Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan



Message

Worg64 -> Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/2/2019 7:15:32 AM)

I feel the Tank units even if they cost oil are far superior in all respects contra a Infantry unit in the game as it is now.
I have noticed due to Tank units high operation point value that Tank units are far better to take cities than infantry units, something that feel really akward.

I would suggest that for Tank Units to attack cities it would cost them 2 Operational points instead of the normal one operational point.

This would put them at level with Infantry units attacking cities.
Also if I am correct Infantry units are better than Tank units as far as combat ratio attacking cities in the game so that makes it even more level.

Hope this is a possible thing to do in the game. I think it would be a good balancing factor.

Edit:
" I agree that since this is a strategic corp level the Tank units should and have supporting infantry as well as artelleri to attack cities.
Thats not the issue.The issue is that tank units get double the operational points compared to infantry. All well in open terrain but they should not be able to use that mobility attacking cities.

With the high operational points the Tanks have, I am fine with that in a open, clear terrain where it well suited for mobility. Attacking a city is a altogether situation and here the Tank units should not gain the benefits of its high mobiltiy.

A tank unit should revert to its Infantry/arty detachments to take the cities with tank support but they should lose their mobility doing so, thats why I think the 2 cost operational cost for attacking cities for tank unit would be a good balance in the game.
This would mean the Tank would be on par with the Infantry attacking cities as well as also make it harder to attack cities.
As it is now if you surround a city with tanks and the next turn after air strikes it is near impossible to hold any city due to the fact the Tanks has so many operational poins and hence get lots of attacks compared a infantry unit."



Jim D Burns -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/2/2019 8:04:03 AM)

I agree, you should probably double losses taken as well. Tanks were exposed and hard to defend in narrow street fighting, people should really want to avoid attacking a city directly with their armor.

Jim



george420 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/2/2019 8:53:41 AM)

Tanks with infantry (combined arms)are great in cities, but by themselves are dead ducks.



Flaviusx -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/2/2019 9:14:45 AM)

These are corps sized units and include a fair amount of motorized infantry. They aren't tank regiments lacking combined arms. I think it is fine.

And I disagree on the value of infantry. My ideal Barbarossa army has a dozen panzer korps and lots and lots of infantry besides that and indeed once you go east you find you can never have enough infantry as the front lengthens and you need to drop off divisions to guard against partisans.

You cannot just build panzers and call it a day. Your oil won't support this. Heck, even a dozen panzer corps is stretching it, particularly with the luftwaffe thrown in.



ncc1701e -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/2/2019 9:24:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

These are corps sized units and include a fair amount of motorized infantry. They aren't tank regiments lacking combined arms. I think it is fine.



That is what I was willing to say. In fact, I know a tank corps cannot split but I would expect to see at least a motorized division inside it. But, at the same time, I tend to agree that they are not the best suited for urban terrain.

But, according to the manual, this is already the case:

Mechanized Corps – 30 strength infantry unit, with armored transports, tank battalions, and assault guns. They are less effective vs hexes that have natural tank defenses such as forest, hills, mountains, or urban. They increase the chances a defender will retreat in open terrain more than do infantry units. There is a +3% retreat bonus for each tank factor.

Armor Corps – 30 strength balance units, with a combination of infantry and armor divisions. They are less effective vs hexes that have natural tank defenses such as forest, hills, mountains, or urban. They increase the chances a defender will retreat in open terrain more than do mechanized units. There is a +3% retreat bonus for each tank factor.



Worg64 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/2/2019 9:58:04 AM)

I agree that since this is a strategic corp level the Tank units should and have supporting infantry as well as artelleri to attack cities.
Thats not the issue.The issue is that tank units get double the operational points compared to infantry. All well in open terrain but they should not be able to use that mobility attacking cities.

With the high operational points the Tanks have, I am fine with that in a open, clear terrain where it well suited for mobility. Attacking a city is a altogether situation and here the Tank units should not gain the benefits of its high mobiltiy.

A tank unit should revert to its Infantry/arty detachments to take the cities with tank support but they should lose their mobility doing so, thats why I think the 2 cost operational cost for attacking cities for tank unit would be a good balance in the game.
This would mean the Tank would be on par with the Infantry attacking cities as well as also make it harder to attack cities.
As it is now if you surround a city with tanks and the next turn after air strikes it is near impossible to hold any city due to the fact the Tanks has so many operational poins and hence get lots of attacks compared a infantry unit.



ncc1701e -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/2/2019 10:28:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Worg64

The issue is that tank units get double the operational points compared to infantry. All well in open terrain but they should not be able to use that mobility attacking cities.


Yes you have a point.



AlvaroSousa -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/2/2019 6:10:39 PM)

The point is valid actually about costing double Opts to attack a city due to their mobility.

Could be 2x effectiveness cost or 2x opts cost. I would apply it to all rugged terrain. The same rules would apply to going through a mountain.

I need to think about this. And the reason why I think his point is valid is because I often find myself using tanks to attack cities regardless of the situation because they are stronger.



AlbertN -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/2/2019 7:34:37 PM)

Double Effectiveness is too much from my perspective.
Double Operation cost would sensibly nerf the mechanized troops though considering rugged terrain is not exactly scarce all around.



Worg64 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/3/2019 2:27:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

The point is valid actually about costing double Opts to attack a city due to their mobility.

Could be 2x effectiveness cost or 2x opts cost. I would apply it to all rugged terrain. The same rules would apply to going through a mountain.

I need to think about this. And the reason why I think his point is valid is because I often find myself using tanks to attack cities regardless of the situation because they are stronger.

I belive x2 operational cost would be more balanced and also make the game more historical. Mechanized units should have the same cost. As for move over rugged terrain I agree but dont double the ZOC cost only the terrain cost.



AlbertN -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/3/2019 2:32:53 AM)

Consider also the scale of the hex though.
A City is not the whole hex.

If any penalty is to happen - it should just be for big enough cities. (Let's say, cities that warrant production?)
Otherwise one can simply imagine armour proper sweeping around the city and their infantry component investing it.



MOS96B2P -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/3/2019 2:53:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen_slith

Consider also the scale of the hex though.
A City is not the whole hex.

If any penalty is to happen - it should just be for big enough cities. (Let's say, cities that warrant production?)
Otherwise one can simply imagine armour proper sweeping around the city and their infantry component investing it.



This is a good point. I just turned off the unit counters and scrolled around the map. There are lots and lots of hexes that have the designation "urban". Maybe cities with 10 production and greater should be more difficult for armor/mechanized. While everything smaller than 10 stays the same? I think 10 an above would cover the "big cities".



ncc1701e -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/3/2019 5:42:11 AM)

According to the manual, there are :
1. Large urban
2. Small urban

Should work.



Worg64 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/3/2019 5:45:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MOS96B2P


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen_slith

Consider also the scale of the hex though.
A City is not the whole hex.

If any penalty is to happen - it should just be for big enough cities. (Let's say, cities that warrant production?)
Otherwise one can simply imagine armour proper sweeping around the city and their infantry component investing it.



This is a good point. I just turned off the unit counters and scrolled around the map. There are lots and lots of hexes that have the designation "urban". Maybe cities with 10 production and greater should be more difficult for armor/mechanized. While everything smaller than 10 stays the same? I think 10 an above would cover the "big cities".


10 production cities only doesnt do it, there is few cities with 10 production and a LOT of big other cities, just look at the map.

At least all cities with 1+ production point should be included if you look at their sizes. Thats a minimum.

I would prefer all cities(urban hexes) however, even if the city(urban) is just part of the hex it is a main hub that need to be taken and urban warfare is slow and gritty. It makes sense the Tank corps cant use their mobility to full extent when attacking urban hexes as it should I think. And with their increased combat strength they are still powerfull attacking city(urban hexes). And if a urban hex is weekly defended, the attack just take one push and you would only lose 2 operational points out of 9 anyway. I think 2 operational cost for Tank units attacking cities(urban) is just fine. Its the same later on for the Allies so it gets balanced in the long round as well.

To some extent defending cities(urban) with tank unit also maybe should have some drawback like -1 defense or similiar? Just a thought.

Maybe enginner special units could be made disregard the city(urban hexes) but not the +1 production cities and/or neglect the combat penalty for all cities?

One thought however that need to be taken into account is the Axis Yugoslavia and Greece campain when it comes to length. Here historical it was a lot of political reason and infighting that lead to a easy campaign. But I think weak units at start of war can finetune this campaign.



AlvaroSousa -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/3/2019 1:00:20 PM)

I believe Yugo starts off with low effectiveness

The only reason the Greece lost is that they ran out of ammo. German soldiers commented that the Greeks were the toughest soldiers they ever encountered during the war.



Worg64 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/3/2019 8:48:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

I believe Yugo starts off with low effectiveness

The only reason the Greece lost is that they ran out of ammo. German soldiers commented that the Greeks were the toughest soldiers they ever encountered during the war.


The two main reason the Greek lost acording to historical notes:

The Greek army found itself outnumbered in its effort to defend against both Italian and German troops. As a result, the Metaxas defensive line did not receive adequate troop reinforcements and supply and was quickly overrun by the Germans, who then outflanked the Greek forces at the Albanian border, forcing Greek surrender.
As you mention they run out of ammo but more to it than that, they also got overrun and outflanked due to the above.

Then most fortresses—like Fort Roupel, Echinos, Arpalouki, Paliouriones, Perithori, Karadag, Lisse and Istibey—held until the Germans occupied Thessaloniki on 9 April,at which point they surrendered under General Bakopoulos' orders, after at first given the Axis very heavy losses in their initial attacks.
This surrender is today seen by many greeks as high treason, and the actual reason that made for a swift victory for the Germans.

The reason of General Bakopulos surrender is said to be of political reasons where he was promised to remain in power after Greeces surrender.This is something as far as I know never has been confirmed but what is know is the actual surrender by General Bakopoulus on his orders.

This surrender is not possible in the game as it works now and hence my question in regard how to handle it?
It is pretty clear it made the surrender of Greece a lot easier and made it possible to overrun and outflank rest of defending forces of the Greeks and allies.

Also in terms of the thread question if you are to make operational cost increase for tanks in mountain as well as cities it will very much affect them in Greece thats why I mentioned it as something that needed to be looked into.




AlbertN -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/3/2019 9:03:13 PM)

Tanks would advance mostly on roads leaving rearguards and minor flanking forces if isolated enemies just cling to the mountains.
Tbh mountains give already quite a hefty defending bonus.

I'd not touch yet these kind of things as most of the games atm - the MP games - where actual balance can be seen, seem to have other type of problems.

The AI alas is quite 'dumb' so I do not feel games vs the AI are representative of balance.
For instance vs the AI in general I take Greece by naval invasion ... that says enough, I think. Whereas a player may have a more persistant presence of the Royal Navy in the area.



Essro -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/4/2019 4:19:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen_slith

Tanks would advance mostly on roads leaving rearguards and minor flanking forces if isolated enemies just cling to the mountains.
Tbh mountains give already quite a hefty defending bonus.

I'd not touch yet these kind of things as most of the games atm - the MP games - where actual balance can be seen, seem to have other type of problems.

The AI alas is quite 'dumb' so I do not feel games vs the AI are representative of balance.
For instance vs the AI in general I take Greece by naval invasion ... that says enough, I think. Whereas a player may have a more persistant presence of the Royal Navy in the area.




Against my opponent, we fought an inconclusive naval engagement in the eastern med exactly as you say.

Really it was a RN victory as I probably won't risk my fleet like that again. I damn near had a catastrophe. Thankfully Italian Air from North Africa got involved.

Greece has been a costly affair in my game. Germans finished Greece off with an airborne assault backed by a panzer corps and a fair amount of air (in addition to the Italians). Greece was tough--and rightly so. And I'm in no shape to deal with Crete which my opponent was kind enough to keep occupied. I'm in a bad way there. In fact, I'm curious to see how it plays out not taking Crete.

In fact, I should probably go check to see how far Ploesti is from Crete...







Simulacra53 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/4/2019 7:11:21 AM)

Not every city is Stalingrad.



Worg64 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/4/2019 11:31:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53

Not every city is Stalingrad.

And not every hex is a good terrain for Tanks.



Simulacra53 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/4/2019 1:14:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Worg64
quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53
Not every city is Stalingrad.

And not every hex is a good terrain for Tanks.


True, but not asking for a Panzer Armee to act as a Gebirgsjaeger division and operate in the mountains.
But as said before a Mechanized Army or Corps is much more than tanks alone...and again, not every city is a Stalingrad.



Worg64 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/4/2019 4:01:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53

quote:

ORIGINAL: Worg64
quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53
Not every city is Stalingrad.

And not every hex is a good terrain for Tanks.


True, but not asking for a Panzer Armee to act as a Gebirgsjaeger division and operate in the mountains.
But as said before a Mechanized Army or Corps is much more than tanks alone...and again, not every city is a Stalingrad.

I have not said so, on the contrary if you read my earlier thread in this post. I agree tank/mech corps should be able attack cities.
This is Not the issue as I also have said earlier in threads in this post.
The Issue is and something Alvaro agree with me is that tank corps has double the OPERATIONAL points and therefore Always are better to attack with, even against cities.
Thats why a tank corp should cost 2 OPERATIONAL points to attack cities. They would still be great attacking cities due to their high combat value but would not be able attack cities twice as many times a Infantry corp could.
A tank and infantry corp attacking a city should be equal in balance doing so. In the open terrain a Tank corp should be superior.



RFalvo69 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/4/2019 4:14:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen_slith

Consider also the scale of the hex though.
A City is not the whole hex.


Yup. But why your panzer korps are in the hex? [;)]



Worg64 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/5/2019 9:23:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen_slith

Consider also the scale of the hex though.
A City is not the whole hex.


Yup. But why your panzer korps are in the hex? [;)]


They have a traffic jam into the city trying to find the petrol stations [;)]



Simulacra53 -> RE: Tank Units attacking Cities to good! (11/5/2019 4:55:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Worg64

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53

quote:

ORIGINAL: Worg64
quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53
Not every city is Stalingrad.

And not every hex is a good terrain for Tanks.


True, but not asking for a Panzer Armee to act as a Gebirgsjaeger division and operate in the mountains.
But as said before a Mechanized Army or Corps is much more than tanks alone...and again, not every city is a Stalingrad.

I have not said so, on the contrary if you read my earlier thread in this post. I agree tank/mech corps should be able attack cities.
This is Not the issue as I also have said earlier in threads in this post.
The Issue is and something Alvaro agree with me is that tank corps has double the OPERATIONAL points and therefore Always are better to attack with, even against cities.
Thats why a tank corp should cost 2 OPERATIONAL points to attack cities. They would still be great attacking cities due to their high combat value but would not be able attack cities twice as many times a Infantry corp could.
A tank and infantry corp attacking a city should be equal in balance doing so. In the open terrain a Tank corp should be superior.


I can follow the reasoning of more cost, to stop gaming the game.
Although with the support of infantry armor can have a force multiplier effect even in cities - cracking defensive positions with fire power.
Having a StuG in support is much better than not having them.

But am preaching to the choir, we are basically on the same page.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.25