Command structure and PP feature

[Milman]

I must admit that i enjoy in micromanagment of my troops. Planing attacks and redeploying troops for that job is my favorite part of game. But i am very sad when i open stack and see units from 5 diferent armies in that stack. That realy goes on my nervs. Since game don't give me any penalties if i send division from X Army to fight in hex where Y Army is i don't change HQ of non restricted units and keep my pp for more important things.

So i have few ideas for future patches.

1. Units under unrestricted HQ change HQ for free. For units under restricted HQ rules stay as it is now. PP paying for commanders also stay that is excelent rule.

Nobody cares in PBEM what will Yamamoto do to us if we take few of hes units and send them under 14th Army. Game engine don't punish us if we do that and that is why this is useles rule. And it will solve my misery when i see stacks with units from 5 diferent armies.

or

2. 17th Army HQ gives bonuses only to units under 17th Army HQ command. Than pp paying will be something which we must do if we want to use full potential of our units. Kwantung army gives bonuses to all units under subordinate armies. Since i don't think this engine can't do this i think number 1 is better solution for now.

In the meantime is it posible to change PP trough editing save game ?

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Milman
1. Units under unrestricted HQ change HQ for free. For units under restricted HQ rules stay as it is now. PP paying for commanders also stay that is excelent rule.

I don't think that's so unfeasible - we're already paying less PP for transferring units within the same command.

[Cribtop]

I second this idea. I too am a neat freak and like orderly commands.

[tbridges]

ditto!

[zace]

possibly have it as a toggle so at least a house rule could be used.  Currently there is no way a house rule can override this.

[Milman]

In the meantime is it posible to change PP trough editing save game ?

[Kaletsch2007]

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

I second this idea. I too am a neat freak and like orderly commands.

+1

[Oldguard1970]

I do not think it is possible to edit a save. (If I am wrong, someone will certainly correct me.)

Frankly, I like the idea of zero PP to change non-restricted to non-restricted. That would do no harm to the game play and allow us to tidy the command structures.

ORIGINAL: Milman

In the meantime is it posible to change PP trough editing save game ?

[cverbrug]

I second this option as well. It makes scrolling in the troop lists much more feasable if you can filter, sort by the army HQ they report too.
Who would we have to approach from the patch developerd to get this option introduced?

Christophe

[Rainer]

Who would we have to approach

None. They (Michael, J. Wilkerson et al) read the forums regularly and collect ideas, wishes, complaints.
So far they have been quite responsive, and I can see no reason why that should change in the future.
However (and that's a BIG "however): patches and bug fixes have priority.

[FeurerKrieg]

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

I second this idea. I too am a neat freak and like orderly commands.

+1

Also good for team games, when you want to divvy up troops.

[Milman]

For AI games i find solution. I can make new scenario where i will edit only PP/day from 50 to 1.000

That will give me freedom to move my lcu, airunits and ships where i want. I only need HR for other things to keep that in range of 50PP/day. Too bad i allready started Japan campaign

[Cavalry Corp]

For units under the same Army ( Highest level ) I agree they should change to any other HQ underneath free of charge . Like say Burma army units may interchange with any Army under Burma Army control.

Same with planes.

cav

[Oldguard1970]

Hi Cav,

Why not allow free assignment to any non-retricted command?

For game play purposes, the only thing that matters is if a command is restricted or non-restricted. (That's correct, isn't it?) So, why not allow the players the freedom to tidy up the command structure among non-retricted commands as they see fit without any PP costs?

Am I missing some feature that is influenced or determined by the command structure other than the restricted part?

ORIGINAL: cavalry

For units under the same Army ( Highest level ) I agree they should change to any other HQ underneath free of charge . Like say Burma army units may interchange with any Army under Burma Army control.

Same with planes.

cav

[Cavalry Corp]

I can live with it eitherway but the Pacific is a vast structure. for certain I agree with my earlier suggestion and could live with yours.

I think it wpould be fair to say that say in Europe moving Panzers from east to west would involve big decisions that would not involve restricted commands.

Perhaps PP points need to be revised downward at the same time so that transfering from restricted commands becomes more difficult.

cav

[CV2]

ORIGINAL: OldGuard1970

Hi Cav,

Why not allow free assignment to any non-retricted command?

For game play purposes, the only thing that matters is if a command is restricted or non-restricted. (That's correct, isn't it?) So, why not allow the players the freedom to tidy up the command structure among non-retricted commands as they see fit without any PP costs?

Am I missing some feature that is influenced or determined by the command structure other than the restricted part?

ORIGINAL: cavalry

For units under the same Army ( Highest level ) I agree they should change to any other HQ underneath free of charge . Like say Burma army units may interchange with any Army under Burma Army control.

Same with planes.

cav

You dont think there should be a PP charge for assigning US Marines to British III corps for example? 1st Marine division to ABDA? NCAC to I Australian? I do. I can see US Army units being low to no cost between US Army commands, but not to others. China within China, Brit within Brit ect. But cross service I think should incur a cost.

[FeurerKrieg]

ORIGINAL: CV2

ORIGINAL: OldGuard1970

Hi Cav,

Why not allow free assignment to any non-retricted command?

For game play purposes, the only thing that matters is if a command is restricted or non-restricted. (That's correct, isn't it?) So, why not allow the players the freedom to tidy up the command structure among non-retricted commands as they see fit without any PP costs?

Am I missing some feature that is influenced or determined by the command structure other than the restricted part?

ORIGINAL: cavalry

For units under the same Army ( Highest level ) I agree they should change to any other HQ underneath free of charge . Like say Burma army units may interchange with any Army under Burma Army control.

Same with planes.

cav

You dont think there should be a PP charge for assigning US Marines to British III corps for example? 1st Marine division to ABDA? NCAC to I Australian? I do. I can see US Army units being low to no cost between US Army commands, but not to others. China within China, Brit within Brit ect. But cross service I think should incur a cost.

Is there any in game benefit to doing those things? (1st Marine to ABDA for example. I was under the impression there is not, so why not allow free non-restricted command changes. The Allied player can easily drop off 1st Marine in Java as it is now, right?

[CV2]

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg


Is there any in game benefit to doing those things? (1st Marine to ABDA for example. I was under the impression there is not, so why not allow free non-restricted command changes. The Allied player can easily drop off 1st Marine in Java as it is now, right?

Well there WOULD be a reason to do this if it actually worked right. But as of now, at least in the beta, it doesnt. Most Dutch air units are restricted to Dutch or ABDA command. So in theory (if it worked right) a unit under ABDA that takes a base would put that base under ABDA and allow Dutch air to base there. It can still be done by changing the base command of course, but in some cases this can be VERY expensive in PPs.