameters could include:

• Decrease in effectiveness recovery

• Increased movement cost (or possibility of increase movement cost in clear terrain)

• Increased movement effectiveness loss for clear terrain hexes

• No strategic movement

• Decreased on map supply levels

• Combat effects (e.g. increased effectiveness loss for side without AS)

Simulating Air Interdiction too, good idea indeed.

I would be willing to help playtest the idea if Alvaro wanted to try it out for Warplan 2.