Oh no, stacking limits...

[fbs]

Sorry, this is one of the game abstractions that I can't make a break into reality.

A 10-miles hex has an area of 54 square miles or 140 km2; this is more than twice the size of Manhattan. I can understand fitting 3 Corps in that area (something like 100,000 soldiers), but I don't understand why, if I place one NKVD Rgt, one "fortified region" and one AT Brigade there (total of some 10,000 soldiers) I can't place anything else.

I mean, it's fine to limit to no more than 3 divisions or corps, but brigades, regiments and "fortified" regions should be excluded from that count (or should count for half)...

[timmyab]

I think the stacking limits could be relaxed just a bit for brigades.Would also like to see HQ's immune from stacking limits.

[Texas D]

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I think the stacking limits could be relaxed just a bit for brigades.Would also like to see HQ's immune from stacking limits.

HQs take up more space than line units in real life.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: Texas_
HQs take up more space than line units in real life.

There's no lack of space though is there.I think stacking limits are more about frontage.

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I think the stacking limits could be relaxed just a bit for brigades.Would also like to see HQ's immune from stacking limits.

It's not really about the physical room they occupy. It is more about how much combat power can be effectively coordinated and brought to bear. Personally, I am fine with the current stacking restrictions. They also nicely reflect progressing Soviet ability to concentrate combat power with increasing availability of corps the more the war progresses.

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

It's not really about the physical room they occupy. It is more about how much combat power can be effectively coordinated and brought to bear. Personally, I am fine with the current stacking restrictions. They also nicely reflect progressing Soviet ability to concentrate combat power with increasing availability of corps the more the war progresses.

Right, that's why it is fine to limit to 3 divisions or 3 corps. But why should the player lose 1 stack limit if he has a fortified region or a regiment? Either in space, frontage and combat power they are much smaller than a division, much less a corps.

The thing that "I can place 3 divisions, but if it is fortified I can place 2 divisions" seems bit artificial.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I think the stacking limits could be relaxed just a bit for brigades.Would also like to see HQ's immune from stacking limits.

It's not really about the physical room they occupy. It is more about how much combat power can be effectively coordinated and brought to bear.

That's presicely why I don't like having stacking limits for HQ's.
I'm quite happy with the three division stacking limit but It would make more sense to me if you had say a nine point stacking limit with divisions counting three points, brigades two points and regiments one point.

[Uxbridge]

Could it perhaps be that otherwise you start to upset the pixel limit for each hex? [:D]

[Tarhunnas]

Right, that's why it is fine to limit to 3 divisions or 3 corps. But why should the player lose 1 stack limit if he has a fortified region or a regiment? Either in space, frontage and combat power they are much smaller than a division, much less a corps.

I can agree with that. Fortified regions could well be free of stacking.

[Uxbridge]

All right, so what do we suggest?

1. Normal stacking should be lowered to 2 units with one extra fortified region as an option?

2. A fortified region should be allowed in excess of the normal 3 units, but it will not show up as a counter/counter corner in the hex?

3. A total redrawing of the entire graphic model to allow for 4 units visible in a hex?

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I think the stacking limits could be relaxed just a bit for brigades.Would also like to see HQ's immune from stacking limits.

It's not really about the physical room they occupy. It is more about how much combat power can be effectively coordinated and brought to bear. Personally, I am fine with the current stacking restrictions. They also nicely reflect progressing Soviet ability to concentrate combat power with increasing availability of corps the more the war progresses.

I was sort of against the stacking rules as presently constituted until my most recent Ge vs. AI Soviet game, in which I inflicted almost 5 million casualties.

As I wait for winter (in 4 more turns) I notice a ton of Soviet brigades, but I've forced the vast majority of divisions to surrender, meaning the AI Soviet is going to have a harder time building corps. In essence, I've forced the Soviet to smaller unit sizes, and may reap significant benefit when it is only brigades he can attack me with (plus the bacteria of Guards Cavalary) when Blizard hits.

I say they are an abstraction that works reasonably well to force operational and strategic considerations.

[2ndACR]

Yep, the AI spams those brigades big time. I think it actually hurts the AI.

[amatteucci]

The issue was already discussed ad nauseam in these forums, you could read some interesting discussions about this issue... if the search funtion would function as advertised! [:D]

Basically, there were two possible solutions: stacking based on actual number of troops, vehicles and guns, stacking based on unit counters. The latter solution was the only one that allowed for a correct representation of unit frontages and their evolution in the 1941-45 timeframe. In a strategic game with such a scope it's more important to get the doctrinal frontages right, than to avoid the occasional inconsistencies.

For what concernes HQs, I think that they contribution to the stacking limits recreates very well the problems due to Soviet Corps level headquarters in 1941, especially with Mechanized Corps. )

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: amatteucci

The issue was already discussed ad nauseam in these forums, you could read some interesting discussions about this issue... if the search funtion would function as advertised! [:D]

Yeah, I reckoned it had been, but when I tried to Google for "Gary fortified stacking" I ended up with a list of porn movies, oh no...

I really wished the search function would work; I got traumatized with Googling this game after I tried to find information about "German rear attack"... [X(]

[Redmarkus5]

This issue has been handled by a number of games in the past, IIRC. You just calculate stacking limits based on the number of men in the hex, with tanks counting as 10 men, artillery pieces as 5, etc.

Then you set the upper limit based on a historical headcount for a major battle along a relatively narrow frontage (Kursk springs to mind). The total allowed should be higher in urban terrain and lower in rough and mountains.

If the game is modelling the total OOB numbers correctly, then stacking (read 'concentration of force') should be encouraged, not prevented. Concentration of force is what allows a weaker force to break through a numerically stronger one and prevail.

The current system is completely artificial and has very little relation to reality, IMO.

[Redmarkus5]

ORIGINAL: fbs

ORIGINAL: amatteucci

The issue was already discussed ad nauseam in these forums, you could read some interesting discussions about this issue... if the search funtion would function as advertised! [:D]

Yeah, I reckoned it had, but when I tried to Google for "Gary fortified stacking limit" I ended up with a list of porn movies, oh no...

I really wished the search function would work; I got traumatized of Googling this game after I tried to find information about "German rear attack"... [X(]

Try searching for 'Moscow thrust' LOL

[Mynok]

ORIGINAL: fbs

Yeah, I reckoned it had been, but when I tried to Google for "Gary fortified stacking" I ended up with a list of porn movies, oh no...

I really wished the search function would work; I got traumatized with Googling this game after I tried to find information about "German rear attack"... [X(]

You have to Google with results restricted to matrixgames.com.

[marty_01]

My one cent worth of opinion...I think the stacking limits in there current form work fine -- at least for me. They are straight forward, clean, elegant, etc...

[Skanvak]

Sure I could do with something more refine and I like the unlimited stacking of TOAW, but well the concentration of force exist thanks to attack reserve and defense reserve.

If you want actual frontage, you have to go for unit type, not number of men, as doctrinal frontage is base on the unit not the real number of men. Now I let the historical specialist discuss if the fact that the soviet can stack 3 orps and the german only 3 divisions is coherent or not.