RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/29/2009 4:30:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

There should be more display then just "Off-map". You need to know what's in the Repair Pool and the Construction Pool and being able to see the Reserve Pool would be helpful for deciding about pilots. Actually a button to view what's in the production pipeline (on the spiral) would also be very good IMO (or does View resources/Production do that?).

Repair Pool and Construction Pool and be viewed by clicking on those items in the left-most column.


Errh, sorry, which left column? Oh, you mean if you click on ships and subs?



If you look at the US example, you'll see the rows Naval Repair and Naval Construction.
===
You might also want to sort by cost or turns or a combination of things.

I disagree, although maybe it's a personal preference, but the most sensible "view" for me when I think about building is I think of it type by type, what do I need and what can I spend. The cost and turns I have memorized, what is there to build, I don't (usually) have memorized.

If there is only one way to sort it, by type would be best IMO. What is the existing sort key or is there one?

Sorting by cost is obvious, when you pnly have 2 BPs left to spend. Sorting by division might be desired at times too. As I said, there are a lot of different possibilities that come to mind. [I doubt that everyone has memorized the cost of each type of unit.][:D]



paulderynck -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/29/2009 4:46:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Sorting by cost is obvious, when you pnly have 2 BPs left to spend. Sorting by division might be desired at times too. As I said, there are a lot of different possibilities that come to mind. [I doubt that everyone has memorized the cost of each type of unit.][:D]

Well I went back and looked, and it sure isn't sorted by cost. My question was: is it sorted by anything? And my suggestion was that if it could be done one time, then I think by type is the most sensible. Sure, if you can dynamically sort, those other things could be helpful to some, but you seemed to indicate there was no in-form sort capability.

And I think a lot of veteran players know 90% of the costs off by heart.



Orm -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/29/2009 8:28:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Sorting by cost is obvious, when you pnly have 2 BPs left to spend. Sorting by division might be desired at times too. As I said, there are a lot of different possibilities that come to mind. [I doubt that everyone has memorized the cost of each type of unit.][:D]

Well I went back and looked, and it sure isn't sorted by cost. My question was: is it sorted by anything? And my suggestion was that if it could be done one time, then I think by type is the most sensible. Sure, if you can dynamically sort, those other things could be helpful to some, but you seemed to indicate there was no in-form sort capability.

And I think a lot of veteran players know 90% of the costs off by heart.


There are not so many units in MWIF. I have found that after building units for a few turns you got all the units memorized. (So you get the current costs updated and forgets the ghosts from the wif past)

The order of Units looks ok to me. If I could have one change it would be that Naval Construction and Naval Repair are located next to building the different naval units.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/29/2009 8:30:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Sorting by cost is obvious, when you pnly have 2 BPs left to spend. Sorting by division might be desired at times too. As I said, there are a lot of different possibilities that come to mind. [I doubt that everyone has memorized the cost of each type of unit.][:D]

Well I went back and looked, and it sure isn't sorted by cost. My question was: is it sorted by anything? And my suggestion was that if it could be done one time, then I think by type is the most sensible. Sure, if you can dynamically sort, those other things could be helpful to some, but you seemed to indicate there was no in-form sort capability.

And I think a lot of veteran players know 90% of the costs off by heart.

By obvious I meant "it is obvious that some players will want to sort by cost".

I an almost certain the order is that of the program's internal list in the unit types. The tricky bit here is that unit types that do not exist are removed from the list - which can happen for several reasons, choice of optional rules being the primary one.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/29/2009 9:26:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Also, should the US not have 11 build points on the first turn of a Global War game? They usually produce 10 and get an extra one from their trade with Japan. Unless they are saving a lot of oil, I suppose.

Yes. It looks like a bug. The convoys are all in place for both the US and Japan.

Here is the Production Planning form that precedes actual production. Note that the build points received is zero.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/3FA91EA66CD944E6800731C192901C0C.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/29/2009 9:28:41 PM)

What I did get working correctly today is the Swedish resources arriving in Germany. Here is another screen shot of the Production Planning form, this time for Germany and with the Expand List button clicked on so more items can be seen.



[image]local://upfiles/16701/5AF2D2E107E54CA38783BB7486E3F886.jpg[/image]



willycube -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 1:54:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Here is an example of zoom level 2 on a 1280 by 1024 monitor. The Flyouts let you see what is in any particular stack. Here the Soryu has sent a Fighter to participate in a ground strike on the US units in Guadalcanal (I think that is where that is). It should be flying as a bomber, which is what I am debugging at the moment. Note the Selectable Units form in the upper left.

I do not have medium resolution turned on, so the numbers are difficult to see on the units. It is much better with medium res.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/FAE218D62CB9468B89C762B10524DBE6.jpg[/image]


Question about this attack, a plane from the Soryu is attacking Guadacanal and primarily
the CA Vincennes, it is at zoom level 2 so it is hard to see the naval boxes, looking at the the 4 on the plane I assume that it has a range of 4, now it is hard to tell if the Soryu is in box 1 or 2, regardless which box its in how does the carrier plane reach the attack point where its shown attacking, it looks like its a range of 5 to me but I could be very wrong here. Maybe its not caculated that way [range of the plane] if not how? If every carrier that remains at sea must be in a sea box how do carrier attack planes reach certain targets do you caculate from the sea box to the target, is there a target they cant reach in the same sea area as the attacking carrier planes or does the planes range restict them from reaching certain targets. Could that plane fly from the Soryu and reach Bouganville which seems to be in the Coral Sea area?

Willy



Taxman66 -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 3:08:49 AM)

The box number the carrier is in has no impact on the range of the CVP (carrier plane) flying the mission.  A plane with a range of 1 can fly a mission from a CV in any box to any hex adjacent to a all sea hex in the CV's sea area.



bredsjomagnus -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 12:21:59 PM)

IIRC neutral powers can only save one oil per turn. Isn´t that so?

I was thinking about that US is saving 3 oil in the "Resource - Production Summary & Details" form.



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 2:02:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willycube
Question about this attack, a plane from the Soryu is attacking Guadacanal and primarily
the CA Vincennes, it is at zoom level 2 so it is hard to see the naval boxes, looking at the the 4 on the plane I assume that it has a range of 4, now it is hard to tell if the Soryu is in box 1 or 2, regardless which box its in how does the carrier plane reach the attack point where its shown attacking, it looks like its a range of 5 to me but I could be very wrong here. Maybe its not caculated that way [range of the plane] if not how? If every carrier that remains at sea must be in a sea box how do carrier attack planes reach certain targets do you caculate from the sea box to the target, is there a target they cant reach in the same sea area as the attacking carrier planes or does the planes range restict them from reaching certain targets. Could that plane fly from the Soryu and reach Bouganville which seems to be in the Coral Sea area?

Willy


From 14.4 :
"A carrier plane can fly a mission to any hex in range. Measure the range from any hex-dot in the CV’s sea area (it’s usually best to pick the hex-dot closest to your target). "



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 2:10:57 PM)

And from 14.4.1, and exception for rebase missions :

"Rebasing
During the rebase aircraft step of each turn, you can rebase a face-up carrier plane, up to double its range, from its CV to a hex or vice versa (including the cost to get into or out of the sea-box section).
You can also rebase a carrier plane from a CV to another CV in the same sea-box section or port or from a CV to the port hex it is in or vice versa. Each of these counts as a rebase for activities limits. Like all other rebases, the carrier plane remains face-up."

Which the errata in the latest ADG Annual modified :
"Aircraft rebasing (WiF 11.17)
CVPiF & SiF option 56: During the aircraft rebase step, you may rebase CVPs within a hex (i.e. from one CV to another, and/or from a CV to land) for no action limit cost."



composer99 -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 4:35:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bredsjomagnus

IIRC neutral powers can only save one oil per turn. Isn´t that so?

I was thinking about that US is saving 3 oil in the "Resource - Production Summary & Details" form.


The US starts the Global War scenario with 3 oil already, so those 3 oil aren't being saved against the rules.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 6:13:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp


quote:

ORIGINAL: willycube
Question about this attack, a plane from the Soryu is attacking Guadacanal and primarily
the CA Vincennes, it is at zoom level 2 so it is hard to see the naval boxes, looking at the the 4 on the plane I assume that it has a range of 4, now it is hard to tell if the Soryu is in box 1 or 2, regardless which box its in how does the carrier plane reach the attack point where its shown attacking, it looks like its a range of 5 to me but I could be very wrong here. Maybe its not caculated that way [range of the plane] if not how? If every carrier that remains at sea must be in a sea box how do carrier attack planes reach certain targets do you caculate from the sea box to the target, is there a target they cant reach in the same sea area as the attacking carrier planes or does the planes range restict them from reaching certain targets. Could that plane fly from the Soryu and reach Bouganville which seems to be in the Coral Sea area?

Willy


From 14.4 :
"A carrier plane can fly a mission to any hex in range. Measure the range from any hex-dot in the CV’s sea area (it’s usually best to pick the hex-dot closest to your target). "

They can also fly air missions to any hex adjacent to the sea area. This permits them to traverse several land hexes to reach a port hex, even if the air unit has a range of 1. For example, both London and Leningrad are NOT next to an all sea hex.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 6:15:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99


quote:

ORIGINAL: bredsjomagnus

IIRC neutral powers can only save one oil per turn. Isn´t that so?

I was thinking about that US is saving 3 oil in the "Resource - Production Summary & Details" form.


The US starts the Global War scenario with 3 oil already, so those 3 oil aren't being saved against the rules.

Yes. You can think of them as old stockpiles. When the player instructs the program to save oil (new addition to existing stockpiles), a check is made to see if he has already done so (or not) for the current turn.



Zorachus99 -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 7:15:09 PM)

Questions:

1) If the program is keeping track of where each resource is going, can the axis decide not to supply Paris with a resource point so that it's useless to bomb Paris other than to destroy the red factory? If not, what's the rationale of why not? I'm sure the rule from RAW was made because of the excessive bookeeping that would be involved otherwise, but clearly, the computer has lightened that load for us.

2) If the path that the resource is being transported through is no longer available, will the resource be able to use an alternate path, or is it lost?

3) If the factory the resource *was* being transported to is lost, however you have excess factories available, will you be able to produce (as you would in face-to-face) with that resource regardless, or will the resource be lost?




paulderynck -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 7:40:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Questions:

1) If the program is keeping track of where each resource is going, can the axis decide not to supply Paris with a resource point so that it's useless to bomb Paris other than to destroy the red factory? If not, what's the rationale of why not? I'm sure the rule from RAW was made because of the excessive bookeeping that would be involved otherwise, but clearly, the computer has lightened that load for us.

2) If the path that the resource is being transported through is no longer available, will the resource be able to use an alternate path, or is it lost?

3) If the factory the resource *was* being transported to is lost, however you have excess factories available, will you be able to produce (as you would in face-to-face) with that resource regardless, or will the resource be lost?



Doesn't the benefit of #3 contradict what you'd like for #1? Kind of a "have your cake and eat it, too" position?




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 7:48:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Questions:

1) If the program is keeping track of where each resource is going, can the axis decide not to supply Paris with a resource point so that it's useless to bomb Paris other than to destroy the red factory? If not, what's the rationale of why not? I'm sure the rule from RAW was made because of the excessive bookeeping that would be involved otherwise, but clearly, the computer has lightened that load for us.

2) If the path that the resource is being transported through is no longer available, will the resource be able to use an alternate path, or is it lost?

3) If the factory the resource *was* being transported to is lost, however you have excess factories available, will you be able to produce (as you would in face-to-face) with that resource regardless, or will the resource be lost?



1 - the rules on strategic bombing are precise on this issue. If the factory is capable of receiving a resource, it can be bombed, and the effects of that bombing are applied.

2 - a path is not "locked in". It is just what the player would like to see happen. This lets you specify which resources go where and use which convoys. If the player-specified path is 'lost' and an alternative exists, then the program will find it for you. Priority goes to the resources/build points that are part of trade agreements.

3 - Yes. But My answer to #1 still applies.



willycube -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 8:32:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

The box number the carrier is in has no impact on the range of the CVP (carrier plane) flying the mission.  A plane with a range of 1 can fly a mission from a CV in any box to any hex adjacent to a all sea hex in the CV's sea area.


Thanks Taxman for trying to help me, still confused, I think sometimes you WIF board game players think us novices should grab all this information and get it correct the first time [probably should] [&:] The only reason I brought up a sea box is because I was counting hex dots from where the carrier might be to the Vincennes which is beyond 4 hexes, so your saying it could attack Bouganville appx. 9 dot hexes away because its still in the Coral sea area. Actually the Soryu could be one sea hex away from the Vincennes when it launches its attack even though its in a sea box, is that right? According to what I have been reading understanding sea boxes is the toughest part of this game. Sorry for not grasping your help on this.

Willy



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 9:12:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willycube


quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

The box number the carrier is in has no impact on the range of the CVP (carrier plane) flying the mission.  A plane with a range of 1 can fly a mission from a CV in any box to any hex adjacent to a all sea hex in the CV's sea area.


Thanks Taxman for trying to help me, still confused, I think sometimes you WIF board game players think us novices should grab all this information and get it correct the first time [probably should] [&:] The only reason I brought up a sea box is because I was counting hex dots from where the carrier might be to the Vincennes which is beyond 4 hexes, so your saying it could attack Bouganville appx. 9 dot hexes away because its still in the Coral sea area. Actually the Soryu could be one sea hex away from the Vincennes when it launches its attack even though its in a sea box, is that right? According to what I have been reading understanding sea boxes is the toughest part of this game. Sorry for not grasping your help on this.

Willy

Perhaps it would help if I were to tell you I eventually want to make the location of the sea boxes within each sea area something the players can change. That is, I would let the players shift them up/down/left/right, to where ever they think it best to have them displayed within the sea area. The key word here is 'displayed'; the sea area section boxes are an abstract concept and are located within the sea area purely for convenience. They could just as easily be placed in a tabular form, with no map shown at all!

As a clear cut case of that, CWIF displayed no sea area section boxes! Instead, when the player moved the cursor into a sea area, a separate form was shown displaying the units in the sea area with their section numbers underneath. Furthermore, WIF FE had only one section zero for each sea area with the Axis and Allied units all stacked together (within each section).

For MWIF, I have followed the conventions of WIF FE with the sea rea section boxes shown within each sea area. EDIT: And I have provided two sets of section boxes for each sea area so the Axis and Allied units are separate.



Mike Parker -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 9:52:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willycube


quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

The box number the carrier is in has no impact on the range of the CVP (carrier plane) flying the mission.  A plane with a range of 1 can fly a mission from a CV in any box to any hex adjacent to a all sea hex in the CV's sea area.


Thanks Taxman for trying to help me, still confused, I think sometimes you WIF board game players think us novices should grab all this information and get it correct the first time [probably should] [&:] The only reason I brought up a sea box is because I was counting hex dots from where the carrier might be to the Vincennes which is beyond 4 hexes, so your saying it could attack Bouganville appx. 9 dot hexes away because its still in the Coral sea area. Actually the Soryu could be one sea hex away from the Vincennes when it launches its attack even though its in a sea box, is that right? According to what I have been reading understanding sea boxes is the toughest part of this game. Sorry for not grasping your help on this.

Willy


Willie,

When I first started playing WiF I had the guy that hosted the game explain sea boxes to me. I paraphrase here.

Do not think of the sea box as a location. A ship is in a sea area. When a ship is in a sea area it is operating in that area, moving to and fro patrolling or engaging in other missions, it might be in any hex-dot in the sea zone, and in fact is in many of them over the course of a turn.

The sea box just represents how effective the ship is at performing missions while in the sea box. So if a ship moves into a sea zone near the end of its endurance (i.e. used up its speed) it cannot proceed into a higher box because it just doesn't have much time to patrol around in the sea zone to prosecute maritime missions.

When a unit like the Soryu in this case launches an attack against the port with the Vincenness in it, the mission the Soryu is on means it sails up close to the port and launches its airwing. Its why the range for the aircraft starts in ANY hexdot the Japanese player wishes, because in reality the Soryu is in the SeaZone and then moves on a mission and gets close to the location to attack. In other cases if the Soryu had instead decided to attack at sea forces, its not so automatic and the position of each ship in respective boxes dictates aspects of combat as each side patrols for/hides from the opposing side.

He also suggested that in my mind I call the sea boxes 'search level indicators' they are just a convenience to indicate on the board how well a particular unit is searching. The same effect could be had by stacking counters on top of ships, but the sea boxes do that and avoid clutter on the map.

I hope that helps rather than confuses



Zorachus99 -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 10:12:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Questions:

1) If the program is keeping track of where each resource is going, can the axis decide not to supply Paris with a resource point so that it's useless to bomb Paris other than to destroy the red factory? If not, what's the rationale of why not? I'm sure the rule from RAW was made because of the excessive bookeeping that would be involved otherwise, but clearly, the computer has lightened that load for us.

2) If the path that the resource is being transported through is no longer available, will the resource be able to use an alternate path, or is it lost?

3) If the factory the resource *was* being transported to is lost, however you have excess factories available, will you be able to produce (as you would in face-to-face) with that resource regardless, or will the resource be lost?



1 - the rules on strategic bombing are precise on this issue. If the factory is capable of receiving a resource, it can be bombed, and the effects of that bombing are applied.

2 - a path is not "locked in". It is just what the player would like to see happen. This lets you specify which resources go where and use which convoys. If the player-specified path is 'lost' and an alternative exists, then the program will find it for you. Priority goes to the resources/build points that are part of trade agreements.

3 - Yes. But My answer to #1 still applies.


Thank you. That completely clarifies it. I was afraid of the 'locked in' situation quite a bit.

As far as cake is concerned I'm very interested in contradictions. [:D]



willycube -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/30/2009 10:50:51 PM)

Thanks Mike that was a big help about patrolling anywere in that sea zone, appreciate your concern and Im sure the other players exlained it to me the same information only in their way. Prosecute Yo Mike you a lawyer, first time in a wargame I ever heard that phrase.

Willy



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (5/1/2009 12:54:53 AM)

With advice from the beta testers I have revised the Use Oil form. The new additions are the ability to mark units Don't reorg. and the oil sources Don't use. This update the stats at the botom of the page so you can reach the 'magic' .4 which let's you get .4 worth of oil for 'free'.

Here the German player has decided to save 3 points worth of his oil by not reorganizing some units. He has already reorganized the armor and Rundstedt. he is about to reorganize von Bock (and the other units which still need oil to reorganize.

The Reorganize All button (yet to be coded) let's you select units as Don't reorg, and oil sources as Don't use, then just click on Reorganize All to have all the remaining units reorganized using all the remaining oil sources.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/8288EA7E728D4DC3A48D72532B56F21A.jpg[/image]



bredsjomagnus -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (5/1/2009 9:51:24 AM)

quote:

Yes. You can think of them as old stockpiles. When the player instructs the program to save oil (new addition to existing stockpiles), a check is made to see if he has already done so (or not) for the current turn.


Ok! I misinterpred the phrase "Being saved".



Mike Parker -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (5/1/2009 1:52:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willycube

Thanks Mike that was a big help about patrolling anywere in that sea zone, appreciate your concern and Im sure the other players exlained it to me the same information only in their way. Prosecute Yo Mike you a lawyer, first time in a wargame I ever heard that phrase.

Willy


*chuckles* nope I am an engineer.. although technically I am a Director of IT now. In military parlance to 'Prosecute an attack' is not all that uncommon, but *smirks* I suppose it is archaic. Any current military guys wanna comment? Do the Operations Officers use the term these days?



Gneisenau -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (5/4/2009 12:54:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

4th and last in the series. Germany has chosen 2 of its losses and must pick the 3rd.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/54E66402EBF14082A1FF83BA0F5250B8.jpg[/image]



It seems that the 2D10 table has very severe swings. In this example, Germany loses three Corps in the battle and the defender none. That's hard to imagine. I think I might be using the 1D10 table...




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (5/4/2009 1:47:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gneisenau


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

4th and last in the series. Germany has chosen 2 of its losses and must pick the 3rd.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/54E66402EBF14082A1FF83BA0F5250B8.jpg[/image]



It seems that the 2D10 table has very severe swings. In this example, Germany loses three Corps in the battle and the defender none. That's hard to imagine. I think I might be using the 1D10 table...



When this screen shot was taken, the combat result was determined incorrectly. It should be a die roll of 4, modified to 19 (with a 67% chance of going to 20). The correct result is 2 attacker losses and 2 defender losses. And that was rolling a 4 as the sum of two 10-sided dice. 94% of the time the sum should be better than that.

EDIT: I show a lot of stuff in development - warts and all.



Gneisenau -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (5/4/2009 1:57:54 AM)

I see now how the 2D10 table works.  Was also wondering why a player would construct DIV's vice CORPS because the cost effectiveness of the
Corps seems much better (unless one is low on buying power).  But, in the above example, with the outcome being 2 attacker losses, if DIV's are
being used in the battle, their selection for a loss is much better than losing a CORPS.



bredsjomagnus -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (5/4/2009 7:08:23 AM)

With DIVs you can get a higher attack/defence value in one hex because of the stack limit rules. There can be three land units in one hex if one of the units is a division or artillery.



micheljq -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (5/4/2009 2:39:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gneisenau

I see now how the 2D10 table works.  Was also wondering why a player would construct DIV's vice CORPS because the cost effectiveness of the
Corps seems much better (unless one is low on buying power).  But, in the above example, with the outcome being 2 attacker losses, if DIV's are
being used in the battle, their selection for a loss is much better than losing a CORPS.


DIV have many advantages, DIV improves stacking limits to 3, 2 corps + 1 DIV can be stacked in a single hex. Useful in defense in a city for example. When attacking on the blitz table, first loss must be a MOT, or MEC, or ARM unit, so a motorized DIV can be used as first loss. Also mechanized and armor divisions, gives a +0.5 bonus in a blitz battle when attacking a clear hex in fine weather, +1 when defending in a clear hex, so, they are costly but useful. MEC & ARM divisions can make the difference allowing the player to choose between the Assault or Blitz table, which is very important in land combats.

I am speaking when using the 2D10 table, which we do since many years, we would never return using the 1D10 table.



Page: <<   < prev  54 55 [56] 57 58   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.203125