Stacking issues and question

[FM WarB]

As far as I can judge, oob nut that I am, a "Corps" in this game does not represent a historical Corps. I have no idea what a "strength point" is, or how it relates to the impressive total of casualties that get racked up.
A unit, called a Corps in this game can have from one to 40 "strength points" yet requires three stacking points per hex. This means that The Americans can basicaly stack more than any other army (especially late in the game), because their "Corps" are so strong.

Maybe stacking should be by strength points (whatever They are) not "units" or "Corps" per hex?

[ILCK]

They are, get a bunch of decimated corps together and you can stack the heck out of them.

[FrankHunter]

This is actually an old discussion from about a year ago or more. A combat point doesn't actually represent 1 manpower. If it did all corps would have the same strength since I based them around 40,000 troops if my memory is right. But all corps weren't equal. Even with separating quality out so that I could use it for things like resisting gas, bombardments etc the fact is that all corps having 20 CV just didn't feel right. Of course that's because that strength didn't take into account the differences in equipment and command. So using 20 as my base I fudged numbers up or down for each nation until I liked the balance.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: ILCK

They are, get a bunch of decimated corps together and you can stack the heck out of them.

I don't think this is correct ILCK, even decimated corps cost 3 stacking points.

[Harrybanana]

FM WarB,

Like you I was unhappy that the US Corps are so strong. However it may give you some comfort to know that not all A class corps are the same between nations. For example, German and British A Corps have a quality of 9, while (if memory serves) US A Corps only have a quality of 7. Even with this I still think US Corps are too strong and, IMHO, should have a stacking value of 4 rather than 3. But we will just have to live with it.

[FM WarB]

U.S. Corps should be stronger. They often have three instead of two infantry divisions, and these divisions are larger than anyone else's. It's the stacking that has me asking these questions.

[ILCK]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

ORIGINAL: ILCK

They are, get a bunch of decimated corps together and you can stack the heck out of them.

I don't think this is correct ILCK, even decimated corps cost 3 stacking points.

I can consistently get more than 3 battered corps but in roaming through save games to find these they all seem to violate stacking rules and appears to the results of some ugly defeats and retreats not intentional overstacking. My bad.

[FM WarB]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

A combat point doesn't actually represent 1 manpower.

To replace one combat point costs one armament point and two manpower points, no matter the nation. So the stacking question remains: Should a "Corps" of 40 combat points have the same stacking value as one of 10?

[FrankHunter]

Oh I've been aware of that flaw in the logic since I first decided not to make all corps the same strength. I just figured that it was an acceptable fudge.

[FM WarB]

"Corps" are not exactly Corps in this game. They do not represent the historical corps accurately enough to be. Corps did have varying strengths, historically. Most armies had combat strength at army or army group, not corps level also, so more fudging is required.
Hey, the game is fun, and thanks for your replies, Frank.

[FM WarB]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

FM WarB,

Even with this I still think US Corps are too strong and, IMHO, should have a stacking value of 4 rather than 3. But we will just have to live with it.

For PBEM, I suggest a Gentlemens' rule (dislike these, preferring to have changes in the game) U.S. may not stack more than three corps in the same hex.