Hospitals?

[m10bob]

Do the different nations have a different ability to heal their warriors?
If so, is this a function of supply, base size, national characteristic?

[Yamato hugger]

No different than WitP. Supplies to recover disrupted squads. You also have the option of "standing a unit down" by ordering it to "rest / train" which will recover disrupted squads at an accelerated rate. God help you if you are attacked (by any method) while you are in this mode.

[m10bob]

Thank you..

[Japan]

Maby consider to add Hospital Ships at some point ??
 
Can be a Modefied AP with a different Paint Job...
 
 
[:)]

[Andy Mac]

Out of scope for now

[Sardaukar]

Bit related, but are Malaria Zone bases handled differently now related to morale etc.?

[dhuffjr2]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Bit related, but are Malaria Zone bases handled differently now related to morale etc.?

Good point. As I recall there were islands that were not developed as bases because the islands were so infested.

[Q-Ball]

I had posted on Morale and Malaria zones before. The current rule really bugs me. My gramps spent the entire war in "Malaria" zones. Sometimes that meant sitting at Biak, watching movies and drinking beer, not exactly morale-sapping activities.

Morale should decline in Combat, but if a unit is Resting, should always recover; just maybe faster in Hawaii, then Biak.

Just my two yen.

[Japan]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I had posted on Morale and Malaria zones before. The current rule really bugs me. My gramps spent the entire war in "Malaria" zones. Sometimes that meant sitting at Biak, watching movies and drinking beer, not exactly morale-sapping activities.

Morale should decline in Combat, but if a unit is Resting, should always recover; just maybe faster in Hawaii, then Biak.

Just my two yen.

I Agree

[Yamato hugger]

Well, without revealing too much let me say that little said here on the boards (on any subject) hasnt been discussed to death on the devs forum. Lots of changes have been made. Some things havent because of A) time, B) code limits, C) minor details that would take away from the flavor of the game (ie too much detail isnt necessarily a good thing).

[Oldguard1970]

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Well, without revealing too much let me say that little said here on the boards (on any subject) hasnt been discussed to death on the devs forum. Lots of changes have been made. Some things havent because of A) time, B) code limits, C) minor details that would take away from the flavor of the game (ie too much detail isnt necessarily a good thing).

Those are three fine reasons to disgard an idea. Having said that, I recognize one man's "minor detail" might be just the cat's meow to another player. The developers have to make an interesting set of calls, but that is the nature of any game design. Everything that has been shared in this forum suggests the team has settled on a mighty interesting set of ideas, corrections, and enhancements. Bravo, and carry on.

[TheTomDude]

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

No different than WitP. Supplies to recover disrupted squads. You also have the option of "standing a unit down" by ordering it to "rest / train" which will recover disrupted squads at an accelerated rate. God help you if you are attacked (by any method) while you are in this mode.

I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but is it possible for LCUs to stay out of combat when "resting/training" as long as they are protected by friendly units in the same hex? I.e. one unit is holding the line against attackers while another one is resting? Or are the both attacked no matter what they are doing atm? Or will the resting LCU only be attacked if the defending unit retreats because of a stronger enemy attack?

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: TheTomDude

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

No different than WitP. Supplies to recover disrupted squads. You also have the option of "standing a unit down" by ordering it to "rest / train" which will recover disrupted squads at an accelerated rate. God help you if you are attacked (by any method) while you are in this mode.

I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but is it possible for LCUs to stay out of combat when "resting/training" as long as they are protected by friendly units in the same hex? I.e. one unit is holding the line against attackers while another one is resting? Or are the both attacked no matter what they are doing atm? Or will the resting LCU only be attacked if the defending unit retreats because of a stronger enemy attack?

If there are other units in the hex, yes. Sort of. Any unit can be hit by air attack or naval bombardment (I think). If a land attack gets through the other units and forces a retreat, this unit will take massive losses.

Better for units on the line to be "in reserve" than in "rest / training". In reserve allows them to be in the combat if the commander on the scene determines they are needed otherwise they are sitting in the rear out of combat. Units in this mode are the only ones allowed to pursuit after combat as well.

[RevRick]

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

ORIGINAL: TheTomDude

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

No different than WitP. Supplies to recover disrupted squads. You also have the option of "standing a unit down" by ordering it to "rest / train" which will recover disrupted squads at an accelerated rate. God help you if you are attacked (by any method) while you are in this mode.

I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but is it possible for LCUs to stay out of combat when "resting/training" as long as they are protected by friendly units in the same hex? I.e. one unit is holding the line against attackers while another one is resting? Or are the both attacked no matter what they are doing atm? Or will the resting LCU only be attacked if the defending unit retreats because of a stronger enemy attack?

If there are other units in the hex, yes. Sort of. Any unit can be hit by air attack or naval bombardment (I think). If a land attack gets through the other units and forces a retreat, this unit will take massive losses.

Better for units on the line to be "in reserve" than in "rest / training". In reserve allows them to be in the combat if the commander on the scene determines they are needed otherwise they are sitting in the rear out of combat. Units in this mode are the only ones allowed to pursuit after combat as well.

Thanks be to, well, you know, for small favors. I have never fathomed how a unit in combat, in either a shock or deliberate attack could up and run 60 miles in pursuit of a combat unit employing the Monty Python Retreat Maneuver. For that matter, I have never understood how a unit could retreat 60 miles overnight without a mobile rating or a flock of trucks anyway, specially when it might take a month to walk into the combat zone, but that is part of the problems with this scale map, I would suppose.

[bradfordkay]

At least they'll only be retreating 40 miles in one day in AE! [;)]

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: RevRick

Thanks be to, well, you know, for small favors. I have never fathomed how a unit in combat, in either a shock or deliberate attack could up and run 60 miles in pursuit of a combat unit employing the Monty Python Retreat Maneuver. For that matter, I have never understood how a unit could retreat 60 miles overnight without a mobile rating or a flock of trucks anyway, specially when it might take a month to walk into the combat zone, but that is part of the problems with this scale map, I would suppose.

Well, lets see if I can put it in perspective (or at least have you look at it in another light):

First of all, a unit isnt moving 60 miles really. Its 60 miles end to end in the hex (or center of hex to center of hex). Now when you order a unit to move to another hex, it has to walk 60 miles to get there. Most people take that to mean center of hex to center of hex but consider this: If you assume that it takes time for a unit to pack to move and whatnot and take that "60 mile" move to just represent the TIME to move from here to there, then that 60 "miles" is more like "3 days" or "30 days" or whatever based on the terrain of the hex rather than an actual distance.

So if you look at it from that perspective then center of hex to edge of hex (in reality a unit only needs to be forced just across the hex-side) one has to consider the size of area occupied by the defender. If you consider the defender to have roughly a 10 mile perimeter, then the defender is only really "retreating" 21 miles.

Sir Robin can hoof that in a day. Even with worn out coconuts.

[RevRick]

I hate to, respectfully, disagree, but that is not logical. If it takes X amount of energy/time to move into a hex in one direction, it takes exactly that much energy/time per capita/unit/device to move in the opposite direction, and the distance to cross the hex side must be the same in both directions. Further, if there are areas within each hex other than the center point, then how is it that the unit moving into the hex does not come into contact with the unit defending until the entire 60 miles of movement time/energy have been spent and the contact is immediate. If that were not the case, there would be the possibility of units within the hex not in contact with each other, which we know in reality, exists. So, the active point must be a designated point within the hex, and there is only one point in the center. Now, if follows, if you postulate that the units are in constant contact immediately following entry into the hex, then it has to be at that point, and if they remain in consant contact the combat phase, then neither one would then be able to move 60, or 40 miles in one 24 hour period because "it takes time for a unit to pack to move and whatnot and take that "60 mile" move to just represent the TIME to move from here to there" and that time would be required in anything less than a full bore rout, in which the routing units would cease to exist in any effective fashion in a sixty mile "Run away! Run Away!" It does take time to haul/load/manhandle machine guns, mortars, howitzers, field guns, field kitchens, headquarters equipment, etc., etc., etc. If both the attacker and defender are moving in good order, and in constant contact, neither one would be able to move into another hex in one day. That was precisely demonstrated in the New Guinea campaign across the Owen Stanley range, and should be somehow reproducible in the game. Instead, we have a galloping contest down the Malay peninsula, or between Lunga and Tassafaronga, for example. There is just no way an entire corps can move from a battle set, attack, transition into movement and pursuit, move, transition into attack formations, and attack again within 24 hours sixty miles away. Yet, we are told that the hexes in WitP are 60 miles hexes, and the movement from hex to hex happens just that way in combat.

At the very least, it should take in a constant contact action no more than twice the movement cost within the hex to exit it in good order retreat as it does to enter it.

One more thing. Why is it that when the attacker is attacking at a value of say 17, to a defense value of, say 340, the attack is only at 0-1 when the reverse is not true. Any idiot that would launch attacks of that magnitude of disparity against an entrenched foe would lose a lot more then a 0-1 attack would warrant. If this is supposed to represent a campaign game, then it ought to take time to wear down an opponent who is in a defensible position, and able to bring fire to bear, and not just be "I have 75,000 men attacking 40,000 men and I will break down his defenses in a week, even though he is dug in, fortified, artillery zeroed, and camouflaged because I can keep throwing troops into his defensive fire.

Perhaps the game ought to have some mechanism other than just movement in a sixty, or 40 mile hex. Perhaps zones of control within a hex, either based on six equilateral triangles (cumbersome, one would think) or seven circles within a hex in which the area would be smaller and simulate the real perimeter effects of a corps, or even a division spread out.

I know that this is not feasible for AE, but in seeking a means to try to make land combat more realistic in what must, by the nature and size of the beast, be at best an abstract formulation, it would seem to me to be incumbent to make the ground combat at least realistic in outcome, and not short changed, or exaggerated, in time requirement, etc.

This is just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth...the same as all other opinions.

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

ORIGINAL: RevRick

Thanks be to, well, you know, for small favors. I have never fathomed how a unit in combat, in either a shock or deliberate attack could up and run 60 miles in pursuit of a combat unit employing the Monty Python Retreat Maneuver. For that matter, I have never understood how a unit could retreat 60 miles overnight without a mobile rating or a flock of trucks anyway, specially when it might take a month to walk into the combat zone, but that is part of the problems with this scale map, I would suppose.

Well, lets see if I can put it in perspective (or at least have you look at it in another light):

First of all, a unit isnt moving 60 miles really. Its 60 miles end to end in the hex (or center of hex to center of hex). Now when you order a unit to move to another hex, it has to walk 60 miles to get there. Most people take that to mean center of hex to center of hex but consider this: If you assume that it takes time for a unit to pack to move and whatnot and take that "60 mile" move to just represent the TIME to move from here to there, then that 60 "miles" is more like "3 days" or "30 days" or whatever based on the terrain of the hex rather than an actual distance.

So if you look at it from that perspective then center of hex to edge of hex (in reality a unit only needs to be forced just across the hex-side) one has to consider the size of area occupied by the defender. If you consider the defender to have roughly a 10 mile perimeter, then the defender is only really "retreating" 21 miles.

Sir Robin can hoof that in a day. Even with worn out coconuts.

[witpqs]

Rev,

A couple of small points. That small (17) force attacking the large (340) force gets to do some choosing about how it attacks. So, it probably won't face the attackers full firepower. 0 to 1 might be closer to right than it first appears (although it still could be very wrong, of course).

Also, if you move from one hex to another and the journey is mostly uphill that will take more time that going the opposite way. That has nothing to do with the movement system for combat pursuits in WITP, but it would 'ideally' be accounted for in movement.

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: RevRick

This is just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth...the same as all other opinions.

Land combat in this game will never be "realistic". Ever. Get used to it. Unless it is broken down to the same extent that ship and air combat is (ie 1 ship vs 1 ship, 1 plane vs 1 plane) until land combat is modeled as 1 trooper vs 1 trooper, it will never be realistic.

As for the "good order retreat" there is no such thing within the framework of the game. Any unit retreating loses 10 to 20% of its troops just because of the retreat (and these losses dont appear on the combat report). If you take that into consideration there is every justifiable reason to allow the defender to retreat 21 miles (yes, 21 not 60) after a combat.

You want to map out each 60 mile hex and place this battalion here and that one there. Aint happening. Live with it or dont. Accept it as it is or dont. Pretty much that simple.

As for the 0-1 odds. That matters also. a 600av to 601av 0:1 attack will render less losses to the attacker than a 600av to 6000av 0:1 attack. Try it.

As for wearing the defenders down with 0:1 attacks, actually it is possible to do this. As long as the defender is unsupplied and the attacker is supplied. Eventually the defender will have enough disruption and disrupted squads that the attacker will eventually win. But supply is the key element there.