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: Stacking

 
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] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> RE: Stacking Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Stacking - 6/13/2016 4:43:38 AM   
Hairog


Posts: 1645
Joined: 7/11/2000
From: Cornucopia, WI
Status: offline 		I sure wish some modders would gain access to Time of Fury and fulfill it's potential.

_____________________________

WW III 1946 Books
SC3 EAW WW Three 1946 Mod and Naval Mods
WarPlan and WarPlan Pac Alpha and Be

(in reply to Steely Glint)
Post #: 31
RE: Stacking - 6/13/2016 1:40:46 PM   
Happycat

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 10/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

quote:

That's why you don't see many stacking games.


I really don't want to argue with the designer, but really this remark is ludicrous.

Here is small list just for starters of guys/companies who have been stacking for years.

John Tiller
Norm Koger
Ron Dockal
Gary Grigsby
Frank Hunter
Victor Reijkersz
AGEOD

Even Avalon Hill, the old boardgame company had stacking in their very first PC games (WAW) back in the 90's

Not sure who made HOS, but it has stacking as well. I would think there are easily as many games with stacking as without, I think probably more with stacking actually.

But its a simple equation for me. If this game has stacking I will try it. If not I won't.



For me, stacking isn't a big deal, because the map scale is large enough to accomplish what I want to do during a game. It's all a matter of taste to some degree; I dislike stacks and find them cumbersome and somewhat counter-intuitive (no pun intended).


_____________________________

Chance favours the prepared mind

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 32
RE: Stacking - 6/13/2016 1:49:12 PM   
Happycat

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 10/24/2006
Status: offline 		An additional thought. I would ask that everyone be patient. We're still in early beta, but I think everyone who is concerned about scale will be happy. Suggestions that a lack of stacking is lazy programming are a bit over the top. I've known Hubert for the best part of two decades--there is NOTHING lazy about him, his programming or his commitment to product improvement.

_____________________________

Chance favours the prepared mind

(in reply to Happycat)
Post #: 33
RE: Stacking - 6/13/2016 7:35:19 PM   
lecrop


Posts: 412
Joined: 4/14/2009
Status: offline 		I prefer no stacks, there are other wargames that are great at stacking. I think Strategic Command belongs to a special kind of wargames, like Clash of Steel for example. IMHO at most I would like a max stack of one unit for each weapon (naval, air & ground).

_____________________________


(in reply to Happycat)
Post #: 34
RE: Stacking - 6/14/2016 3:04:09 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		No problem HappyCat, I have consigned these games to what *I* consider the 'beer and pretzels' category. Not my cup of tea.

I wish you well with the project.

_____________________________


(in reply to lecrop)
Post #: 35
RE: Stacking - 6/14/2016 4:05:11 AM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline 		FWIW, having worked with Hubert and Bill on it and played it, I think SC3 is going to be a fantastic grand strategy release and will appeal to grogs who try it as well. There is a lot of good history packed into this release and plenty of strategy.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 36
RE: Stacking - 6/14/2016 10:32:54 PM   
Ron

 

Posts: 506
Joined: 6/6/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Happycat

For me, stacking isn't a big deal, because the map scale is large enough to accomplish what I want to do during a game. It's all a matter of taste to some degree; I dislike stacks and find them cumbersome and somewhat counter-intuitive (no pun intended).



I can accept the rationale of map scale for ground units; however the question remains - what about air units? Can they stack in the same hex as another unit?

(in reply to Happycat)
Post #: 37
RE: Stacking - 6/14/2016 10:43:22 PM   
wodin


Posts: 10762
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline 		Surely stacking depends on the hex size and unit scale? I don't mind stacking but prefer it if say there was a max amount of units\counters in one hex at around four or five..anymore can start to hinder ease of play I feel.

_____________________________

My website


https://www.awargamersneedfulthings.co.uk/

(in reply to Ron)
Post #: 38
RE: Stacking - 6/15/2016 12:44:35 AM   
Happycat

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 10/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron


quote:

ORIGINAL: Happycat

For me, stacking isn't a big deal, because the map scale is large enough to accomplish what I want to do during a game. It's all a matter of taste to some degree; I dislike stacks and find them cumbersome and somewhat counter-intuitive (no pun intended).



I can accept the rationale of map scale for ground units; however the question remains - what about air units? Can they stack in the same hex as another unit?


Due to non-disclosure rules, that is too specific for me to answer, sorry. What I can say at this juncture is that if you're familiar with SC2, then I think you will recall that air ranges in that game and its various add-ons was seldom an issue.

Where it does become an issue is on islands in the Pacific or, as someone here pointed out, Malta. I know that Hubert and Bill are aware of this and I'd be awfully surprised if it isn't addressed in SC3.



_____________________________

Chance favours the prepared mind

(in reply to Ron)
Post #: 39
RE: Stacking - 6/15/2016 12:46:32 AM   
Happycat

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 10/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

Surely stacking depends on the hex size and unit scale? I don't mind stacking but prefer it if say there was a max amount of units\counters in one hex at around four or five..anymore can start to hinder ease of play I feel.


I know what you mean. Wasn't it Operational Art of War where one could stack like about a dozen units if they were small enough in composition?

_____________________________

Chance favours the prepared mind

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 40
RE: Stacking - 6/15/2016 1:54:54 AM   
Mountaineer

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 9/6/2013
Status: offline 		It was OPART, great game though but too many counters.

(in reply to Happycat)
Post #: 41
RE: Stacking - 6/16/2016 5:37:11 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline 		The Operational Art of War has a nine unit stacking limit [maximum of three air units allowed in a stack]. Nine units is too many in a lot of cases, but TOAW includes movement and combat penalties per hex based on scale and amount of equipment. Due to those penalties it is not wise to 'overstack'. As each scenario is different, there is a small indicator in each hex that appears and goes from yellow to orange to red as your stack moves up in the density scale.

As for my opinion concerning stacking for SC3, stacking one air unit with one ground unit would seem reasonable. I'd like to play it like that to see how it works out.

(in reply to Happycat)
Post #: 42
RE: Stacking - 6/16/2016 9:20:23 PM   
solipsismMatrix

 

Posts: 55
Joined: 12/13/2013
Status: offline 		Yes, or two corps vs. a single army. Or an army and a rocket unit, etc.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 43
RE: Stacking - 6/16/2016 10:29:12 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

The Operational Art of War has a nine unit stacking limit [maximum of three air units allowed in a stack]. Nine units is too many in a lot of cases, but TOAW includes movement and combat penalties per hex based on scale and amount of equipment. Due to those penalties it is not wise to 'overstack'. As each scenario is different, there is a small indicator in each hex that appears and goes from yellow to orange to red as your stack moves up in the density scale.



I love this game. How is it called? Just joking

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 44
RE: Stacking - 6/16/2016 10:44:52 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Happycat

For me, stacking isn't a big deal, because the map scale is large enough to accomplish what I want to do during a game. It's all a matter of taste to some degree; I dislike stacks and find them cumbersome and somewhat counter-intuitive (no pun intended).



I have asked this earlier in this thread but I did not get an answer. Is there something that was implemented like a switch command allowing to change a front line unit per another one behind the front without penalties on the entrenchment of the previous one? As such, we will have the possibility to disengage a tank unit per an infantry unit instead of keeping it stuck on the front line.

As I said earlier, I am not against a rule specifying no ground units could stack together if this type of command exist.

It does not change my view on ground and air units stacking together anyway. Malta is a beautiful island surely having a garrison, an airport and a harbor. I recommend anyone to visit it - great place for one week holiday.

(in reply to Happycat)
Post #: 45
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 3:39:25 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: solipsismMatrix

Yes, or two corps vs. a single army. Or an army and a rocket unit, etc.



Rocket Units ? These would hardly be appropriate for this scale. Rockets should be included in the shock value of corps level units. I think, maybe.

(in reply to solipsismMatrix)
Post #: 46
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 7:11:20 AM   
Ason

 

Posts: 352
Joined: 11/29/2013
Status: offline 		Well, hopefully people will mod the hell out of the game and create all types of scenario sizes, if we're really lucky maybe different scenarios/sizes will already be in maingame from the start. The more options for modders the better imo.
For example I'm creating Siege of Budapest scenario for AoC, for this size rockets and other support units are very nice to have:






Anyway I agree with Solipsim, stacking something like 1 army=2 corps or 1 army = 1 corps and support unit etc, sounds reasonable.



< Message edited by Mrslobodan -- 6/17/2016 7:16:01 AM >

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 47
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 12:28:11 PM   
Happycat

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 10/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e


quote:

ORIGINAL: Happycat

For me, stacking isn't a big deal, because the map scale is large enough to accomplish what I want to do during a game. It's all a matter of taste to some degree; I dislike stacks and find them cumbersome and somewhat counter-intuitive (no pun intended).



I have asked this earlier in this thread but I did not get an answer. Is there something that was implemented like a switch command allowing to change a front line unit per another one behind the front without penalties on the entrenchment of the previous one? As such, we will have the possibility to disengage a tank unit per an infantry unit instead of keeping it stuck on the front line.

As I said earlier, I am not against a rule specifying no ground units could stack together if this type of command exist.

It does not change my view on ground and air units stacking together anyway. Malta is a beautiful island surely having a garrison, an airport and a harbor. I recommend anyone to visit it - great place for one week holiday.


Yes, that ability was introduced in SC2 at some point (I think it was when the AOD add-on was introduced, but not sure of that.) IIRC the units "swapping" positions used no movement points but might have lost a level of entrenchment. However, the point is that it was implemented. It would be a huge surprise to me if it didn't continue for SC3.

_____________________________

Chance favours the prepared mind

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 48
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 1:00:38 PM   
solipsismMatrix

 

Posts: 55
Joined: 12/13/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

ORIGINAL: solipsismMatrix

Yes, or two corps vs. a single army. Or an army and a rocket unit, etc.



Rocket Units ? These would hardly be appropriate for this scale. Rockets should be included in the shock value of corps level units. I think, maybe.

Perhaps you have not played the earlier SC games? I'm talking about strategic rocket units (e.g., V1 / V2).

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 49
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 1:32:08 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

Perhaps you have not played the earlier SC games? I'm talking about strategic rocket units (e.g., V1 / V2).


I got SC2 a couple months ago and tried it out, that is the meager extent of my experience with SC. I didn't know that you were referring to Strategic Rockets, I thought you meant Werfers and Katyushkas. So, nevermind !

(in reply to solipsismMatrix)
Post #: 50
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 4:29:26 PM   
Duck Doc


Posts: 693
Joined: 6/9/2004
Status: offline 		So, this is 150 km per hex? Units are corps as basis? Artillery as separate units? Back 1 hex? Incorporated into corps?

Agree completely that air and ground need to co-habitate a hex?

There are times you might want to listen to your (prospective) players.

(in reply to Hairog)
Post #: 51
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 4:56:56 PM   
Happycat

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 10/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dale H

So, this is 150 km per hex? Units are corps as basis? Artillery as separate units? Back 1 hex? Incorporated into corps?

Agree completely that air and ground need to co-habitate a hex?

There are times you might want to listen to your (prospective) players.


The devs ARE listening. There are hordes of SC and SC2 fans who can attest to that fact :)

_____________________________

Chance favours the prepared mind

(in reply to Duck Doc)
Post #: 52
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 5:55:34 PM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline 		I have played SC2, in fact I am playing right now a game against the AI (one WW1 scenario) and I am surprised how competent and competitive the AI is.

I think the scale of the map in the WW1 breaktrhough scenario is very good for Corps size units and I don find big issues with stacking there. Air units are Air Armies scale more or less (OOBs are not very historical) but again as they are place a good distance from the frontline there are no big issues with it. To me the main problem is with naval units, the naval part of the game feels very unrealistic, with units spread over the sea, or unable to enter port beacuse it is another unit already in.


(in reply to Happycat)
Post #: 53
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 8:38:50 PM   
solipsismMatrix

 

Posts: 55
Joined: 12/13/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Happycat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dale H

So, this is 150 km per hex? Units are corps as basis? Artillery as separate units? Back 1 hex? Incorporated into corps?

Agree completely that air and ground need to co-habitate a hex?

There are times you might want to listen to your (prospective) players.


The devs ARE listening. [...]

Like I listen to my wife? ;)


(in reply to Happycat)
Post #: 54
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 8:57:50 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4945
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar

I have played SC2, in fact I am playing right now a game against the AI (one WW1 scenario) and I am surprised how competent and competitive the AI is.

I think the scale of the map in the WW1 breaktrhough scenario is very good for Corps size units and I don find big issues with stacking there. Air units are Air Armies scale more or less (OOBs are not very historical) but again as they are place a good distance from the frontline there are no big issues with it. To me the main problem is with naval units, the naval part of the game feels very unrealistic, with units spread over the sea, or unable to enter port beacuse it is another unit already in.




Good, because that map was largely inspirational for the size of the new one.

I say inspirational because the scale is ever so slightly out, I think that was 1 tile to about 18 miles whereas this one is about 1 hex to 20 miles.


_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 55
RE: Stacking - 6/17/2016 8:58:36 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4945
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: solipsismMatrix


The devs ARE listening. [...]


Like I listen to my wife? ;)


But I do listen to my wife too!


< Message edited by Bill Runacre -- 6/17/2016 9:01:18 PM >

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to solipsismMatrix)
Post #: 56
RE: Stacking - 6/18/2016 3:29:08 AM   
Capitaine

 

Posts: 1043
Joined: 1/15/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar

I have played SC2, in fact I am playing right now a game against the AI (one WW1 scenario) and I am surprised how competent and competitive the AI is.

I think the scale of the map in the WW1 [breakthrough] scenario is very good for Corps size units and I don find big issues with stacking there. Air units are Air Armies scale more or less (OOBs are not very historical) but again as they are place a good distance from the frontline there are no big issues with it. To me the main problem is with naval units, the naval part of the game feels very unrealistic, with units spread over the sea, or unable to enter port [because] it is another unit already in.




I can see how the air won't be a problem, really. But never having played this series before I don't know how air attacks; does the unit physically move to attack a target unit? If so there'd be a need to show the a/c icon over the land unit.

The naval non-stacking does bother me as you suggest. A port should be able to host a fleet, I'd think. Maybe a special rule or something? For visual stacking, you could show only the icon of the top unit, but stack the bases [only] of extra units below. Have a routine to shuffle through the stack and order any unit to the top position. My .02.

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 57
RE: Stacking - 6/19/2016 2:36:16 AM   
Rosseau

 

Posts: 2757
Joined: 9/13/2009
Status: offline 		And don't forget the Hearts of Iron series. HOI4 at division level is completely insane and also throw history out the window. But with limited use of console (cheats) I am having an amazingly good time. About 53 hours in five days. That hasn't happened since WitE.

When I want real history there is always SC3.

(in reply to Capitaine)
Post #: 58
RE: Stacking - 6/21/2016 6:38:33 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Happycat

Yes, that ability was introduced in SC2 at some point (I think it was when the AOD add-on was introduced, but not sure of that.) IIRC the units "swapping" positions used no movement points but might have lost a level of entrenchment. However, the point is that it was implemented. It would be a huge surprise to me if it didn't continue for SC3.


Thanks for your answer. I am completely discovering SC thus forgive my lack of knowledge on this system.

(in reply to Happycat)
Post #: 59
RE: Stacking - 6/22/2016 3:21:04 PM   
Steely Glint


Posts: 580
Joined: 9/23/2003
Status: offline 		If the devs are listening, then: make sure there is stacking.

_____________________________

“It was a war of snap judgments and binary results—shoot or don’t, live or die.“

Wargamer since 1967. Matrix customer since 2003.

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> RE: Stacking Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
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

0.734