Stacking

Fury Games has now signed with Matrix Games, and we are working together on the next Strategic Command. Will use the Slitherine PBEM++ server for asynchronous multi-player.

Moderators: MOD_Strategic_Command_3, Fury Software

Mountaineer
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 7:06 am

RE: Stacking

Post by Mountaineer »

It was OPART, great game though but too many counters.
User avatar
sPzAbt653
Posts: 10082
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:11 am
Location: east coast, usa

RE: Stacking

Post by sPzAbt653 »

The Operational Art of War has a nine unit stacking limit [maximum of three air units allowed in a stack]. Nine units is too many in a lot of cases, but TOAW includes movement and combat penalties per hex based on scale and amount of equipment. Due to those penalties it is not wise to 'overstack'. As each scenario is different, there is a small indicator in each hex that appears and goes from yellow to orange to red as your stack moves up in the density scale.

As for my opinion concerning stacking for SC3, stacking one air unit with one ground unit would seem reasonable. I'd like to play it like that to see how it works out. [:)]
solipsismMatrix
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:34 pm

RE: Stacking

Post by solipsismMatrix »

Yes, or two corps vs. a single army. Or an army and a rocket unit, etc.
User avatar
ncc1701e
Posts: 10722
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 7:50 pm
Location: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards

RE: Stacking

Post by ncc1701e »

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

The Operational Art of War has a nine unit stacking limit [maximum of three air units allowed in a stack]. Nine units is too many in a lot of cases, but TOAW includes movement and combat penalties per hex based on scale and amount of equipment. Due to those penalties it is not wise to 'overstack'. As each scenario is different, there is a small indicator in each hex that appears and goes from yellow to orange to red as your stack moves up in the density scale.

I love this game. How is it called? Just joking [;)]
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
User avatar
ncc1701e
Posts: 10722
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 7:50 pm
Location: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards

RE: Stacking

Post by ncc1701e »

ORIGINAL: Happycat

For me, stacking isn't a big deal, because the map scale is large enough to accomplish what I want to do during a game. It's all a matter of taste to some degree; I dislike stacks and find them cumbersome and somewhat counter-intuitive (no pun intended).

I have asked this earlier in this thread but I did not get an answer. Is there something that was implemented like a switch command allowing to change a front line unit per another one behind the front without penalties on the entrenchment of the previous one? As such, we will have the possibility to disengage a tank unit per an infantry unit instead of keeping it stuck on the front line.

As I said earlier, I am not against a rule specifying no ground units could stack together if this type of command exist.

It does not change my view on ground and air units stacking together anyway. Malta is a beautiful island surely having a garrison, an airport and a harbor. I recommend anyone to visit it - great place for one week holiday. [:)]
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
User avatar
sPzAbt653
Posts: 10082
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:11 am
Location: east coast, usa

RE: Stacking

Post by sPzAbt653 »

ORIGINAL: solipsismMatrix

Yes, or two corps vs. a single army. Or an army and a rocket unit, etc.

Rocket Units ? These would hardly be appropriate for this scale. Rockets should be included in the shock value of corps level units. I think, maybe.
Ason
Posts: 368
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2013 11:14 am

RE: Stacking

Post by Ason »

Well, hopefully people will mod the hell out of the game and create all types of scenario sizes, if we're really lucky maybe different scenarios/sizes will already be in maingame from the start. The more options for modders the better imo.
For example I'm creating Siege of Budapest scenario for AoC, for this size rockets and other support units are very nice to have:


Image



Anyway I agree with Solipsim, stacking something like 1 army=2 corps or 1 army = 1 corps and support unit etc, sounds reasonable.

User avatar
Happycat
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:45 pm

RE: Stacking

Post by Happycat »

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

ORIGINAL: Happycat

For me, stacking isn't a big deal, because the map scale is large enough to accomplish what I want to do during a game. It's all a matter of taste to some degree; I dislike stacks and find them cumbersome and somewhat counter-intuitive (no pun intended).

I have asked this earlier in this thread but I did not get an answer. Is there something that was implemented like a switch command allowing to change a front line unit per another one behind the front without penalties on the entrenchment of the previous one? As such, we will have the possibility to disengage a tank unit per an infantry unit instead of keeping it stuck on the front line.

As I said earlier, I am not against a rule specifying no ground units could stack together if this type of command exist.

It does not change my view on ground and air units stacking together anyway. Malta is a beautiful island surely having a garrison, an airport and a harbor. I recommend anyone to visit it - great place for one week holiday. [:)]

Yes, that ability was introduced in SC2 at some point (I think it was when the AOD add-on was introduced, but not sure of that.) IIRC the units "swapping" positions used no movement points but might have lost a level of entrenchment. However, the point is that it was implemented. It would be a huge surprise to me if it didn't continue for SC3.
Chance favours the prepared mind
solipsismMatrix
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:34 pm

RE: Stacking

Post by solipsismMatrix »

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
ORIGINAL: solipsismMatrix

Yes, or two corps vs. a single army. Or an army and a rocket unit, etc.

Rocket Units ? These would hardly be appropriate for this scale. Rockets should be included in the shock value of corps level units. I think, maybe.
Perhaps you have not played the earlier SC games? I'm talking about strategic rocket units (e.g., V1 / V2).
User avatar
sPzAbt653
Posts: 10082
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:11 am
Location: east coast, usa

RE: Stacking

Post by sPzAbt653 »

Perhaps you have not played the earlier SC games? I'm talking about strategic rocket units (e.g., V1 / V2).

I got SC2 a couple months ago and tried it out, that is the meager extent of my experience with SC. I didn't know that you were referring to Strategic Rockets, I thought you meant Werfers and Katyushkas. So, nevermind ![:)]
User avatar
Duck Doc
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 12:22 am

RE: Stacking

Post by Duck Doc »

So, this is 150 km per hex? Units are corps as basis? Artillery as separate units? Back 1 hex? Incorporated into corps?

Agree completely that air and ground need to co-habitate a hex?

There are times you might want to listen to your (prospective) players.
User avatar
Happycat
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:45 pm

RE: Stacking

Post by Happycat »

ORIGINAL: Dale H

So, this is 150 km per hex? Units are corps as basis? Artillery as separate units? Back 1 hex? Incorporated into corps?

Agree completely that air and ground need to co-habitate a hex?

There are times you might want to listen to your (prospective) players.

The devs ARE listening. There are hordes of SC and SC2 fans who can attest to that fact :)
Chance favours the prepared mind
User avatar
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2001 6:00 pm

RE: Stacking

Post by Iñaki Harrizabalagatar »

I have played SC2, in fact I am playing right now a game against the AI (one WW1 scenario) and I am surprised how competent and competitive the AI is.

I think the scale of the map in the WW1 breaktrhough scenario is very good for Corps size units and I don find big issues with stacking there. Air units are Air Armies scale more or less (OOBs are not very historical) but again as they are place a good distance from the frontline there are no big issues with it. To me the main problem is with naval units, the naval part of the game feels very unrealistic, with units spread over the sea, or unable to enter port beacuse it is another unit already in.

solipsismMatrix
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:34 pm

RE: Stacking

Post by solipsismMatrix »

ORIGINAL: Happycat

ORIGINAL: Dale H

So, this is 150 km per hex? Units are corps as basis? Artillery as separate units? Back 1 hex? Incorporated into corps?

Agree completely that air and ground need to co-habitate a hex?

There are times you might want to listen to your (prospective) players.

The devs ARE listening. [...]
Like I listen to my wife? ;)

User avatar
BillRunacre
Posts: 6739
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 2:57 pm
Contact:

RE: Stacking

Post by BillRunacre »

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar

I have played SC2, in fact I am playing right now a game against the AI (one WW1 scenario) and I am surprised how competent and competitive the AI is.

I think the scale of the map in the WW1 breaktrhough scenario is very good for Corps size units and I don find big issues with stacking there. Air units are Air Armies scale more or less (OOBs are not very historical) but again as they are place a good distance from the frontline there are no big issues with it. To me the main problem is with naval units, the naval part of the game feels very unrealistic, with units spread over the sea, or unable to enter port beacuse it is another unit already in.


Good, because that map was largely inspirational for the size of the new one. [:)]

I say inspirational because the scale is ever so slightly out, I think that was 1 tile to about 18 miles whereas this one is about 1 hex to 20 miles.
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/
User avatar
BillRunacre
Posts: 6739
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 2:57 pm
Contact:

RE: Stacking

Post by BillRunacre »

ORIGINAL: solipsismMatrix


The devs ARE listening. [...]


Like I listen to my wife? ;)

But I do listen to my wife too! [:D]
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/
Capitaine
Posts: 1028
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 10:00 am

RE: Stacking

Post by Capitaine »

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar

I have played SC2, in fact I am playing right now a game against the AI (one WW1 scenario) and I am surprised how competent and competitive the AI is.

I think the scale of the map in the WW1 [breakthrough] scenario is very good for Corps size units and I don find big issues with stacking there. Air units are Air Armies scale more or less (OOBs are not very historical) but again as they are place a good distance from the frontline there are no big issues with it. To me the main problem is with naval units, the naval part of the game feels very unrealistic, with units spread over the sea, or unable to enter port [because] it is another unit already in.


I can see how the air won't be a problem, really. But never having played this series before I don't know how air attacks; does the unit physically move to attack a target unit? If so there'd be a need to show the a/c icon over the land unit.

The naval non-stacking does bother me as you suggest. A port should be able to host a fleet, I'd think. Maybe a special rule or something? For visual stacking, you could show only the icon of the top unit, but stack the bases [only] of extra units below. Have a routine to shuffle through the stack and order any unit to the top position. My .02.
Rosseau
Posts: 2951
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:20 am

RE: Stacking

Post by Rosseau »

And don't forget the Hearts of Iron series. HOI4 at division level is completely insane and also throw history out the window. But with limited use of console (cheats) I am having an amazingly good time. About 53 hours in five days. That hasn't happened since WitE.

When I want real history there is always SC3.
User avatar
ncc1701e
Posts: 10722
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 7:50 pm
Location: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards

RE: Stacking

Post by ncc1701e »

ORIGINAL: Happycat

Yes, that ability was introduced in SC2 at some point (I think it was when the AOD add-on was introduced, but not sure of that.) IIRC the units "swapping" positions used no movement points but might have lost a level of entrenchment. However, the point is that it was implemented. It would be a huge surprise to me if it didn't continue for SC3.

Thanks for your answer. I am completely discovering SC thus forgive my lack of knowledge on this system.
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
User avatar
Steely Glint
Posts: 594
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 6:36 pm

RE: Stacking

Post by Steely Glint »

If the devs are listening, then: make sure there is stacking.
“It was a war of snap judgments and binary results—shoot or don’t, live or die.“

Wargamer since 1967. Matrix customer since 2003.
Post Reply

Return to “Strategic Command WWII War in Europe”