Stacking of BG's? what for? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat: Panthers in the Fog



Message

Kanov -> Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/1/2013 9:35:23 PM)

Hi,

Forgive me if this is common knowledge but I don't own LSA so this is my first CC with "stacking" of BG's.

-What does it does? I can't choose from troops of the reserve BG
-What happens to the reserve BG and the map if the frontline BG is routed by the enemy?
-What information should I take into consideration to decide the merge of two BG's? is it something basic like merge infantry BG's with armor BG's?

Any other input about the subject would be greatly appreciated.



Tejszd -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/2/2013 2:02:13 AM)

I'll let someone else answer the PiTF question about stacking but did want to let you know it is much more useful in LSA. As you asked/stated you can select units from the reserve BG and even have the reserve BG and units come onto the map from their own VL (thus you can attack from 2 directions). Not sure why this functionality was dropped/removed from this newest CC as it feels like a step backwards....



Kanov -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/2/2013 3:07:36 AM)

Thanks for the answer Tejszd.

Static BG were removed because not used in this Operation, the germans are on the ofensive etc, OK

Why remove the selection of units from reserve BG's and the ability to attack from different places?



squadleader_id -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/2/2013 5:00:18 AM)

Why? The game devs want to make sure that each release is unique and different [;)]



SteveMcClaire -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/2/2013 7:23:29 PM)

Drawing units from the reserve BG was not retained for Panthers for a number of reasons. The main reason was because most feedback indicated it was overly complicated, and didn't really justify the amount of UI complexity or confusion it created. Given that the Panthers in the Fog unit selection system is substantially different than Last Stand Arnhem, any mechanism for borrowing reserve BG troops would have had to be significantly different. It would never have been a case of 'just do it exactly like LSA'.

Stacking Battle Groups in Panthers in the Fog has several uses, even without borrowing teams in combat:

1) Friendly BGs can move through each other. If you could not stack BGs you would have to have them trade places.

2) With stacking you can have more BGs active on the map. With two BGs present on a map you can move off the map in two directions at the same time, or advance one BG and leave a second behind to secure the flank/rear. Without stacking you tended to end up with gaps in your front line whenever you were moving forward or back at the strategic level.

3) You can use 'Relieve' and 'Rest' to have one BG fight while a second one rests. You can use this technique to rotate BGs and wear down a single enemy BG by forcing constant battle.

Steve



STIENER -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/2/2013 9:29:50 PM)

thanks for the reply to the questions steve. i would have liked to see the borrowing from the reserve BG function kept in PITF. its great in LSA, so im a little disapointed there.

i have a couple of questions.....if you are forced to reatreat off a map, can you retreat back onto a map that has one friendly BG on it? in LSA i believe the map you retreated to had to be friendly controled but empty.

also....if you have 2 BG's on a map and the attacking / top BG is forced to retreat, does the reserve /bottom BG retreat too?

why on the Barenton map, on the 1st turn of the GC does the allies have 2 deploy zones, but can only deploy in the deploy zone the PC picks for you?? thats a wierd one. does this happen on other maps?



Pvt_Grunt -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/3/2013 11:14:23 AM)


quote:


3) You can use 'Relieve' and 'Rest' to have one BG fight while a second one rests. You can use this technique to rotate BGs and wear down a single enemy BG by forcing constant battle.


It's important to look closely at which BG is on top of the stack. This is the one you will fight the battle with.
I learnt this the hard way...... [:@]



SteveMcClaire -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/3/2013 5:44:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: STIENER

i have a couple of questions.....if you are forced to reatreat off a map, can you retreat back onto a map that has one friendly BG on it? in LSA i believe the map you retreated to had to be friendly controled but empty.

also....if you have 2 BG's on a map and the attacking / top BG is forced to retreat, does the reserve /bottom BG retreat too?

why on the Barenton map, on the 1st turn of the GC does the allies have 2 deploy zones, but can only deploy in the deploy zone the PC picks for you?? thats a wierd one. does this happen on other maps?


If the front line BG is forced to retreat the reserve BG also retreats.

A BG can retreat to a map with a single friendly BG already present. As long as the map is not full (2 BGs stacked) it is a valid retreat location. However, you cannot retreat to a map where an enemy BG is present.

The reserve BG always retreats first. So it's possible the reserve BG to retreat first, cause the only available retreat map to become full (2 stacked BGs) and force the front line BG to disband.

Barenton starts with two Allied BGs present, each having entered from a different entry VL. This situation can happen in play as well. As the Allied player you can use the 'Relieve' command to swap which BG is the front line / fighting BG (the one on top of the stack). This will determine which of the entry zones your forces start in. The defending player (the AI or German player) will not know which is going to be used until enemy units are spotted. When this happens due to movement (2 BGs enter a map from different directions) you need to use the 'Attack' order to indicate which BG you want to be the front line / fighting BG at the end of movement, rather than the 'Move' order.

Steve



davidss -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/3/2013 9:48:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire
The defending player (the AI or German player) will not know which is going to be used until enemy units are spotted. When this happens due to movement (2 BGs enter a map from different directions) you need to use the 'Attack' order to indicate which BG you want to be the front line / fighting BG at the end of movement, rather than the 'Move' order.

Steve


didn't know that ... seems like a really good feature.

thanks



Kanov -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/4/2013 1:48:32 AM)

I guess is more realistic in the sense that why should a BG be able to deploy in another entry point across the map?

I still think having stacked BG's share units was the ideal thing since it seems I have less BG's this time around and merging them seems like a bad idea. But I understand your position about the difficulty to implement although I disagree about it being a complicated feature, difficult to understand.



kweniston -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/7/2013 7:56:10 PM)

CC is not an arcade game, deliberately so. Taking out features because they are "too difficult" for the novice player is insulting the average CC player, who enjoys realism (and bought the game for it!). Otherwise, make it optional (difficulty setting: easy/normal). So please consider returning the lost and useful features of LSA again, if not for this campaign, then for the mods that could be made with PitF.



STIENER -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/8/2013 7:12:00 PM)

id have to agree with kweniston on this.



Kanov -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/15/2013 4:51:45 PM)

Maybe it could be that all the units of the reserve BG go to the support Forcepool of the frontline BG while they're on the same map.



slbm -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/28/2013 7:10:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire

Drawing units from the reserve BG was not retained for Panthers for a number of reasons. The main reason was because most feedback indicated it was overly complicated, and didn't really justify the amount of UI complexity or confusion it created.


One thing is that I couldn't disagree more about the "justification". This ability was in many cases priceless. And the biggest benefit here was not even so much about borrowing actual teams, but about being able to assault a map from different directions at the same time.

There is an issue I don't understand by the way with the new game, I actually haven't tested it yet (haven't come across such situation), can you tell me what happens if I have a contended map with my forces let's say in the east, and then bring another BG from the west? I assume that if I make the newly arrived group the active one, then my eastern locations will be left undefended for the next battle and easy to capture by the enemy... or?

Second issue is that with the new interface and team selection method it would not have to be complicated at all. You'd simply select one platoon from one BG, and another from the other. To ensure max clarity you could colour-code the teams in the roster and VLs in the map preview to make 100% clear which teams can be deployed at which locations.



STIENER -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/29/2013 5:21:06 AM)

slbm
1] i believe if you make the newly arrived BG the active one, as you suggest above, that you will have the option of deploying it in either deploy zone. your opponent will not know which deploy zone until the battle starts of course.

this is...welll...just lame...considering that in LSA, as we have already discussed, you had troops in both deploys, subject to some restrictions of course.

2] i agree.......but i think the LSA way should be put back into PITF> simple.



Kanov -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (4/29/2013 5:17:35 PM)

Please Steve, give us the feature of selecting troops from the reserve BG. With out it is like having a sandwich with out mayonnaise.



Kanov -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (9/27/2013 1:15:27 AM)

Steve, is there no chance of a BG behavior regarding borrowing of troops like in LSA in a future patch for PitF?



Tejszd -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (9/27/2013 2:20:26 AM)

2nd or 3rd or... the request to have reserve BG's affect unit availability, selection and deployment like in LSA.



SteveMcClaire -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (9/30/2013 7:33:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kanov
Steve, is there no chance of a BG behavior regarding borrowing of troops like in LSA in a future patch for PitF?


It is not impossible, but there are no plans for it at present.

Steve



Kanov -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (10/1/2013 10:02:12 PM)

Welp, see ya later!



STIENER -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (10/2/2013 1:58:21 AM)

steve
curiosity gets the best of me again...ive been reading, watching posts and responding to posts in all the cc games...as i own all of them....you mention above that " Drawing units from the reserve BG was not retained for Panthers for a number of reasons. The main reason was because most feedback indicated it was overly complicated, and didn't really justify the amount of UI complexity or confusion it created. "
where were you getting feed back in LSA from enough people...thats the line you use on me allot... that Drawing units from the reserve BG was overly complicated?????
you have allot of people in this thread that want it back.
the reason we like LSA is it has a **** load of cool options that make it a great game....




SteveMcClaire -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (10/4/2013 12:40:09 AM)

I suspect you guys, as forum regulars, are more toward the hard-core end of the player spectrum. I understand you want complexity if it gives you more options / choices. But one of the main goals for the UI re-design was to try and simplify things were possible, so the game would be bit less complicated for people who have never tried CC before.

I think the team-borrowing was more important in LSA, where the situation was very fluid and BGs would frequently be attacking from multiple directions. And historically you had the Germans throwing in units piece meal, so letting them decide where their few tanks would go (and being able to shift that tank support around) was important as well. Panthers is much more about two armies meeting in a head-on bash. There are a lot fewer situations where multiple entry zones are in play, and there are no odd-ball tank-only support BGs to deal with.

The feedback during the re-design was largely in-house, and though one of the long-time beta testers did comment on the change to this area, there wasn't any great hue & cry during the beta either.

I appreciate your feedback and it's something I'll keep in mind, but it's unlikely that we'll be adding major new features to Panthers in the Fog at this point.

Thanks,

Steve



STIENER -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (10/4/2013 2:18:27 AM)

thanks for the reply steve. well, perhaps you can consider putting the LSA options back in the NEXT CC that comes out ;-)



Kanov -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (7/22/2015 2:47:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kanov
Steve, is there no chance of a BG behavior regarding borrowing of troops like in LSA in a future patch for PitF?


It is not impossible, but there are no plans for it at present.

Steve



[:(]

Seeing this situation in the image attached (it's from GtC but still applies) reminded me the frustration of not being able to attack from two sides and grab reinforcements from the reserve battlegroup with out them merging.

In the image you can see I got attacked by two german Battlegroups. Because I put attention to the strategic situation and knew where both of them were stationed previous to them attacking, I knew which one was going to be the "frontline" BG and from where it was going to deploy. I just deployed accordingly, grabbed the undefended entry VL (the attacking German BG can't deploy there because reasons) and got an easy victory, germans where routed etc.

In LSA I would have to be prepared against the two entries and probably against more units.


[image]local://upfiles/42115/21D9A5F282944A869E9426E9EC53B231.jpg[/image]



Kanov -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (7/22/2015 2:50:31 AM)

In this pic you can see the lone rifle unit going for the undefended VL while two german tanks are destroyed at the beginning of the battle.

[image]local://upfiles/42115/B59A159295BF4CEC8CF668C627743880.jpg[/image]



kweniston -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (8/14/2015 9:46:27 AM)

Had a similar experience recently, quite dissapointing. The LSA options are much more gratifying and tactically exciting. Again, why remove a cool feature from Close Combat just for sake of simplicity... People buy and play this game to have a challenging, realistic RTS game. I imagine a large % of players know the game inside-out, this should not be too hard.



STIENER -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (8/16/2015 5:14:59 AM)

I agree kweniston, its damn disappointing really that most of the LSA options were dropped. cant believe matrix believes that they improved GWTC by dropping them. LSA has so much more going for it, if LSA GJS had a update to fix a bunch of stuff that's messed up, it would be the best mod out there.not sure what happened to cathartes and why he hasn't fixed up his mod. ;-(



Tejszd -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (12/28/2015 7:44:55 PM)

LSA is my favourite version due to all its features.

Never understood why Matrix removed features??? Just because the feature is available it doesn't have to be used in the release if the battle/situation doesn't call for it.....

If PiTF and or GtC had all the features then I would try porting older CC mods to them.



STIENER -> RE: Stacking of BG's? what for? (12/29/2015 7:53:29 AM)

I agree Tejszd. LSA rocks.

LSA GJS is a good mod for LSA. there is a newer Ver. of cathartes GJS LSA that can be had at CCS I believe. it has some good improvements IMO.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.625