PBEM Standing Orders

[Froonp]

I have a suggestion for SO 16 Overrun Naval Units.

Maybe the player could decide a "default emergency destination port" that would be the default destination port for all ships overrunned, or needing an emergency rebase.

Maybe this "default emergency destination port" could be set up for each theater of operation (Europe / Asia / America ?).

This would simplify the assignement of SO16, because in the real game you definitely have a default rebase port (Plymouth / Kiel / Tokyo / Canton / Calcuta...) for each theater.


Moreover, this "default emergency destination port" could be used for ships aborded / damaged from combat, which would simplify the SO for naval combat too.

Best Regards

Patrice

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp
I have a suggestion for SO 16 Overrun Naval Units.

Maybe the player could decide a "default emergency destination port" that would be the default destination port for all ships overrunned, or needing an emergency rebase.

Maybe this "default emergency destination port" could be set up for each theater of operation (Europe / Asia / America ?).

This would simplify the assignement of SO16, because in the real game you definitely have a default rebase port (Plymouth / Kiel / Tokyo / Canton / Calcuta...) for each theater.


Moreover, this "default emergency destination port" could be used for ships aborded / damaged from combat, which would simplify the SO for naval combat too.

Best Regards

Patrice

I understand your point. I don't think it will help. If the player wants all his ships to rebase to the same port, then he can just select them all and give them the same SO 16. It would only require a single entry. Adding a default emergency destination doesn't simplify the process.

=================

What you have alerted me to is that the current PBEM design doesn't have a provision for the phasing player returning naval units to base after he chooses to abort from a combat. It's ok for the non-phasing player, but I have to let the phasing player designate the bases he wants his naval units to go to if they abort from combat.

Perfection is such an elusive goal.

Since SO 13 can be set "sort of" in the middle of a naval combat, it should be pretty easy for the phasing player to choose where he wants his naval units to go. From a programming point of view the naval combat is quite annoying to code because during the return to base after aborting from a combat, the naval units can be intercepted again in another sea area, which can produce another round of naval combat, from which they abort, ... Yuck!

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Here is my proposal for SO 24. What I have done is require that the player go through the hexes that might be attacked and mark units for death. There really aren't that many of them (maybe 20 on the Russian front when things are hot and heavy). It should be relatively easy to do quickly, and this way the player has comlpete control without a convoluted prioritization scheme. However, I now have to go back and look at SO 17, Overstacked Losses.

================================
SO 24 Choosing Land Combat Losses

This SO is not difficult to set. When clicked on by the player, all the land hexes that might be attacked are listed in a column on the left hand side of the screen. The player clicks on the hexes one by one and marks which unit should take 1 loss and which two units should take two losses. It is quite possible that the unit that would take a single loss is not one of the two units that would take 2 losses. That is up to the player to decide.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Here is my revised proposal for SO 17.

======================
SO 17 Overstacked losses

This SO prioritizes which units take casualties due to overstacking. This comes up very rarely so the player is only given a little flexibility. Choices from which the player can choose are:
∙ Unit size - kill the divisions first
∙ Combat strength - kill the weak
∙ Defensive strength (i.e., against armor) - kill the weak
∙ Attack strength (i.e., against armor) - kill the weak
∙ Movement points - kill the slow
∙ Cost to rebuild - kill the cheapest to rebuild
∙ Time to rebuild - kill the fastest to rebuild
∙ Unit type - player specifies the priority order for unit types
∙ Elite (white print) versus non-elite (black print) - kill the non-elite

Obviously in the case of 3 corps sized units and a division, the division is not killed, since that will not solve the overstacking problem. But given 2 divisions and 2 corps, the first choice applies. More than one choice can be set. The second and subsequent levels would only be used to break ties. The player can set up to five choices from the above list in priority order.

Just as a side note, there are a lot of land unit types: Infantry, Cavalry, Paratroop, Air Landing, Air Cav, Marine, Mountain, Ski, Engineer, Motorized Engineer, Marine Engineer, Infantry HQ, Armor HQ, Militia, Partisan, Territorial, Garrison, Motorized, Mechanized, Armor, Armored Marine, Armored Paratroop, Artillery, Motorized Artillery, Rocket, Railway Gun, Self Propelled, Tank Destroyer, Anti Tank, Motorized Anti Tank, Light Anti Air, Motorized Light Anti Air, Heavy Anti Air, and Motorized Heavy Anti Air.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

The design for the standing orders is complete and therefore so is the design for PBEM!

I have two PDF files available for anyone who is interested: Final PBEM Design and Final Standing Orders Design. They should be read side by side, which is why I have them as separate documents. I am not going to post them to this forum because the first is 10 pages long and the second is 20.

Just send me an email [Steve@PatternDiscovery.us] and I will send you the PDF files. I do not save the email addresses of people who request the various PDF files I am creating for MWIF. That is intentional. I think of them as one time letter (email) drops, never to be used again and discard them immediately after sending out the documents. So, if you asked for and received the draft copies of these documents, you need to send me another email for the final versions.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Here is my revised proposal for SO 17.

======================
SO 17 Overstacked losses

This SO prioritizes which units take casualties due to overstacking. This comes up very rarely so the player is only given a little flexibility. Choices from which the player can choose are:

Indeed, this come up so rarely (a couple of times in the game ?), that IMO no standing orders are to be made. Just have an extra mail to be sent.