Matrix Games Forums

If this game engine model is successful then future editions will allow for such things as it will be based on divisions inside a corp counter.

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

I’m seeing unit combining/splitting is planned? This sort of allows stacking of sub-units, so looks fine. Also seeing multiple hex attacks, assumed for odds-based CRT combat resolution? Again, looks fine. Good potential.

ORIGINAL: fuzzypup

So say you are defending Leningrad. What can you do as the defender.

#1 put a unit with a tank destroyer specialty in the city.
#2 entrench it to the maximum.
#3 place a HQ with a high tenacity near it which lowers the chance of surrender.
#4 place air superiority groups near by

Air power is important in WarPlan in reducing the effectiveness and movement of units a lot more than doing physical damage. Which matches the reality of the situation in WW2 air interdiction missions.

You would need on the order of 20 good air units to have a chance to actually cripple the health of a land unit in a clear terrain.

The game mechanics allow for creativity.

So take this example. Say your army in Leningrad gets reduced in effectiveness to 40%. You can split the army into two small armies. Move one away. Merge the group with a fresh small army without losing entrenchment.

For other Western countries it would be detaching and replacing divisions.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

You are kidding? Infantry can break down but not Panzer?

You may not realize the Panzer Corp were the most highly trained and flexible formations of the whole German army. I think you need to step away from claims of an operational feel. Clearly it is not an operational game design.

ORIGINAL: fuzzypup

I will put it on the list of considerations during Beta testing.

ORIGINAL: jzardos

ORIGINAL: fuzzypup

So say you are defending Leningrad. What can you do as the defender.

#1 put a unit with a tank destroyer specialty in the city.
#2 entrench it to the maximum.
#3 place a HQ with a high tenacity near it which lowers the chance of surrender.
#4 place air superiority groups near by

Air power is important in WarPlan in reducing the effectiveness and movement of units a lot more than doing physical damage. Which matches the reality of the situation in WW2 air interdiction missions.

You would need on the order of 20 good air units to have a chance to actually cripple the health of a land unit in a clear terrain.

The game mechanics allow for creativity.

So take this example. Say your army in Leningrad gets reduced in effectiveness to 40%. You can split the army into two small armies. Move one away. Merge the group with a fresh small army without losing entrenchment.

For other Western countries it would be detaching and replacing divisions.

WTF
"You would need on the order of 20 good air units to have a chance to actually cripple the health of a land unit in a clear terrain."

Ok this statement completely flies in the face of the realities of the effects of air power on the eastern front. Yes, air power was not available in the same concentrations as in the Germany's western campaigns, but on many occasions when the Germans were able to concentrate their air power in 41 - 42 (less in 43 --> Kursk) it was decisive. You might want to read up on some recent books about combat on the eastern front, you will understand how important air power was and how much it hurt the Ostheer with the decline of the Luftwaffe and the resurgence of the Red Air Force. I've read over 150 books on this conflict and from the lower ranks on up, it's always air power that was feared and could be very devastating when concentrated.

If this is an example of how the game engine tries to emulate combat in WW2, I'm out. Also, as a developer, I'm not sure why having the ability to stack multiple land units in a hex is so complicated and so undervalued a feature. SSI was designing combat games with this feature in 1980's. You should serious consider adding that feature to your combat engine, if you expect it to last the test of time plus sales.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

You are kidding? Infantry can break down but not Panzer?

You may not realize the Panzer Corp were the most highly trained and flexible formations of the whole German army. I think you need to step away from claims of an operational feel. Clearly it is not an operational game design.

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e
On the other hand, I am always disappointed when I see, in a game, that a corps (yes a corps) can be removed from the map by the single action of air power. Air power is important but you do not gain terrain just by its action.

ORIGINAL: fuzzypup
The impact of air power affects effectiveness, some health, and movement. If you play Unity of Command you see something similar if I remember.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

oh, how I wish we could have a PC version of A3R/AWAW.

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

ORIGINAL: fuzzypup
The impact of air power affects effectiveness, some health, and movement. If you play Unity of Command you see something similar if I remember.

But SC and UoC use single unit move/attack. WarPlan uses multi-unit/multi-hex attacks. So I assume air power attack factors and other modifiers are added to the combat? Something like the old Third Reich rules prohibiting air-only attacks on ground units and restricting their use to no more than 3x the ground attack factors could work well. Perhaps a separate thread describing land, air, and naval combats would be helpful to better understand the proposed game mechanics.

ORIGINAL: pzgndr


But SC and UoC use single unit move/attack. WarPlan uses multi-unit/multi-hex attacks.

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53

Tactical interdiction had limited effect against armored vehicles - as in direct kills, although it certainly hampered movement and the supplies.
Strategic interdiction, targeting the road, rail and other infrastructure and specifically logistics had communications had a major impact on operational effectiveness.

How the game handles interdiction is still unknown.
You attack a ground unit and its effects will be what Fuzzypup explained, or you have the ability to go beyond direct targeting..