China and static units.

[Ron Saueracker]

First of all, great job so far with China. Only real problem I can see is the static Chinese units and the huge supply advantage Japan is going to enjoy, an unfortunate result of the 1:1 supply/resource ratio.

Eliminate all the static aspects of these units. The land combat model just turns them into fodder. Retreating LCUs don't even retreat towards supply for crying out loud.[:@] I still have basically no understanding of land combat as there seems to be no specific design direction or standard. Also, given the lack of supplies the Chinese suffer, if these units will become mobile (static restriction removed), they are going to be starved and incapable of anything but defensive action close to what supply is available. The lack of supply is keeping China static on the Chinese end.

Not sure about Japan though. The only hindrances to any advance will be supply and the supply movement model. The model is screwing any unit not in a base hex for the most part and the supplies never get to them unless the rear area units are loaded to the tits. HQs don't do squat in the face of this really. But if Japan can ship in 100,000s of supply as we all know they can, China is in major doodoo.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

The model is screwing any unit not in a base hex for the most part and the supplies never get to them unless the rear area units are loaded to the tits. HQs don't do squat in the face of this really.

True that. Most of static units out of bases are sitting there with 0 supply and withering away. Probably it'd work better if units out of bases could move and static units were in bases.

[treespider]

That would be my error if you would like to call it as such. The units that were designated as static remained in those areas for the duration of the war and would be a simple fix.

In regards to chinese supply....most of the Chinese supply is now derived from daily allotments as opposed to production and resource generated supply which was being bombed into oblivion. What has the experience been with the supply revisions? Better or worse than before?

In regards to the "guerilla" units based behind the lines I initially suggested the inclusion of Chinese "bases" in one or two of these clusters that would recieve a small daily allotment of supply such that if it were occupied the japanese would receive no benefit.

Another option would be to create "safe" hexes wherein the hex would be occupied by some "uber" unit and base for supply that was Static. Such that it could not move but could not be defeated either thereby offering safe haven for the guerillas.

[jwilkerson]

"bases" in one or two of these clusters that would recieve a small daily allotment of supply such that if it were occupied the japanese would receive no benefit

This sounds like there is a way to have a base generate supply for one side and not the other .. is that automatic ... or do you have to do something special ?

( I know how to create a base that generates supply .. .but not how to toggle between restricting the generation to different sides ... or not )

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

The model is screwing any unit not in a base hex for the most part and the supplies never get to them unless the rear area units are loaded to the tits. HQs don't do squat in the face of this really.

True that. Most of static units out of bases are sitting there with 0 supply and withering away. Probably it'd work better if units out of bases could move and static units were in bases.

Nix the static units altogether. If they are forced to retreat, then what?

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: treespider

That would be my error if you would like to call it as such. The units that were designated as static remained in those areas for the duration of the war and would be a simple fix.

In regards to chinese supply....most of the Chinese supply is now derived from daily allotments as opposed to production and resource generated supply which was being bombed into oblivion. What has the experience been with the supply revisions? Better or worse than before?

In regards to the "guerilla" units based behind the lines I initially suggested the inclusion of Chinese "bases" in one or two of these clusters that would recieve a small daily allotment of supply such that if it were occupied the japanese would receive no benefit.

Another option would be to create "safe" hexes wherein the hex would be occupied by some "uber" unit and base for supply that was Static. Such that it could not move but could not be defeated either thereby offering safe haven for the guerillas.

I wouldn't call it an error. Heck, you are just trying to make a botched model work. I'm OK with Chinese supply levels in that China was historically relatively static. What sucks is that the incomprehensible supply model tends to do nothing in any sort of pattern or formula. So instead of spreading supply about if short, the bases with HQs hog all and do not issue a droplet to units in the front not at bases...yet another reason to form death stars.[8|] Can't form a front because the dumb AI won't feed or supply units not on roads or at bases, and even bases are shorted if the larger centres are not already gorged beyond even Roman standards.

All these cute ideas with supply sinks, static units, what have you noble but they all seem to have negative consequences on a game that might take a year to showcase. Maybe they (the devs responsible for this product) should just revisit various aspects of the game and fix them after a concensus of what needs to be fixed and how is arrived at instead of trying to find some modder to achieve the sedired results, especially when nobody seems to know what is actually supposed to happen within the black box anyway.

[Sardaukar]

I wouldn't call it an "error" either. Just that supply system is *bit* weird in WitP. I think that daily allotment idea was right thing to do, so that even when IJ captures the base they don't get the benefits like they'd get from resource centers etc and vise versa. Problem is that supply model is too much "On/Off", like Ron said. Static units would be just fine if supply would flow out of bases when set to realistic levels. It just doesn't unless base supply is set atrociously high. I cannot think many remedies to that...either Chinese get too powerful..or they wither away...[:@]

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

"bases" in one or two of these clusters that would recieve a small daily allotment of supply such that if it were occupied the japanese would receive no benefit

This sounds like there is a way to have a base generate supply for one side and not the other .. is that automatic ... or do you have to do something special ?

( I know how to create a base that generates supply .. .but not how to toggle between restricting the generation to different sides ... or not )

I don't have the manual handy as I am at work...but it is my understanding that daily supply shuts off when the base changes side.

[Ron Saueracker]

I'm still trying to figure out why out of supply and surrounded units not in a base hex can withstand endless shock and deleiberate attacks but if the same units are in a base hex they will surrender.[8|][&:][:-][>:]

[el cid again]

I hate to say this - but it is TRUE Chinese units cannot move. Some can - but most are hopelessly tied to the local economy. They don't get paid or funded by taxes. They need to plug in to a place they understand the language (China has 635 languages) and have an economic role. Move most units you disband them. It is proper to ONLY allow certain units to move.

[Andrew Brown]

Regarding the static Chinese units in CHS - the approach I plan on taking in the next CHS update is to:

• Remove two of the most isolated "guerilla" units entirely.
• Make all units not in bases at start mobile instead of static.
• Increase the number of units IN bases at start that are static, but currently only by a small amount.

Any comments welcome.

Andrew

[rockmedic109]

The static Chinese units behind the lines are supposed to be guerilla bands right? But the game takes into account guerrilla activity by enforcing garrison rules on the Japanese. Would this not render Chinese Guerilla units superfluous? I've never played the Japanese side, so I do not know how much the garrison rule hurts them.

I thought that destroyed Chinese units respawn in Chungking or somewhere. If so, what happens when a static unit respawns? Does it respawn static at the place respawned, or is it no longer static?

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

Regarding the static Chinese units in CHS - the approach I plan on taking in the next CHS update is to:

• Remove two of the most isolated "guerilla" units entirely.
• Make all units not in bases at start mobile instead of static.
• Increase the number of units IN bases at start that are static, but currently only by a small amount.

Any comments welcome.

Andrew

Seems like the most practical approach.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I hate to say this - but it is TRUE Chinese units cannot move. Some can - but most are hopelessly tied to the local economy. They don't get paid or funded by taxes. They need to plug in to a place they understand the language (China has 635 languages) and have an economic role. Move most units you disband them. It is proper to ONLY allow certain units to move.

Game mechanics will just allow the static unit to get screwed. Because the supply is extremely low in China for CHS (as it should be I believe) the units are tied up anyway. Making them static just makes them vulnerable to the clunky land movement/combat models. I say chuck the static aspectentirely as game play has shown the supply limits China to static defence anyway.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

Regarding the static Chinese units in CHS - the approach I plan on taking in the next CHS update is to:

• Remove two of the most isolated "guerilla" units entirely.
• Make all units not in bases at start mobile instead of static.
• Increase the number of units IN bases at start that are static, but currently only by a small amount.

Any comments welcome.

Andrew

Are there any slots for additional Chinese bases?

[Sardaukar]

I also think that those static units are quite supply hogs too. Maybe it's their "Fortification" equipment..but I don't know how game calculates the supply consumption....that is way too arcane for me ! [:D]

[el cid again]

The static Chinese units behind the lines are supposed to be guerilla bands right

I don't know what game people have done? But REAL static units are most of the regular divisions and "armies" - they can barely move - and not leave the hex in our terms. There are fine units in China - but only a few - and there are poor units in China - a fair number - but most of all there are junk units in China - and they are not up to being guerillas either.

[el cid again]

Game mechanics will just allow the static unit to get screwed. Because the supply is extremely low in China for CHS (as it should be I believe) the units are tied up anyway. Making them static just makes them vulnerable to the clunky land movement/combat models. I say chuck the static aspectentirely as game play has shown the supply limits China to static defence anyway.

It all depends on what you want to do? Be historical or fictional?
Probably they are too strong - and being weaker would eat less. For lots of reasons Chinese units are understrength. Leaders sometimes get stipends based on the number of troops they report having - but there is no audit - so they keep the money if they lie! Troops often are in the unit to eat. If the deal suddenly includes actual risky behaviors - like fighting - many troops will decide they want a different job! Remember - these troops are not paid much of anything. In Burma Gen Stillwell experimented with paying them - and he had little trouble getting their interest - but it was a novel idea! There is no sense of nationalism or patriotism motivating most Chinese "units" - and except for specialists (e.g. navy and air force units - and the navy is wiped out before our campaign begins) there is no sense of belonging to the nation that we can recognize. So those sorts of intangible motives do not make cultural sense. Except for communists.

[treespider]

The static Chinese units behind the lines are supposed to be guerilla bands right?

Where did this myth start? There are no static units behind the lines. There are, however, static units located on the transportation net and in several of the Chinese bases. Perhaps they do not work however do not be mistaken that they start the scenario behind the front.

What does start behind the front are a number of small units designated as Guerilla Corps, however they are not static.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: treespider

The static Chinese units behind the lines are supposed to be guerilla bands right?

Where did this myth start? There are no static units behind the lines. There are, however, static units located on the transportation net and in several of the Chinese bases. Perhaps they do not work however do not be mistaken that they start the scenario behind the front.

What does start behind the front are a number of small units designated as Guerilla Corps, however they are not static.

Or does the phrase "behind the front" mean located in Chungking or some other city/base? There are also static units on the rail to Sian from Honan and the trail to Sian from Sinyang as well as the Road into Changsha and across the river from Ichang.