GC 1941 - Closed

Post here to arrange multi-player games via the PBEM++ server.

Moderator: Joel Billings

Post Reply
jubjub
Posts: 641
Joined: Sun May 02, 2021 12:52 pm

GC 1941 - Closed

Post by jubjub »

Want to start a new Axis campaign once the newest patch comes out in the next few days. Looking for an experienced Soviet player.

Enhanced TB control On
Full Fog of War
Full Movement FOW

House Rules:
No paratrooper drops
No naval invasions west of Sevastopol after it's been captured
No air missions with more than 200 sorties in a flight in '41
No removing SU's from ZOC'd units and HQ's

Nix77
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 6:19 am
Location: Finland

RE: GC 1941

Post by Nix77 »

ORIGINAL: jubjub

No removing SU's from ZOC'd units and HQ's

Sorry, unrelated to your opponent search, but how would you define "ZOC'd units"? I've been also thinking that the mass evacuation of support units through a narrow gap in a pocket seems a bit unrealistic, but not sure how to enforce this in a game, or how the devs could fix that.

I think an easy fix for this would be to require the HQ to have the "off-rail MP" less than around 5-15MP (maybe?) to be able to send support units out. Not sure how it's currently limited, since HQs can move SUs inside a pocket freely, which is OK in my opinion. Seems like it's a simple isolated/not isolated switch.
jubjub
Posts: 641
Joined: Sun May 02, 2021 12:52 pm

RE: GC 1941

Post by jubjub »

ORIGINAL: Nix77

ORIGINAL: jubjub

No removing SU's from ZOC'd units and HQ's

Sorry, unrelated to your opponent search, but how would you define "ZOC'd units"? I've been also thinking that the mass evacuation of support units through a narrow gap in a pocket seems a bit unrealistic, but not sure how to enforce this in a game, or how the devs could fix that.

I think an easy fix for this would be to require the HQ to have the "off-rail MP" less than around 5-15MP (maybe?) to be able to send support units out. Not sure how it's currently limited, since HQs can move SUs inside a pocket freely, which is OK in my opinion. Seems like it's a simple isolated/not isolated switch.

Yeah it's mainly to prevent evacuation of support units. Trust me, it's pretty easy to catch, although I do think the devs should implement it as a rule.

To clarify, you can only move SU's to an HQ if you can trace a path from the original HQ that doesn't incur the ZOC to ZOC MP penalty described in 38.7.1. You're free to change HQ's within a pocket (closed or unclosed) and try to sneak them out with the HQ as long as you follow this rule.

I'm a big proponent of the off-rail MP idea, but it's too much calculation and should be handled by the devs.
Post Reply

Return to “Opponents Wanted”