quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

quote:

Huh? Didn't you read my other posts?

No dude, they don't read your posts; all they do is swarm like piranahs to tell you everything that is wrong with your idea, because they are nerdy dorks who think they sound cool if they contradict other people. You have a great idea but these people really aren't open to new ideas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

The 'partisans' would fly off to another land carrier or conventional air base. The land carrier itself would behave in combat like a normal unit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fungwu

"It's a good idea -- assuming a detailed model of partisan warfare was needed. "
It is not a detailed model, it is simply an exact parallel model of the air system, except with partisans instead of air planes.


"The truth tends to be unromantic: most times and most places partisans have been such a low-grade nuisance"

Well that is exactly my intention, partisans can make a few interdiction strikes on passing units, and not a whole lot else. The controlling player puts his partisans along the enemy supply line and that is all he has to do. The other player put military police down his supply line and that is all he has to do. No chasing units around the map.

Right now I am playing a game where in about 4 months partisans have destroyed every major bridge and every kilometer of rail line in Northern Italy, as well as invading Austria and capturing Innsbruck. Under my system everything you suggest partisan warfare should look like will be the case, while all the unrealistic damage they can do will be impossible.

Yeah. My point is that the guerilla effect really models things pretty accurately. Your rail lines will get breaks in them if you don't garrison them, roads will become slower to move along unless they're similarly garrisoned. The only problem other than the lack of romance is that the effect is global.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

The bases would be destroyed. The 'guerillas' -- being air units -- would relocate to the nearest friendly airbase.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fungwu


You - "My own vote would be to stick to the guerrilla effect and make it definable by hex radius from a given location"

Me -"When you see an air unit on the battle field, the air base isn't really its exact location, at any given time, the air unit may be located at any given point within its radius.

Applying the same idea to partisans, you get the effect of the partisans patrolling out in a radius from their base and making random attacks against targets of opportunity."

Now I am confused, I suggest that we change partisans from a physical unit to an area effect within a fixed radius, the center placed by the scenario designer. You so no, it would be better if they were an area effect within a radius set by the scenario designer.

Then you say-

"Ah. Well then you're talking about doing something that can't be done with the current system. In that case, why don't we get rid of the flying partisan idea entirely? After all, they don't fly. They can and were effectively cordoned off and kept away from sensitive areas. "

Does that contradict your idea? If you have a guerrilla effect within x hexes from point A, well then if point A is sensitive to the German player there is nothing he can do to cordon it off, because it is a hex effect.

On the other hand under my idea, one player has partisans, but the other player has military police, if partisans are attack one area, just put military police there and it is protected. Just like if they enemy is making interdiction strikes with bombers, you put fighters there to provide cover.

quote:




"Such a radius can already be assigned to the refugee effect, so evidently the necessary programming mechanisms are more or less in place."

Right now there are some lines of code saying something like this:

Terrain type airbase
unit flag "air operations"
units with air operations flag:
-are capable of these missions: air superiority, interdiction, combat support, direct strikes, bridge strikes
-Have a range of 210 hexes (or whatever)
-Can only be located at terrain type airbase

now you copy and past all that and change a little bit:

Terrain type partisan base
unit flag "partisan operations"
units with partisan operations flag:
-are capable of these missions: Anti Partisan duty(air superiority), interdiction, combat support, direct strikes, bridge strikes
-Have a range of 10 hexes (or whatever)
-Can only be located at terrain type partisan base

There is only 3 changes you need, air planes can't use partisan bases and vice versa, airplanes don't intercept partisans, and partisans don't have a range of 210, otherwise you are just copying and pasting the existing system.

quote:

ORIGINAL: a white rabbit

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fungwu

"It's a good idea -- assuming a detailed model of partisan warfare was needed. "
It is not a detailed model, it is simply an exact parallel model of the air system, except with partisans instead of air planes.


"The truth tends to be unromantic: most times and most places partisans have been such a low-grade nuisance"

Well that is exactly my intention, partisans can make a few interdiction strikes on passing units, and not a whole lot else. The controlling player puts his partisans along the enemy supply line and that is all he has to do. The other player put military police down his supply line and that is all he has to do. No chasing units around the map.

Right now I am playing a game where in about 4 months partisans have destroyed every major bridge and every kilometer of rail line in Northern Italy, as well as invading Austria and capturing Innsbruck. Under my system everything you suggest partisan warfare should look like will be the case, while all the unrealistic damage they can do will be impossible.

Yeah. My point is that the guerilla effect really models things pretty accurately. Your rail lines will get breaks in them if you don't garrison them, roads will become slower to move along unless they're similarly garrisoned. The only problem other than the lack of romance is that the effect is global.

..not that global, great in countryside with or without rail, less likely to appear on roads, and virtually never on urban, and a lot of the bombers actions are in urban..