Does size matter?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Does size matter?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Panzer Command: Ostfront >> Does size matter?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Does size matter? - 9/4/2011 1:59:38 AM

Ratzki

Posts: 581
Joined: 8/18/2008
From: Chilliwack, British Columbia
Status: offline

Well as long as you are reading this, maybe put a little thought into it and we might just be able to help out with the updated/new infantry combat model for the next PC installment. What size infantry formation does everyone like to play when sitting down to a battle? I find myself always moving to try to get about a battalion or more on the map. It just seems to be about the size that would be minimum to have a good feel during a battle. Any less and I find that you have to play too conservative as just a couple of step losses makes too much of a difference in the outcome. Three companies or so allow for enough units to make a good push and still have something in reserve.
Plus, even at this time, the orders structure makes it easier to deal with more units.
Just curious to see what some others think about this.

Post #: 1

RE: Does size matter? - 9/4/2011 2:22:01 AM

belljack95

Posts: 12
Joined: 7/24/2011
From: Tennessee, USA
Status: offline

I like keeping it around a company or perhaps a reinforced company when playing. For me, having too many units on the board can be a problem just as having too few. Perhaps adding a way to scale the campaigns or scenarios to allow a person to configure the size of the fight they want would be a nice touch and let each player enjoy the size game they like.

(in reply to Ratzki)

Post #: 2

RE: Does size matter? - 9/4/2011 2:32:22 AM

Mobius

Posts: 10339
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: California
Status: offline

If I have too many I play too risky with them. I'll might try something that doesn't have a lot of hope in succeeding just to see if it can be done.

(in reply to belljack95)

Post #: 3

RE: Does size matter? - 9/4/2011 4:27:38 AM

rickier65

Posts: 14231
Joined: 4/20/2000
Status: offline

I like company sized battles myself, though slightly more or slightly less work for me. I've played some battles where I enjoyed a larger force, but I think it was in cases where the battlefield naturally developed into two distinct battle areas.

Thanks
rick

(in reply to Mobius)

Post #: 4

RE: Does size matter? - 9/4/2011 7:27:10 AM

sztartur2

Posts: 672
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Budapest,Hungary
Status: offline

I like the battalion+ size myself. As I played a lot with Steel Panthers then with CMX1 I got used to that. Company formations for every type of armor, infantry and artillery is a must. Battalion formations for at least the infantry is also a must. Steel panthers is a good example what we would need regarding formations. I am not sure about tank battalions but for myself I would not be sad if that would be included as well.

The way force selection worked in CMX1 was very good.Or Steel Panthers as well.

_____________________________

"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.", Sun Tzu

(in reply to rickier65)

Post #: 5

RE: Does size matter? - 9/5/2011 3:21:31 AM

Ratzki

Posts: 581
Joined: 8/18/2008
From: Chilliwack, British Columbia
Status: offline

For those that prefer the company+/- size infantry battles; would a different command interface be something that may have yuou playing larger formations? Or should we maybe look at different ways of displaying information on the screen. A better overview map, colour coded units that show command structure. Just thinking some.... any ideas.

(in reply to sztartur2)

Post #: 6

RE: Does size matter? - 9/9/2011 5:15:37 AM

madorosh

Posts: 390
Joined: 3/2/2003
Status: offline

A battalion attack was generally done with two companies up, two companies back, so having enough room on a map for two companies seems about right.This would be optimal if/when team/co-play was introduced down the road.

_____________________________

The Tactical Wargamer

(in reply to Ratzki)

Post #: 7

RE: Does size matter? - 9/9/2011 10:43:12 AM

Jacko

Posts: 403
Joined: 6/21/2002
From: The Netherlands
Status: offline

Bigger maps and more units. Those are essential for the future of this game. The game will gain more depth and more interesting scenarios are possible. But it all depends on performance of course.

_____________________________

(in reply to madorosh)

Post #: 8

RE: Does size matter? - 9/9/2011 3:00:29 PM

Mobius

Posts: 10339
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ratzki

For those that prefer the company+/- size infantry battles; would a different command interface be something that may have yuou playing larger formations? Or should we maybe look at different ways of displaying information on the screen. A better overview map, colour coded units that show command structure. Just thinking some.... any ideas.

There might be a need for a command post unit(s) then.

(in reply to Ratzki)

Post #: 9

RE: Does size matter? - 9/9/2011 4:31:52 PM

sztartur2

Posts: 672
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Budapest,Hungary
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobius

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ratzki

For those that prefer the company+/- size infantry battles; would a different command interface be something that may have yuou playing larger formations? Or should we maybe look at different ways of displaying information on the screen. A better overview map, colour coded units that show command structure. Just thinking some.... any ideas.

There might be a need for a command post unit(s) then.

Absolutely.

And also the chain of command has to be represented. Steel Panthers is doing a good job by the rallying system.

_____________________________

"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.", Sun Tzu

(in reply to Mobius)

Post #: 10

RE: Does size matter? - 9/10/2011 4:08:15 AM

Yoozername

Posts: 1121
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline

There are many bigger issues but I think that the basic 'benefit' of handling larger battles is historical representation.� By that, I mean that those battles that can be fully represented by the units involved is a overall 'value'.

In the East, the actual battles and forces involved can exceed many 'tactical' games.� But if a game can 'marquee' forces and model them...well...goody on that game.

(in reply to sztartur2)

Post #: 11

RE: Does size matter? - 9/11/2011 7:06:19 PM

Enigma6584

Posts: 306
Joined: 9/23/2010
Status: offline

When playing infantry centric scenarios, I like to go up to battalion size formations. With this in mind, I like that the map be big enough that I have to manuever my companies into position and I have plenty of time to do it in. I get "a high" in being able to organize my forces for the attack, slowly move them up into their jump off points, and then committing them as necessary. Slow, methodical and large missions is what I crave.

(in reply to Yoozername)

Post #: 12

RE: Does size matter? - 9/19/2011 8:52:43 PM

wodin

Posts: 10762
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline

As a potential new customer which is wholey reliant on the Infantry model in the next game I prefer coy size give or take but no more than a battalion...a battalion is really the max for me.

(in reply to Ratzki)

Post #: 13

RE: Does size matter? - 9/23/2011 3:25:54 AM

Ratzki

Posts: 581
Joined: 8/18/2008
From: Chilliwack, British Columbia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

... In the East, the actual battles and forces involved can exceed many 'tactical' games.� But if a game can 'marquee' forces and model them...well...goody on that game.

By maquee'ing forces, are you meaning a more abstract representation of a larger force, or do you mean being able to pick out the best elements of a force?

(in reply to Yoozername)

Post #: 14