Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: James Ward


My $.02 (or $5.00 with inflation) is that the initial cost for units should be set to make it more economical to build less advanced units and upgrade them than to build them at high levels from the

Love that idea. In fact, that's one of my personal 'house rules.' I've only bought infantry corps on very rare occasions, even when I had the PPs. I think it's more realistic to start all purchases as divisions, lover level, and then upgrade later. I have broken that house rule in emergencies - witness my purchase of a couple of level 3 mech corps in the my current PBEM game.

Another house rule - I will never, and have never, destroyed a unit to get the salvage PPs. I just don't think it's realistic, at least to the scale possible in this game. That said, I do not begrudge any opponent who does so - if it's allowed, go for it.

I rarely build corps either.  The division is too useful, and when the time comes I will upgrade it.  I also like to build as low a level as possible and uplevel it.  I would not mind any sensible change in the costs and could change my production styles as needed.

I will throw two ideas on the table :

1. How about three adjacent divisions, with all SP unused, being allowed to combine into one corps with all SP expended?  It would be located in one hex occupied by the divisions.  There may be issues but I think it could be made to work.  The reverse would be allowed too, that is a corps could disband to multiple divisions, again with all SP expended.

2. How about the choice to expend PP to "convert" an infantry unit to motorized, and a motorized to armor?

I think there is historical precedent for both of these proposed actions.  I would not mind a "friction" cost imposition.

Chuck

Edit : Oops, please substitute "action points" for SP in the above.

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

ORIGINAL: James Ward


My $.02 (or $5.00 with inflation) is that the initial cost for units should be set to make it more economical to build less advanced units and upgrade them than to build them at high levels from the

Love that idea. In fact, that's one of my personal 'house rules.' I've only bought infantry corps on very rare occasions, even when I had the PPs. I think it's more realistic to start all purchases as divisions, lover level, and then upgrade later. I have broken that house rule in emergencies - witness my purchase of a couple of level 3 mech corps in the my current PBEM game.

Another house rule - I will never, and have never, destroyed a unit to get the salvage PPs. I just don't think it's realistic, at least to the scale possible in this game. That said, I do not begrudge any opponent who does so - if it's allowed, go for it.

What if your research level was the maximum you could upgrade to? All units are purchased at level 0 and go from there. This would also address the instantaneous building of fully trained units! [:)]

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung
2. How about the choice to expend PP to "convert" an infantry unit to motorized, and a motorized to armor?

I like that idea. When you uprade you get a drop down menu and choose the type you want to upgrade to and the cost.

Good ideas all, Chuck and James. I especially like the friction point cost (what is that, actually?).

ORIGINAL: James Ward

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung
2. How about the choice to expend PP to "convert" an infantry unit to motorized, and a motorized to armor?

I like that idea. When you uprade you get a drop down menu and choose the type you want to upgrade to and the cost.

It would probably not be too difficult to implement either.

In fact, playing PBEM, you can do this already. All you have to do is decide what the cost should be and be prepared for some book-keeping.

By friction I mean that three 1.5 SP divisions might only make a 4.25 Corps, or a 3 SP corps might split into three .85 SP divisions.  I would also be content if an uplevel path of 20 + 11.5 + 12.5 + 13.5 = 57.5 would cost 60.5 if you built it at one time.  These are just numbers I pulled from the air, but such "friction" costs could encourage thinking ahead.  One could also consider buying a battleship at 0 for 120 points, and taking 8 turns at 10 PP per turn to fit it out, go through sea trials etc, at which point it would join the fleet as a 8 SP battlewagon.  This does stop the creation of an instant navy.  The same scheme could be applied to all production if that appeals.  Thus you would purchase a cadre at 0 SP for 5 PP, and it would be worth 1 SP after two purchases of 7.5 PP per turn.  More complex, but the computer would handle the bookwork.  You might have to commit the location of the unit a week before placement.  Just thoughts, but if you remember the WiE production spiral that Redmond Simonsen designed for cadres, this would approach a bit of that.  I thought that was a brilliant piece of work by a man I place in the Pantheon.
 
Chuck

Our solution to problems such as the possibility to build instant battleships, is to have a fixed OOB for both land units and battleships/CVs. They arrive at a specific month and if lost they never return. Building new such units is forbidden. That way you have to fight with those naval units you have at start or get as reinforcement. Same goes for land units, why catastrophys such as Stalingrad or Tunis will weigh heavily upon the player. All non-start units appear as divisions with 100% strength, but 1 in quality. Thus it takes 4 turns to build it into a level-4 unit and an additional turn to make it into a Corps. Replacements are much more expensive now than earlier, and those PPs make up the real cost of fighting, not the building process wich is now gone. There's one exception to the build-prohibition. You can delete a unit after making not of it's designation, and then rebuild it at a later point. You have to build it from scratch, though; level-1 and division.
 
We have also changed the Corps-concept slightly, now making them much slower. The aim is to see them more as HQs, filled with artillery-support units, supply-concentrations and so on, relied upon to break down heavily defended sectors, but not as agile as the divisions. As a defender you might want to use them to protect cities or other vital positions. They are also expensive and rather rare on the "battlefield".
 
As for now, we have only played a number of turns into Gelb. But the tension is very high, knowing that early irreparable losses can never be regained by a high PP-level; only nursing your units through the war with care will keep your army intact.

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung

By friction I mean that three 1.5 SP divisions might only make a 4.25 Corps, or a 3 SP corps might split into three .85 SP divisions.  I would also be content if an uplevel path of 20 + 11.5 + 12.5 + 13.5 = 57.5 would cost 60.5 if you built it at one time.  These are just numbers I pulled from the air, but such "friction" costs could encourage thinking ahead.  One could also consider buying a battleship at 0 for 120 points, and taking 8 turns at 10 PP per turn to fit it out, go through sea trials etc, at which point it would join the fleet as a 8 SP battlewagon.  This does stop the creation of an instant navy.  The same scheme could be applied to all production if that appeals.  Thus you would purchase a cadre at 0 SP for 5 PP, and it would be worth 1 SP after two purchases of 7.5 PP per turn.  More complex, but the computer would handle the bookwork.  You might have to commit the location of the unit a week before placement.  Just thoughts, but if you remember the WiE production spiral that Redmond Simonsen designed for cadres, this would approach a bit of that.  I thought that was a brilliant piece of work by a man I place in the Pantheon.

Chuck

Chuck, Gary, James and Uxbridge
We are really getting somewhere on this production "spiral" idea. In addition to just allowing the production of "cadres," we should allow production of more mature units with a geometricaly increased cost for each level of maturity. (ex. A unit that cost 10pp as a 0st cadre could be built as a 2st unit for a cost of 40pp.) However, there should be a provision for having to pre-set the "completed" strength of the (naval?) unit to prevent committing half finished naval units to combat. I believe that you could use half completed land and air units without penalty.
We could also use this to model the several warships that were in production in 1939 - 40 but are not included in the curent OOB (ex. Tripitz, Bismark, Graf Zepplen, Dunkerque, Richelieu, Jean Bart, etc.)
I too honor the memory of Redmond. I remember a horrible arguement I had with him over the morality of producing a Nazi version of Invasion America. By the way, does anyone know what happened to Rich Berg -- another of my role models.[:'(]

Google is our friend :
 
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/9489
 
http://web.mac.com/bergbrog/Site/Welcome.html
 
Chuck

Dear Michael,

However, there should be a provision for having to pre-set the "completed" strength of the (naval?) unit to prevent committing half finished naval units to combat.

Oh I think we could let it go out as a 7!

Shortly after her commissioning, Prince of Wales joined HMS Hood in intercepting and attacking the German battleship Bismarck and the accompanying heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen. The Prince of Wales sailed with civilian technicians still aboard. On 24 May, she and the Hood fought the two German warships at the Battle of the Denmark Strait. Following the sinking of Hood, Prince of Wales, with an inexperienced crew, and having received seven large-calibre hits, with most of her weaponry out of action due to malfunctions or damage, disengaged under cover of a smokescreen. During the brief battle, she struck Bismarck three times; one hit on a forward fuel tank rendered it useless. This forced the Bismarck to head for France for repairs. The Prince of Wales joined up with the cruisers HMS Suffolk and Norfolk that had been shadowing the Bismarck since before the Denmark Strait. Gunfire was exchanged with the Bismarck briefly at 0131 hours on 25 May. Twelve hours later, Prince Of Wales broke off pursuit due to her fuel running low. She then returned to the shipyard for six weeks of repair.

(Wikipedia)

Chuck

Guys,
I really like your ideas posted in this thread, but we will have to wait with some of them until the next game.
Despite, they look easy, some of them are really large bunch of coding.

ORIGINAL: Michael the Pole


I too honor the memory of Redmond. I remember a horrible arguement I had with him over the morality of producing a Nazi version of Invasion America.

You? Having a horrible argument? I never would have guessed.

You guys keep mentioning these old games. I had them all. Unfortunately, as an idiot college student, my tendency was to sell my current game in order to pay for the next! Thus I gave up War in Europe, for War in the Pacific, and so on. I'm left with a rather empty closet ....

Chuck, think of what the Unions would say! You have to have a Reagan or a Churchill to tell Jimmy Hoffa that he's goin to war. (Of course, there is always the option of fresh concrete and a new football stadium!)

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

ORIGINAL: Michael the Pole


I too honor the memory of Redmond. I remember a horrible arguement I had with him over the morality of producing a Nazi version of Invasion America.

You? Having a horrible argument? I never would have guessed.

You guys keep mentioning these old games. I had them all. Unfortunately, as an idiot college student, my tendency was to sell my current game in order to pay for the next! Thus I gave up War in Europe, for War in the Pacific, and so on. I'm left with a rather empty closet ....

Ha, ha, ha. Such cynicism ill becomes you, old comrade.[8|] Just fyi, I bought an old copy of OSG's Battle of Nations on e-bay last week, and the feeling I got when I opened the package..., well it was worth the knife-fight I had to win to get it. The question now is, is it going to be worth what Jolene is going to inflict on me when she sees the credit card statement![X(] Just in case you want to share the nostalgia, last time I looked, there was a copy of War in the Pacific available. Bidding was only a little over $1000.

ORIGINAL: doomtrader

Guys,
I really like your ideas posted in this thread, but we will have to wait with some of them until the next game.
Despite, they look easy, some of them are really large bunch of coding.

Doom, you've got to fight this tendancy for cold blooded realism. After all, we have a reputation as irresponsible Polish idealists to maintain! What would King John Sobieski say to such an attitude?[&:]
What do you think of the idea of making Casablanca or Tunis a French VP city to fix the Vichy problem?

ORIGINAL: doomtrader

Guys,
I really like your ideas posted in this thread, but we will have to wait with some of them until the next game.
Despite, they look easy, some of them are really large bunch of coding.

If any can be used in this game to improve it then it has been worth it.

What do you think of the idea of making Casablanca or Tunis a French VP city to fix the Vichy problem?

 
You are giving me hard time with that.
I'll be back to this issue when I'll finish those Freiwilligen divisions.

OK Doomtrader, sorry about that, I don't mean to give you a hard time about it -- it's sort of an ocupational hazard! They spend three years in law school converting you into a junkyard dog!
Just thought that you might have an opinion

Whenever the aI is improved would it be possible to let the minors save some PP's to research artillery? Instead of building tons of level 1 divisions that just get in the way and are next to useless in 1943-44 perhaps spending on research could be the priority as long as X number of units are in the field.