Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

To answer the stacking question...

I wanted to do everything like the naval system but I found that programming would be a very tall order. The reason is the A.I.. It is too much to program at once on a conceptual system that hasn't been proven yet.

It's like me trying to make a racing car before I even invent a car.

WarPlan is a corp level game. The abstract stacking comes from corps and armies being able to detach/split. That is the compromise I made. Functionally it is MUCH easier than manipulating stacks of counters.

I don't like that compromise at all.

I do.

ORIGINAL: cdcool

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

To answer the stacking question...

I wanted to do everything like the naval system but I found that programming would be a very tall order. The reason is the A.I.. It is too much to program at once on a conceptual system that hasn't been proven yet.

It's like me trying to make a racing car before I even invent a car.

WarPlan is a corp level game. The abstract stacking comes from corps and armies being able to detach/split. That is the compromise I made. Functionally it is MUCH easier than manipulating stacks of counters.

I don't like that compromise at all.

Well you might not like it but in life you must surely have to from time to time![:D]

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa
WarPlan is a corp level game. The abstract stacking comes from corps and armies being able to detach/split. That is the compromise I made. Functionally it is MUCH easier than manipulating stacks of counters.

I think the system works rather well. It's simple and you learn how to work with the it very quickly; the GUI gets you there after an interaction or two. Likes it.

ORIGINAL: Worg64

ORIGINAL: cdcool

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

To answer the stacking question...

I wanted to do everything like the naval system but I found that programming would be a very tall order. The reason is the A.I.. It is too much to program at once on a conceptual system that hasn't been proven yet.

It's like me trying to make a racing car before I even invent a car.

WarPlan is a corp level game. The abstract stacking comes from corps and armies being able to detach/split. That is the compromise I made. Functionally it is MUCH easier than manipulating stacks of counters.

I don't like that compromise at all.

Well you might not like it but in life you must surely have to from time to time![:D]

Not with my money I don't [:D]
[:D][:D]

ORIGINAL: bcgames

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa
WarPlan is a corp level game. The abstract stacking comes from corps and armies being able to detach/split. That is the compromise I made. Functionally it is MUCH easier than manipulating stacks of counters.

I think the system works rather well. It's simple and you learn how to work with the it very quickly; the GUI gets you there after an interaction or two. Likes it.

I will watch some YouTube video's then make a decision. I didn't take SC serious because of lack of Stacking

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Yes, no 2 ground units can exist in one hex. Not even HQ plus other ground.

Stacking plus the combat model kept me well away from SC. eek.

But I can live with the lack of stacking in WarPlan as it has a nice combat model. But I would prefer to be able to stack, up to a sensible limit.

My feelings exactly.

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

ORIGINAL: Worg64

WHY Would You EVER want more stacking in a strategic wwII corp/army game? If you want more stacking in all respect play War in the East!

Of course War in the East... why it seems forbidden to have stacks in a strategic game? World in Flames have stacks but true, not all strategic games implement stacks. You see my problem is the following, you have the hexes that give you an operational feeling but yet you can't concentrate your army to achieve a breakthrough.

And I like to reproduce Panzer breakthrough in the Ardennes.

If this is a so-called strategic game, why providing hexes anyway? You could have big regions like Gary Grigsby's World at War a World Divided.

Everything will be solved by war economy and production anyway.

You see my problem is the following, you have the hexes that give you an operational feeling but yet you can't concentrate your army to achieve a breakthrough.

And I like to reproduce Panzer breakthrough in the Ardennes.

With multiple attacks from adjoining hexes and units themselves being able to attack multiple times you can very easily have wonderful breakthroughs and indeed recreate the Blitzkrieg and later on the Soviet Deep Battle.

If you can get the allies looking the wrong way you can easily reproduce the breakthrough in the Ardennes as well as by-passing and surrounding millions of Soviets and later Germans.

Are there no replay videos of this?!?!?!

ORIGINAL: Hairog
...With multiple attacks from adjoining hexes and units themselves being able to attack multiple times you can very easily have wonderful breakthroughs and indeed recreate the Blitzkrieg and later on the Soviet Deep Battle.

I'm starting to see this evolve in my game play. The more I understand the game rules, the better my performance. The sequencing of ground offensive operations is compelling game play. Likes it so far. Still uncovering the essentials of air and naval play.

ORIGINAL: Hairog

With multiple attacks from adjoining hexes and units themselves being able to attack multiple times you can very easily have wonderful breakthroughs and indeed recreate the Blitzkrieg and later on the Soviet Deep Battle.

If you can get the allies looking the wrong way you can easily reproduce the breakthrough in the Ardennes as well as by-passing and surrounding millions of Soviets and later Germans.

Are there no replay videos of this?!?!?!

Yes please, can you show me a video of a real breakthrough in the Ardennes? All I have seen for the moment is a recreation of the Schlieffen plan.

Also, this is not linked to Warplan (SC is the same), but I found that invading the Low Countries end of 1939 or beginning of 1940 before entering France is gamey strategy. Strategy that does not help to achieve this breakthrough in the Ardennes, indeed...

I like not being able to stack in this game. Generally I don't care one way or another as long as it fits the game the stacking/non-stacking is designed for. Example: I like and play the board game Beyond the Rhine which can have significant stacking per hex on the frontline. Makes for a bit of a math fest at times, but still fun system. Then I equally like and play Unconditional Surrender: WWII in Europe that is modelled like this game, no stacking of ground units, only one air with a ground unit or both of those stacked with a naval unit at a port hex. Great for the way the game was designed.

I feel that the non stacking suits this game due to the scale of it and planning when the right time to break down a unit for an encirclement adds flavor to it.

Personally I find stacking sort of tedious. It's too hard to see what is going on when I have to dig through 3-4 units in every hex just to see where all my units are. And it's hard to get a feel for where the strong and weak points are because you have to cycle through and add everything up.

Plus I know from experience that writing an AI with stacking is an order of magnitude harder because of the combinatorial explosion you get when multiple units can occupy the same hex. Which means either the AI would be much worse or much slower.

What I do like is that I can move my units through my own units which I don't believe most of these no stacking grand strategy games allow. I personally feel that this gets around a lot of the limitations of stacking.

WarPlan is a corp level game. The abstract stacking comes from corps and armies being able to detach/split. That is the compromise I made. Functionally it is MUCH easier than manipulating stacks of counters.

I agree. I am not in favor of stacking land units.

Glad what I am doing works for everyone. It takes a while to realize how fast the game moves with this arrangement of units. It isn't obvious on the surface till you play it. It took me months to work out all the details.

I have managed several Breakthrougs in the lowlands as well as in Russia. The tactic is hit the flanks on two side with inf corp and then let the tank rumble in on the cleared hex and contiue attacking or move further and pocket the enemies center. Then mop up the defenders First, prep the attacks by bombing the targets and use supply truck to bolster the attacks. Keep the good combat-mobility HQ close by.