Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

that is for putting the unit into static mode, meaning it gives most of it movement/vehicles

quote:

ORIGINAL: thackaray

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

that is for putting the unit into static mode, meaning it gives most of it movement/vehicles

Thank you for the quick reply.

So it's best to think of it when a unit is static, it gives it's movement (points)/vehicles as though it's given up some of it's supply to the other units ?

When a unit is in static mode and is part of a stack. What happens to that unit after those other units have attacked? Does the unit in static mode stay in the same hex or is it moved with those units which attacked and moved ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings



...Combat is resolved at the weapon to weapon level (squads, vehicles, guns), and the terrain being fought over has a huge impact on how the weapons fight against each other. Combat resolution is literally calculated shot by shot, although you don't want to watch all those shots, or the war would play out in realtime. Armor is at a big disadvantage in urban fighting.

To elaborate a bit on Joel's comment, terrain determines the maximum range combat will begin at. The more dense the terrain the shorter the initial combat range will be so in urban combat armor looses its advantage of longer ranged guns versus short ranged infantry weapons. Remember that the real advantage of armored units over non-armored units was survivability. The greater the range that armor could engage a target, the more survivable the armor was. In game terms, the higher the defensive benefit of the terrain the more dangerous it will be for armor to attack into.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iņaki Harrizabalagatar


I imagine that besides range, armor has the advantage of mobility and, of course, armor. I mean, I imagine squads have an anti armor value independent of their anti infantry value, right? and armor units will have different armor levels.
I also imagine that, besides range, terrain will provide some defense bonus, depending on terrain.
Letīs imagine the combat between an infantry division and an armor division. At long range only artillery would play, but it would be largely ineffective over armor units. At medium range infantry could use their antitank guns against armor, but they are handicapped because they are not armored (so can be destroyed by artillery and medium range mortar fire) and because theyt are largely inmobile, against mobile armor. Finally, at close range, infantry could use many other antitank weapons, but again tanks, as well as their armor, have the defense of their mobility. Am I right in these assumptions for the game?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iņaki Harrizabalagatar


I imagine that besides range, armor has the advantage of mobility and, of course, armor. I mean, I imagine squads have an anti armor value independent of their anti infantry value, right? and armor units will have different armor levels.
I also imagine that, besides range, terrain will provide some defense bonus, depending on terrain.
Letīs imagine the combat between an infantry division and an armor division. At long range only artillery would play, but it would be largely ineffective over armor units. At medium range infantry could use their antitank guns against armor, but they are handicapped because they are not armored (so can be destroyed by artillery and medium range mortar fire) and because theyt are largely inmobile, against mobile armor. Finally, at close range, infantry could use many other antitank weapons, but again tanks, as well as their armor, have the defense of their mobility. Am I right in these assumptions for the game?

In general yes but here is how it actually works using your example of an armored division versus an infantry division. Each of these divisions is composed of a variety of combat arms (or what I like to call combat elements). The armored division has AFVs in addition to infantry, engineers, and a variety of crew served weapons. The infantry division is similar except for having little or no armor. All of these combat elements are equipped with actual weapons. For example, a typical tank has a main gun and one or more machine guns. These weapons are individually rated for range and effectiveness against armored and non-armored targets. A typical infantry squad would have 8 or more men and a corresponding number of small arms including rifles, sub-machine guns, probably a light machine gun, and grenades (actual composition depending on nationality and period of War).

Now assume the armored division attacks the infantry division. The first round of combat begins at a randomly determined range between 20,000 and 30,000 yards. Only indirect fire artillery capable of that range would fire in this first round. (I'm not certain but I believe combat is simultaneous.)

The second round of combat would occur at 1/4 the range of the first round. For matematically simplicity let's say the first round was at 20,000 yards so the second round would be at 5,000 yards. This range is still greater than any direct fire weapon in the game so again only indirect fire weapons would participate but now more weapons like heavy mortars would also get to fire.

The third round of combat would occur at 1/4 the range of the second round or 1,250 yards. At this range, depending on the terrain, some direct fire weapons would now also participate plus all indirect fire artillery in range. Terrain permitting, tanks with long enough range guns could engage both armored and non-armored targets.

The fourth round of combat would occur at 1/4 the range of the third round or 300 to 350 yards (range is measured in 50 yard increments). Terrain permitting, machine guns, rifles, anti-tank rifles, light mortars would join the fray.

The fifth round of combat would occur at 1/4 the range of the fourth round or 50 to 100 yards. If the range is 50 yards this is the final round of combat; if the range of the fifth round is greater than 50 yards there would be a sixth round. The 50 yard range is close combat were weapons like grenades and sub-machine guns come into play.

After all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw
After all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

quote:



One Thing I recall I didnīt like about TOAW is that, for instance, an AA 88mm had exactly the same statistics that one mounted in a Tiger, while it is clear that a gun mounted on a tank has the big advantage of mobility, being able to reposition in no time, is that factored in this game? I

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reichenberg

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw
After all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Maybe it is my and my bad english - I am not native - but your last sentence is not fully clear to me. Do you mean:

After finishing all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Or do you mean:

After each round of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

The difference for me is e.g. (extreme and unrealisitc example) your armored division attacks an infantry division equipped only with submachine guns and grenades. This infantry division would have a hard time making it thru all the indirect and direct fire from longer ranged weapons and reach the 50 yards combat distance to use their sub machine guns and grenades. How will the game engine handle such a situation??

Uwe

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reichenberg

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw
After all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Maybe it is my and my bad english - I am not native - but your last sentence is not fully clear to me. Do you mean:

After finishing all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Or do you mean:

After each round of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

The difference for me is e.g. (extreme and unrealisitc example) your armored division attacks an infantry division equipped only with submachine guns and grenades. This infantry division would have a hard time making it thru all the indirect and direct fire from longer ranged weapons and reach the 50 yards combat distance to use their sub machine guns and grenades. How will the game engine handle such a situation??

Uwe

Sorry, I should have said "after all these rounds of combat the effect of accumulated damage is assessed and the defending unit will hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse".

Yes, even if a unit was equipped with only submachine guns and grenades (none are) it would still get to fight in the last round of combat providing anyone was still alive to fight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

quote:



One Thing I recall I didnīt like about TOAW is that, for instance, an AA 88mm had exactly the same statistics that one mounted in a Tiger, while it is clear that a gun mounted on a tank has the big advantage of mobility, being able to reposition in no time, is that factored in this game? I

There are multiple versions of the 88mm gun in the game with different stats.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shupov

Unlike WiR, will weather affect railroads (and roads)? Extreme cold affected German locomotives, and mud also caused problems.

quote:

ORIGINAL: McHugh

Don't know if this has been asked but when playing this game by PBEM can you view a replay of your opponent's move? If yes, besides being able to see the moves of the other player's visible units (I am assuming there is fog of war), will you also be able to view the results of his attacks? Thanks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: McHugh

Don't know if this has been asked but when playing this game by PBEM can you view a replay of your opponent's move? If yes, besides being able to see the moves of the other player's visible units (I am assuming there is fog of war), will you also be able to view the results of his attacks? Thanks.

A replay feature has not currently been implemented (don't know if there will be one) but you can review the enemy's air missions and ground combat results. Fog of War is a game preference you can turn on or off.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings
Not just alive, but undisrupted. Elements take disruption as the battle wears on and at some point they are no longer fighting back (or at least not fighting back very well).

quote:

ORIGINAL: dlazov66

Questions:

1. Will all the normal campaign starting positions be available?
(i.e. 1941, 1942, 1943 and 1944, perhaps even the Jan 45 Soviet offensive to end the war on Berlin)

2. Besides the Typhoon scenario will other scenarios be implemented?
(Stalingrad, Kursk, Korsun, Sevastopol, Kharkov Budapest, to name a few)

3. How do the game mechancis basically work? (i.e., are their turn phases (aka traditional board war games, move/combat/exploit) or is it a free flowing turn system (aka TOAW) are combats resolved at the end of your player turn or are they fought during the turn, are orders issued and when your turn is done they are executed?)

Looking forward to this game.