Matrix Games Forums

Is it one, two, three, etc.? Post your number.

Do you want unique unit capabilities (AT, AA, Engineer, etc.) or generic capabilities (infantry and armor only)? Plant your money where your mouth is. I need to make LARGE design decisions ricky-tick. Let me know your druthers; without--mine will rule.

The more I play this game, the more I get a better feel for the mechanics, the more it changes my opinion of stacking. Just for visual purposes, I am not a fan for big stacks over 4 counters. In my gameplay, I do tend to have a HQ stack with some AA, and other units, and those can be 3-4 counter high, and I don't mind the bigger stack size. If I am holding a position with a battalion, I like the way the game limits the stack size to 8, so a 3 or 4 counter max stack is okay with me. I think if a player needs to have a lot of stacks, then maybe they are not playing the game the most efficiently. I know when I try to surround a enemy unit and cut off its supply, I am not using stack, I am using individual units. Stacks in the game should only be temporary hold points when on the offensive, and a position when on the defensive. The game should be fluid movements, and so stacks can come and go during the game.

I do like having the individual units, AA, AT and Engineers, etc. I would not like only having infantry and armor because it would seem too simplified to me. I like to be able to put an AT unit in a critical position if the situation calls for it. If I had to make a hard choice, I would pick removing AA units and having there effects included in the HQ, armor and infantry units, with the exception of the German 88's.

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

If I had to make a hard choice, I would pick removing AA units and having there effects included in the HQ, armor and infantry units, with the exception of the German 88's.

Interesting.

ORIGINAL: bcgames

Is it one, two, three, etc.? Post your number.

Do you want unique unit capabilities (AT, AA, Engineer, etc.) or generic capabilities (infantry and armor only)? Plant your money where your mouth is. I need to make LARGE design decisions ricky-tick. Let me know your druthers; without--mine will rule.

After playing this game for many months I went from being a big stack hater to not minding them. If that is what it takes to preserve unique unit capabilities et al then bring it on! Taking advantage of the hotkeys functionality (which only comes with practice) greatly mitigates stack management.

Just my 2 cents....

Rob.

Thanks for the encouraging feedback. We need to improve how we explain game play.

3

So Max Stack = 3 to 4 units. That's the consensus of two. Any other players care to weigh in?

didn't realize you wanted a number instead of a blank cheque………… so SIX it is![:)]

Rob.

I'm not sure what the right answer is. Do we take the number from those who play the game or those who want to play the game.

I would say 3 Max for sure

That's the neighborhood.

Very late but I think 3-4 is what I am most comfortable with. Even an occasional 5-6 is fine by me.

Max stacks are now in the hands of the player given the breakdown/build-up rules. The player can only have up to five units in a hex (four battalions and an HQ). The player needs to figure out how to accomplish this max through his break-down decisions. On the other hand, given unit frontages and ground scale, having two units in a hex is a real "feel good moment". armored/mechanized organizations can benefit from the stacking rules; but grunts? not so much. In Stalingrad, wide open flanks are free for the enemy to explore--and high stackin' is not always a good strategy for the defender when left or right flanks are out there flappin' in the wind.

Flexibility and options are always welcome!