MCS User WISHLIST

[1925frank]

Regarding recall, I think perhaps Campaign Series wanted to implement an element of chance to air strikes.  I doubt every call for an air strike resulted in an air strike.  This element of chance could have been done on a percentage basis.  (Imagine that, a high percentage for Germans and a low or virtually nonexistent one for the French and the Soviets early in the war.) 
 
But that wasn't done.  Instead, the element of chance was apparently tied to a LOS.  This might not be historically accurate, but it does require more skill on the player's part.  I guess as long as ground forces have a LOS to a target, they would pester for air support, and perhaps it's the repeated requests that ensure an air strike.  I don't know, but I doubt a single request for air support rarely got the job done.  I would imagine there was an element of prioritizing that was probably done by who was screaming for support the longest and the loudest. 
 
I don't remember how recall works in SPWAW or whether there even is a recall aspect to SPWAW.
 
I've never really had a complaint with how air strikes work in Campaign Series, and I've always found it required some skill to do right, which was part of the fun.
 
 
 
 
 

[british exil]

It would be nice if the air support would patrol the skies and attack enemy armour in the open or roads. How often was the German Panzer forced to move at night. LOS wasn't always needed as the air forces ruled the skies and probably flew behind the land frontlines.
I don't expect to have the airpower always there, bad weather would of course restrict it.

Plus it's not really fair to those players who choose to fight as the axis. Maybe there could be a possiblity to toggle air support on/off before a battle, or restrict air power to a certain amount.

Just wondering. Dreaming of the perfect game where everything fits my expectations.

Mathew

[Lionfish]

PBEM....Random Side

Sometimes people only want to play one side in a scenario. If you could set up Random Side selection - it might be a good idea.

Graphics

I read (I think Sarge) updating the graphics to 24 bit. Would it be hard to update them all to 24 bit or even 32 bit?

[major_at]

Ok...so...this is the first bit lol didnt have time to finish it as im in university right now and have to go to class. I would like to point out that im more than willing to, and in some cases already, make the unit information profiles for each one. Im a history student [;)] love it lol

West Front

FOR ALL FORCES - Construction Engineer Platoon, Bridging Engineer Platoon, Rail Engineer Platoon, Pontoon Ferry, Foward Observer Team, Support Platoon, Field Ambulances, Signals Platoon, Field Hospital

-UK Forces - Royal Military Police Platoon, Blacker Bombard (290mm spigot mortar anti-tank) Section, Ulster Home Guard Platoon, Ulster Special Constabulary Platoon, A39 Tortoise Heavy Assault Tanks, Beaverette Armoured Cars, Armoured 30cwt Anti-Tank Lorry,A43 Super Churchill Black Prince Tanks, SAS Troop, Battleship, Heavy Cruiser, Destroyer, Frigate, Corvette, Motor Torpedo Boat, Troop Ship, Submarine, 9.2" Mark IX Coastal Artillery, 6" BL Mark X Coastal Artillery, Home Guard Improvised Armoured Cars, , Canal Defence Light (used at night to illuminate the battlefield) on Matilda and Grant chassis, Mark V Heavy Tanks (thats right the WW1 one)

-German Forces - Feldjäger Platoon, Hitlerjugend Platoon, Legion Volunteur Francaise Platoon, Flammenwefer Platoon, Goliath Radio Controlled Bombs, P1000 Rätte Land Cruiser, P1500 Monster Land Cruiser, PzKpfwgn Löwe, PzKpfwgn Bär 30.5cm mortar, Flakzwilling 8.8cm auf E-100 Maus SPAAG, Battleship, Heavy Cruiser (Pocket Battleship), Destroyer, Frigate, Troop Ship, U-Boot, E-Boot,

- New Nations - Irish Free State (hypothetical allies), Czechoslovakia (hypothetical allies), Denmark (allies), Turkey (hypothetical axis), Sweden (hypothetical allies), Romania (axis), Hungary (axis), Irish Republican Army (axis)

[Jason Petho]

ORIGINAL: major_at

Ok...so...this is the first bit lol didnt have time to finish it as im in university right now and have to go to class. I would like to point out that im more than willing to, and in some cases already, make the unit information profiles for each one. Im a history student [;)] love it lol

West Front

FOR ALL FORCES - Construction Engineer Platoon, Bridging Engineer Platoon, Rail Engineer Platoon, Pontoon Ferry, Foward Observer Team, Support Platoon, Field Ambulances, Signals Platoon, Field Hospital

-UK Forces - Royal Military Police Platoon, Blacker Bombard (290mm spigot mortar anti-tank) Section, Ulster Home Guard Platoon, Ulster Special Constabulary Platoon, A39 Tortoise Heavy Assault Tanks, Beaverette Armoured Cars, Armoured 30cwt Anti-Tank Lorry,A43 Super Churchill Black Prince Tanks, SAS Troop, Battleship, Heavy Cruiser, Destroyer, Frigate, Corvette, Motor Torpedo Boat, Troop Ship, Submarine, 9.2" Mark IX Coastal Artillery, 6" BL Mark X Coastal Artillery, Home Guard Improvised Armoured Cars, , Canal Defence Light (used at night to illuminate the battlefield) on Matilda and Grant chassis, Mark V Heavy Tanks (thats right the WW1 one)

-German Forces - Feldjäger Platoon, Hitlerjugend Platoon, Legion Volunteur Francaise Platoon, Flammenwefer Platoon, Goliath Radio Controlled Bombs, P1000 Rätte Land Cruiser, P1500 Monster Land Cruiser, PzKpfwgn Löwe, PzKpfwgn Bär 30.5cm mortar, Flakzwilling 8.8cm auf E-100 Maus SPAAG, Battleship, Heavy Cruiser (Pocket Battleship), Destroyer, Frigate, Troop Ship, U-Boot, E-Boot,

- New Nations - Irish Free State (hypothetical allies), Czechoslovakia (hypothetical allies), Denmark (allies), Turkey (hypothetical axis), Sweden (hypothetical allies), Romania (axis), Hungary (axis), Irish Republican Army (axis)

Great list, thank you for the input.

West Front and Rising Sun will both be getting major OOB expansions with the 1.04 and 1.05 future UPDATES.

Jason Petho

[Hermann]

Ok let's get technical. The AT Guns ar3e totally fubar. Specifically the 75mm. It's irritating to play the 44 east front screnarios and get nothing but the silly "modded in" pak 41/75mm at guns. First the Gun was the 75mm Pak 41 not the pak 41/75 second their were only 150 guns produced during the entire war and they were scrapped as the ammo supplies ran out. What guns were issued were issued to special duty units. They were never general issue and by june 44 the numbers remaining were almost nil. The gun was much more effective than the 75mm Pak 40 and using it throws off historical balance. Using it as lavishly as it's used in the current TOE is ridiculous.
Now we get to the Halftracks.

whats with the sdkfz 251 ( MG ) ? an sdkfz 251 is an sdkfz 251.. period. ausf a,bc,d etc... its all the same.
each company had 3 platoons. the platoon had 3 squads and a HMG section - it contained 4 vehicles. The First was the platoon leaders vehicle armed with the sdkfz 251/10 37mm AT gun. Next 2 had 2 mg 34 in LMG mounts the last vehicle carried the HMG and the Liight mortar section and had 1 MG 34 in a HMG at the front and the second an LMG 34 mount at the rear. The difference being the the HMG mount was capable of ranged fire to 500m the LMG 34s had substanstially less range. The designation of the last vehicle was 251/1 ( s.MG ) - the others had no special designation they were 251/1.

Lets look at your 1941 OOB for a 1941 Schutzen Company ( mechanised )
Company headquarters was a 251/3 communication vehicle and a 251/1 ( s.MG )
You guys put the 251/10 there.. good call put the company commander in an AT halftrack with no radio equipment and have him engage tanks, that'll really fly.
Each company had 3 Platoons as described above.
Basically to get the 1941 Schutzen company ( mech ) right you need:
1. HQ Platoon Strength 2 with HMG range ( Much longer than a 251/1 ) use the 251/3 designation.
2. 7 units per platoon. 1 251/10 Str. 1, 1 251/1 strength 6 each with a platoon of mot inf., 1 251/1 ( s. MG ) strength 2 with an HMG 34 section - again longer range than the other MG34s ) and 1 251/1 str. 2 for the 50mm nortar section.

that makes 22 units per company. lots of numbers there but its fairly accurate. it would be much more accurate if there was a way to load 2 sections into 1 vehicle. Im not sure about the coding difficulties but it would allow towing vehicles and combine a lot of these smaller sections for better playability.
currently there are 7 units per company.
lets examine the pros and cons of adding 15 units to play
1. pros - more historical accuracy
2. cons - totally oversaturating the game system with minor detail and making it unplayeable at the campaign level.
we can assume the HMG and Light mortar sections are part of the integral firepower of the dismounted infantry and dont have a major bearing on mounted action.
by doing so we can determine that its really unecessary. The single 37mm at track per platoon doesnt constitute a major tactical application other than adding a slight anti-tank defense value to the Halftack at point blank range. It was used more for hitting bunkers than engaging enemy armor. a weak antitank value at short range is another option. The HMG value again is integral and doesnt necessitate and additional unit - the 50mm mortars were short range weapons so adding a 1 hex indirect fire ability to motorised infatry platoons would fix that issue.

in summary :

keep the schutzen company at 4 vehicles. replace the 251/10 company hq with the 251/3 ( same net effect as the normal 251 maybe add 1 0r 2 to range )
keep the 3 tracks and 3 platoon system but add a 1or 2 hex indirect fire ( no armor effect ) to the Mot inf platoons - i think this is really uneccasary but would be accurate - we need to examine the 50mm mortar a little closer for the exact range and if the firepower warrants it. Add a slightly higher anti-tank modifier to the halftrack to reflect the single gun - this would be very useful in bunker busting and would probalby be a hit with the palyer base.


in addition the Panzer engineer bridging units should use the sdkfz 251/7 for bridging rather than the generic engineer trucks. this would only work for the hexside rivers ( dark blue ) and posibly give tanks swamp mobility at a large movement cost having a full blown enginner column in the army train is great but lets face it the bridging units werent combat formations and were used to facilitate the movement of the divisional trains rather than the combat elements. the game simply isnt set up to simualate effective large scale river crossings yet and the bridging companies are unnessary. just load the 251/7 with a bridge section.

[Jason Petho]

Hello Hermann.

A few comments/answers.

ORIGINAL: Hermann
Ok let's get technical.

Excellent! Constructive criticism is appreciated. Thank you.

ORIGINAL: Hermann
The AT Guns are totally fubar. Specifically the 75mm. It's irritating to play the 44 east front screnarios and get nothing but the silly "modded in" pak 41/75mm at guns.

You've played a Barbarossa Campaign to '44 already? Holy, good job!!

ORIGINAL: Hermann
First the Gun was the 75mm Pak 41 not the pak 41/75

I just changed the name for you, you will notice it in 1.03.

ORIGINAL: Hermann
second their were only 150 guns produced during the entire war and they were scrapped as the ammo supplies ran out. What guns were issued were issued to special duty units. They were never general issue and by june 44 the numbers remaining were almost nil. The gun was much more effective than the 75mm Pak 40 and using it throws off historical balance. Using it as lavishly as it's used in the current TOE is ridiculous.

That makes sense. Any suggestions of what would be a better replacement? The Pak 40?

ORIGINAL: Hermann

Now we get to the Halftracks.

whats with the sdkfz 251 ( MG ) ?

It is an alternate halftrack, with higher firepower at greater range but costing more Victory Points. There are both sets of halftracks in there for those who like to remain using the old ones.

ORIGINAL: Hermann
<snip>
it would be much more accurate if there was a way to load 2 sections into 1 vehicle.

1.03 includes that very thing. A 3SP Halftrack or Truck will now be able to carry a 6 SP infantry platoon (or infantry type platoon) and there are new oobs coming for the German motorized and mechanized units.

ORIGINAL: Hermann
Im not sure about the coding difficulties but it would allow towing vehicles and combine a lot of these smaller sections for better playability.
currently there are 7 units per company.
lets examine the pros and cons of adding 15 units to play
<snip>

While I see your points, it might be best to include the stock set of Campaign OOBs and the additional set of Campaign OOBs, then leave it up to the player if they wish to play with what was originally intended by Talonsoft or with the new additions.

ORIGINAL: Hermann
in addition the Panzer engineer bridging units should use the sdkfz 251/7 for bridging rather than the generic engineer trucks. this would only work for the hexside rivers ( dark blue ) and posibly give tanks swamp mobility at a large movement cost having a full blown enginner column in the army train is great but lets face it the bridging units werent combat formations and were used to facilitate the movement of the divisional trains rather than the combat elements. the game simply isnt set up to simualate effective large scale river crossings yet and the bridging companies are unnessary. just load the 251/7 with a bridge section.

The 251/7 would make more sense. The complete abilities of the engineers is still being resolved. Hopefully in a future update engineer capabilities will be available with all of our wishes.

Thanks again for your time.

Jason Petho

[Hermann]

im aware of what the vehicle is - in the campaign games its arbritrarily issued - every unit gets 251/1 (mg) key point here is that there is no 251/1 (mg) its the 251/1 (sMG) and its a custom vehicle modified and equipped solely for HMG sections - not for the ordinary squad.

i can give you a more complete list of engineering vehicles if you want. bridging vehicles were built on every AFV chassis the germans made not including the heavy panzers ( recovery vehicles )
each german tank division had an inherent obstacle crossing ability through its engineer battalion. a bridging column though is a whole different monster.

Oob stuff is really getting very messy.

needs to be cleaned up. i think having unit types reserved to support mods is a better solution. as you'll never be able to adequately represent all the different variables. making the different unit types more editable by the modders for instance. for instance a generic 1941 russian infantry battalion info and sound file connected to a german graphic could be modified to represent almost any ost battalion - they used Russian arms. currently we try to have a seperate unit for each and every one. I know modders can change unit names. So it stands to reason a new unit series called ost units based on russian units info and sound files tied to german graphics would work. in campaigns it would simply revert to ost platoon/ost company etc... but thats ok.

[Deputy]

This is more in the form of a question/request....
When a new scenario in a campaign is started, I ALWAYS have to move the transport trucks to the map's lower edge or into heavy forest to keep them from getting blown to pieces. I suspect that during the war, transport trucks moved troops up to the front lines and then LEFT THE AREA. Especially if an attack or advance was anticipated. Having all those transport vehicles up front just provides a target-rich environment for the AI to take pot shots at. The ONLY time I could MAYBE see having transport up close to the front lines would be if your mission was to move to an exit hex. And even then, they should be out of sight of the enemy....not parked right out in the open. This situation is bad at battalion level, but becomes an agony at division and higher levels. Also, I doubt very much that HQ units parked right out in the open. But this also happen frequently. If trucks MUST be present at the beginning of a campaign scenario, wouldn't it be better to either hide them behind mountains or trees, or put them at the lowest edge of the map so that they could be removed as a target?

Thanks,
Dep

[Jason Petho]

ORIGINAL: Hermann
i can give you a more complete list of engineering vehicles if you want. bridging vehicles were built on every AFV chassis the germans made not including the heavy panzers ( recovery vehicles )
each german tank division had an inherent obstacle crossing ability through its engineer battalion. a bridging column though is a whole different monster.

That would be very handy, please do.

ORIGINAL: Hermann
Oob stuff is really getting very messy. needs to be cleaned up.

I am trying to clean it up. I have reorganized them (Germans, Soviets and Americans)so they make more sense as to how Talonsoft originally coded them. Wait til 1.03 and then take a look at the files and offer some recommendations.

ORIGINAL: Hermann
i think having unit types reserved to support mods is a better solution. as you'll never be able to adequately represent all the different variables. making the different unit types more editable by the modders for instance. for instance a generic 1941 russian infantry battalion info and sound file connected to a german graphic could be modified to represent almost any ost battalion - they used Russian arms.

Would they use the Soviet MG's as well, or use the German?

ORIGINAL: Hermann
currently we try to have a seperate unit for each and every one. I know modders can change unit names. So it stands to reason a new unit series called ost units based on russian units info and sound files tied to german graphics would work. in campaigns it would simply revert to ost platoon/ost company etc... but thats ok.

I will try adding a set and look for it 1.03 and tell me if I am going in the right direction with it.

Thanks again
Jason Petho

[Jason Petho]

ORIGINAL: Deputy

This is more in the form of a question/request....
When a new scenario in a campaign is started, I ALWAYS have to move the transport trucks to the map's lower edge or into heavy forest to keep them from getting blown to pieces.

In the Dynamic Campaigns, you do have the Set-Up Mode where you can move your trucks to the map edge prior to the AI having a chance to shoot at them.

ORIGINAL: Deputy
I suspect that during the war, transport trucks moved troops up to the front lines and then LEFT THE AREA. Especially if an attack or advance was anticipated. Having all those transport vehicles up front just provides a target-rich environment for the AI to take pot shots at. The ONLY time I could MAYBE see having transport up close to the front lines would be if your mission was to move to an exit hex. And even then, they should be out of sight of the enemy....not parked right out in the open. This situation is bad at battalion level, but becomes an agony at division and higher levels. Also, I doubt very much that HQ units parked right out in the open. But this also happen frequently. If trucks MUST be present at the beginning of a campaign scenario, wouldn't it be better to either hide them behind mountains or trees, or put them at the lowest edge of the map so that they could be removed as a target?

If it is a Linked Campaign, the designer must have a reason for including the trucks. Or maybe the designer added for the simple reason they were in the OOB to use.

If it is a Dynamic Campaign, the computer places them randomly, after which you can move the units to where you wish them to be in the Set Up Mode.


Jason Petho

[Hermann]

Soviet Ost truppen were recruited from POW camps for the most part - youre looking at around 200 ethnic groups each with it's own dialect. Germans realized the training problems immediately and left the leadership in the hands of the ethnic NCO's. One of the key elements was trying to train russians in the operation of the complex German weapons. It was decided to leave the Russians with weapons they were already familiar with thru their Red Army training. Infantry weapons, Machine guns, infantry support weapons, etc.. were all Russian. Please take the situation in historical context and realise the Germans main problem wasn't manpower - It was training manpower. Ther Russian troops with full reserve training ( Russians had a military draft ), military training and combat experience compared to german civilian drafts and volksdeutsch of various ages and occupations with rudimentary training. In most instances the Russian troops performed as well as could be expected but the germans payed the ultimate price in august 1944 and the concept of Ostbattalions was pretty much rethought as were the methods of employment - this led to more large ost formations and placed the combat elements into the divisional rear services rather than line battalions. for the core campaigns however - november 43 to jan 45. the Ost battalions had a significant role in the German military effort - comprising 1/3 of the rifle strength of nearly every infantry division and sustaining proportionate losses. Im not sure how the disruption is determined ingame - if the unit being targeted has less of a % of being disrupted if its elite than another unit thats green. But that would really help to clarify the different combat values. An Ost unit was very unlikely to surrender out of hand and many fought desperately till wars end. However when an Ost unit did surrender it tended to do so as a complete unit.

[Jason Petho]

Excellent summary, Hermann. Thank you very much.

I have added three Ost Platoons to the order of battle (Green, Regular, Veteran) each having different attack, defense and weapon capabilities. I used the Russian Rifle platoon numbers as a base.

Any insight on the Company structure? Three Platoons? Three Platoons and a MG Platoon? Would a motorized version be required? If so, would they use captured Russian trucks as well?

Any insight on when the companies and battalions would start being available for German use? Late 41? 42?

Thank you again! This is useful!!

Jason Petho

[Deputy]

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho




In the Dynamic Campaigns, you do have the Set-Up Mode where you can move your trucks to the map edge prior to the AI having a chance to shoot at them.

ORIGINAL: Deputy
I suspect that during the war, transport trucks moved troops up to the front lines and then LEFT THE AREA. Especially if an attack or advance was anticipated. Having all those transport vehicles up front just provides a target-rich environment for the AI to take pot shots at. The ONLY time I could MAYBE see having transport up close to the front lines would be if your mission was to move to an exit hex. And even then, they should be out of sight of the enemy....not parked right out in the open. This situation is bad at battalion level, but becomes an agony at division and higher levels. Also, I doubt very much that HQ units parked right out in the open. But this also happen frequently. If trucks MUST be present at the beginning of a campaign scenario, wouldn't it be better to either hide them behind mountains or trees, or put them at the lowest edge of the map so that they could be removed as a target?

If it is a Linked Campaign, the designer must have a reason for including the trucks. Or maybe the designer added for the simple reason they were in the OOB to use.

If it is a Dynamic Campaign, the computer places them randomly, after which you can move the units to where you wish them to be in the Set Up Mode.


Jason Petho

Jason: I am talking ONLY about the Dynamic Campaigns...I am sorry I wasn't more specific[:)]. Yes....the computer seems to put all the truck transport right up next to the infantry units and in the line of tank and cannon fire. Isn't there any way to have the AI place the truck (and headquarter) units further back or even at the bottom edge of the screen? It doesn't seem like random placement right now as they are ALWAYS right up front. I know in setup mode these untis can all be moved, but it turns intoa real pain when you are talking about division or larger units and all those trucks.
I understand about user-designed scenarios and where the trucks might be placed there.
If nothing can be done about it I understad. Just something that I would like to see changed if possible.

Dep

[Hermann]

ive been working on engineers that wont be done till tonite but ill run thru ost truppen later tonite when im done
Basically your whole approach to engineers is wrong - trying to get a unit to build another unit doesnt work.
basically each river hex should already have a pontoon bridge on it - as a hidden terrain feature - I know you can turn unit display on and off and in the design mode you can do the same with terrain features. Basically you add the pontoon ( hidden ) as an integral part of the river hex. All engineers are amphibious due to the assault boats that are an integral part of their unit train. if an engineer enters a river hexside the function needs to be the engineer unit goes invisible and the pontoon terrain feature appears. adjusting the stacking limits for the hex makes certain that heavier units cant cross the pontoons.

for that feature your engineer truck works just fine unload the truck at the waters edge and create a pontoon ferry that will be able to load heavier units and move them across the water. The only problem is the possibility of cheating - the permanent pontoons allow movement over water - so thatll have to be worked out. youll be able to rapidly move trucks and infantry across the water and slowly ferry armor over... and you can scrap those silly assault assault boats that flood the river crossing scenarios.

[Hermann]

it would rock if the units were assigned on a random basis so the player doesnt know how they act till they start fighting. letting him pick is too easy and takes the punch out of "unpredicteable" =) getting stuck with a flaky unit for a whole campaign would be intetresting to say the least =) - did you adjust the assault values ?

[Hermann]

ORIGINAL: Deputy

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho




In the Dynamic Campaigns, you do have the Set-Up Mode where you can move your trucks to the map edge prior to the AI having a chance to shoot at them.

ORIGINAL: Deputy
I suspect that during the war, transport trucks moved troops up to the front lines and then LEFT THE AREA. Especially if an attack or advance was anticipated. Having all those transport vehicles up front just provides a target-rich environment for the AI to take pot shots at. The ONLY time I could MAYBE see having transport up close to the front lines would be if your mission was to move to an exit hex. And even then, they should be out of sight of the enemy....not parked right out in the open. This situation is bad at battalion level, but becomes an agony at division and higher levels. Also, I doubt very much that HQ units parked right out in the open. But this also happen frequently. If trucks MUST be present at the beginning of a campaign scenario, wouldn't it be better to either hide them behind mountains or trees, or put them at the lowest edge of the map so that they could be removed as a target?

If it is a Linked Campaign, the designer must have a reason for including the trucks. Or maybe the designer added for the simple reason they were in the OOB to use.

If it is a Dynamic Campaign, the computer places them randomly, after which you can move the units to where you wish them to be in the Set Up Mode.


Jason Petho

Jason: I am talking ONLY about the Dynamic Campaigns...I am sorry I wasn't more specific[:)]. Yes....the computer seems to put all the truck transport right up next to the infantry units and in the line of tank and cannon fire. Isn't there any way to have the AI place the truck (and headquarter) units further back or even at the bottom edge of the screen? It doesn't seem like random placement right now as they are ALWAYS right up front. I know in setup mode these untis can all be moved, but it turns intoa real pain when you are talking about division or larger units and all those trucks.
I understand about user-designed scenarios and where the trucks might be placed there.
If nothing can be done about it I understad. Just something that I would like to see changed if possible.

Dep

an option to remove transport prior to setup would rock in the campaign ( soft only , not the sdkz, you may want to move some stuff )
going further on that note being able to remove entire units from the setup with a click would really rock. ( they could revert to the reinforcement schedule )

[Deputy]

ORIGINAL: Hermann



an option to remove transport prior to setup would rock in the campaign ( soft only , not the sdkz, you may want to move some stuff )
going further on that note being able to remove entire units from the setup with a click would really rock. ( they could revert to the reinforcement schedule )

Excellent idea!!!! [:)]

[Hermann]

ORIGINAL: Hermann

ive been working on engineers that wont be done till tonite but ill run thru ost truppen later tonite when im done
Basically your whole approach to engineers is wrong - trying to get a unit to build another unit doesnt work.
basically each river hex should already have a pontoon bridge on it - as a hidden terrain feature - I know you can turn unit display on and off and in the design mode you can do the same with terrain features. Basically you add the pontoon ( hidden ) as an integral part of the river hex. All engineers are amphibious due to the assault boats that are an integral part of their unit train. if an engineer enters a river hexside the function needs to be the engineer unit goes invisible and the pontoon terrain feature appears. adjusting the stacking limits for the hex makes certain that heavier units cant cross the pontoons.

for that feature your engineer truck works just fine unload the truck at the waters edge and create a pontoon ferry that will be able to load heavier units and move them across the water. The only problem is the possibility of cheating - the permanent pontoons allow movement over water - so thatll have to be worked out. youll be able to rapidly move trucks and infantry across the water and slowly ferry armor over... and you can scrap those silly assault assault boats that flood the river crossing scenarios.

aaah I see your problem now =).... Your using the bridge column B which is a bit high powered for the game. It takes 6 hours on average to erect a 40 meter 16 ton bridge using the Bridge column B. Apparently dear Jason you forgot to look INSIDE the trucks... every truck you see towing those big pontoons is loaded to the gills with Rubber pontoons as well. they can slap out a 135 foot 10 ton bridge in less time.

The Bridge column B gives you 3 options:
1. is to build a straight bridge using the lumber and trestles that are on the trailers towed by the sdkfz's
2. is to build a 10 ton pontoon bridge from inflateable pontoons using sturmbootes to hold them in place ( inflateable boots will float away so you need motor boats with engines running to hold them in place )
3. Is to build the 16 ton Bridge with the Big Pontoons using the M-Boot section thats attached and towed by sdkfz.
the boat you guys use in the game ( crewed boats ) is the M-Boot and its the least common of all the boats in the Bridging column - its sole puorpose being to provide motive power to the large pontoons.

the next option is to form a ferry with either of the 2 elements and simply ferrying the stuff across. but thats time consuming.

the Bridge Column K is medium trucks loaded with Inflatable pontoons / girders and trestles and although not as frequently employed is more manegeable in game terms. Problem with using it is that its all paddles - theres no motors i think.
bridge column D is the box girder units attached to the division - like tanks with bridge sections that fold out for small obstacles.

The way the bridge assault plays it is the sturm boots of the pioneer battalion go in first they are sometimes helped by the pontoon rafts. once the bridgehead is formed thesturm boots and rafts form ferries and light pontoon bridges. its only at this stage that the BRUKO B will arrive and start building the good stuff. they can get a 16 ton up in 6 hours and have it to 24 tons the next day.

[steelrain60]

Jason,

One change that I hope can be made for 1.03 is that some Japanese units, such as MG sections and platoons can't be carried by Japanese tanks who are labeled as having the ability to carry troops. A little thing, but in the scenario I'm playing now, a little annoying.

BTW, thank you for all your efforts to make this game better; it means a lot to me and many others!

Alex