Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: WarHunter

My suggestion.

The ability to use Admin Points to cancel Historical Withdrawal dates. Make it an option.
Those that want to play historical Reinforcement/Withdrawals should not be forced to use this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
That would really take a huge expenditure in time and testing in order to get something like a random unit location feature in place. Honestly i don't see the devs taking the time for this when an editor is available that will allow for all kinds of set-ups. I know this isn't quite the same, but it is what we have.

Fair enough, it was just a thought for something that could be nice, but hardly a must have.


On a different token, what about Light Mud?

The spring and fall mud in Russia was notorious, and despite the complaints I have seen, the full mud rules are appropriate in those periods. Not a lot happened when the ground was like that.

BUT, that mud required the heavy run off of a large amount of melting snow, or the heavy rains of spring. Mud outside those periods (in random weather) shouldn't be that severe. Either because the ground is still mostly frozen and you just have a bit of a mid-winter thaw (what around here we call an 'Indian Summer' or a 'Chinook') - its a mess but not as bad as a full melt. Or for summer rains, the rain won't be severe enough for the ground to turn to complete soup.

And if feeling really complete, between winter and summer, or summer and fall there could be a period where the mud isn't as heavy (either when its starting to dry out, or the rains have only started to really set in). For that period though, I would only have a week of light mud between the full mud and clear weather.

Basically Light mud would have a moderate impact on movement (maybe half as severe as full mud), a small effect on air missions, and a very small effect on ground combat (if any at all).

Russia Beseiged used Light Mud as an intermediate point and I thought it a good feature.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Similarly, how do you supply a pocket when there is no HQ? I think you have to drop supplies on each hex, which is a bit silly. Not sure how this would work, but it would be good if players could spawn a "pocket HQ" or something which could then serve as a supply hub for all of the units in the pocket.

quote:

That's been brought up already and unfortunately due to how involved the German reinforcement/withdraw schedule is, it would mess up a lot of things allowing for something like this. For this version of the game, the system is pretty much locked in stone when it comes to this. Hopefully when War in Europe ever comes around, we will see a much more player involved production system.

“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

quote:

ORIGINAL: map66

One historical issue I have with the game after reading David Glantz' Barbarossa Derailed is how relatively restrictive the admin point cost is for reassigning units, especially corps and army Hq and particularly for the Axis side. For example, Glantz on 380-4 lists changes to Army Group Center's OOB for a few weeks in August (from abolishing Fourth "Panzer" Army to creating Armygruppeguderian and changes in seemingly every other infantry formation in between), which (with a little exaggeration) probably would cost a good six months worth of admin points in game terms. Glantz does cite here the "extreme flexibility" of the German command structure.

In game terms, I think the biggest ahistorical issue is that it costs too much to switch a corps HQ or an army HQ--- perhaps more historical might be having a nominal cost (as low as 1-3 admin points) on top of the cost of the subordinate units (which may be a bit too high as well). A good in-game example where I think problems with the admin costs is evident is the start of Case Blau scenario, where the Germans must spend the vast bulk of their admin points to clean out a very messy CnC structure based on the initial break through plans--- hardly the "extreme flexibility" Glantz argues, and nor a CnC issue that would seem to plague the Germans historically in 1942.

A wider problem (and one probably more for the "next game" in the series) is that I think it is problematic that admin points control both OOB and more supply orientated aspects such as HQ build up or the creation of Soviet units. I could see a strong case being made that the Axis should have the ability to switch around units nearly at will (and the Soviets perhaps a bit more than they can now), but with a much more limited ability to create supply build ups. Perhaps breaking admin points into two separate categories might be a good solution, and allow a bit more historical fine tuning of the two sides relative capabilities.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

quote:

ORIGINAL: map66

One historical issue I have with the game after reading David Glantz' Barbarossa Derailed is how relatively restrictive the admin point cost is for reassigning units, especially corps and army Hq and particularly for the Axis side. For example, Glantz on 380-4 lists changes to Army Group Center's OOB for a few weeks in August (from abolishing Fourth "Panzer" Army to creating Armygruppeguderian and changes in seemingly every other infantry formation in between), which (with a little exaggeration) probably would cost a good six months worth of admin points in game terms. Glantz does cite here the "extreme flexibility" of the German command structure.

In game terms, I think the biggest ahistorical issue is that it costs too much to switch a corps HQ or an army HQ--- perhaps more historical might be having a nominal cost (as low as 1-3 admin points) on top of the cost of the subordinate units (which may be a bit too high as well). A good in-game example where I think problems with the admin costs is evident is the start of Case Blau scenario, where the Germans must spend the vast bulk of their admin points to clean out a very messy CnC structure based on the initial break through plans--- hardly the "extreme flexibility" Glantz argues, and nor a CnC issue that would seem to plague the Germans historically in 1942.

A wider problem (and one probably more for the "next game" in the series) is that I think it is problematic that admin points control both OOB and more supply orientated aspects such as HQ build up or the creation of Soviet units. I could see a strong case being made that the Axis should have the ability to switch around units nearly at will (and the Soviets perhaps a bit more than they can now), but with a much more limited ability to create supply build ups. Perhaps breaking admin points into two separate categories might be a good solution, and allow a bit more historical fine tuning of the two sides relative capabilities.

This was brought up in testing multiple times. It used to cost a lot more ap's than it does, but they were reduced to where they are now. I know it isn't as flexible as some would like it, but it is what we have more for game balancing at this point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HHI

The Red Army would still have many winter advantages, not all of which are represented in the game. Russian tank brigades should be more mobile than the Axis forces, because their tracks were wide enough to move through heavy snow and, I assume, lubricants and oils were suitable for severe winter conditions. Similarly, the Red Air Force should be much more active than the Luftwaffe, as they were operating from real air fields with heated hangars.

I would like to see these possibilities implemented in the game.

1. Use split colouration as you have for the LW airbase backgrouns but in the symbol area where the army colours are currently. This would allow both army and corp colours to be shown.
   
2. Keep the existing army colours but use a coloured dot or bar in the symbol to denote the corp.
   
3. Use single colours but use more shades and give more thought to how they are distributed. For instance 6th army uses shades of blue for it's corps, 17th army uses shades of red and 11th army uses shades of yellow etc. With some careful thought most corps could be distinguishable. And allow colouration to be changed if a clash does occur.

quote:

My suggestion is to replace or supplement colour outlining with simple lines connecting subordinate units down in tree like structure...Perhaps line to parent command HQ from selected unit as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
A bonus would be a report on the whole battle as it can be seen on higher battleresolutions. But acessible as text. Would save me perhaps 1-2 hours per turn! Would make a huge difference!

quote:

ORIGINAL: arras

If I may one interface suggestion:

Colour outlining of direct subordinate units is of course helpful in visualising command structure but I find it still not clear enough. Battlefield is still one mess in which it is hard to orient in times. Especially if I want to get idea of overall command structure.

My suggestion is to replace or supplement colour outlining with simple lines connecting subordinate units down in tree like structure. Perhaps with colour coding of lines according to level of command. There might be restriction of how much down this visualisation should go to prevent it connecting all units on map while viewing high command unit (STAVKA, OKH). Say it would be limited to Corps or Armies HQs when displaying command structure on this global level. Or link it in to the zoom so larger the zoom, more levels of command are displayed.

Perhaps line to parent command HQ from selected unit as well.

It would make easier to determine position of subordinate units along with their position (even without unit being on map, line would give direction in which unit is in relation to it's subordinates or commanding unit)

This can be optional mode, say activated by icon.

Something like this:

quote:

ORIGINAL: johntoml56

Can we have it so that the unit that captures supplies or fuel etc directly recieves a portion eg 10%? with the rest going to the HQ as per current functionality; historically I suspect that a bone dry unit may have topped up before marching on....I make it say 10% because the turns are weekly but the capture event would probably take eg a day....