Matrix Games Forums

I have a silly question, why can't units be stacked in the same hex in this game?
Thanks

You're asking this question 4 weeks before the release date because ... ?

Yeah, it's not a complaint, I'm just curious. 4 weeks is a long time

Don't know if it is helpful, but found this thread:
tm.asp?m=3870627

Maybe there are some asnwers to your questions!
Hope it helps

Daniele

ORIGINAL: Daniele

Don't know if it is helpful, but found this thread:
tm.asp?m=3870627

Maybe there are some asnwers to your questions!
Hope it helps

Daniele

It did 100% Thank you, and thank you for not being offensive. Interesting

What's the current hex size?

The scale is 1 hex = 20 miles.

or 32 Kilometers (Klicks) that's a huge hex, so the concept is to just move armies and corps in and out of hex's to attack from the same hex?

You can also swap units to do so. But only units that attack without or before moving receive the Prepared Attack bonus.

Ten miles per hex used to be the standard for wargames about WW II with division-sized units and stacking.

A division consists of about a dozen units, most of them battalions with a one kilometer footprint. The division's footprint will usually be something like six to eighteen kilometers across, depending on what it's trying to do.

There's enough room in a hex for two or three divisions in a defensive deployment, but it's a tight fit. Five or six in an offensive posture, but it's not a concentration that you would want to maintain for a protracted period of time in real life.

What that means in practice is that shoe-horning an army-sized unit into a hex leaves no room for anything else. As things stand, hexes that size can barely accomodate corps size units.

The problem comes when you start to consider garrisons and auxilliary units like anti-aircraft, anti-tank, and artillery.

I'm not very comfortable with the idea of this kind of unit filling up a hex to the exclusion of other units, but allowing auxiliary units to stack with divisions, corps, armor groups and armies makes good sense. But it would change gameplay and have to be tested, and the release date is just around the corner.

Compared to a division, corps, or army, air units have minuscule footprints and don't come close to filling up a hex. But I haven't seen any situations where this is really problematic. I don't think they should be allowed to stack with other air units, but they shouldn't prevent ground units of less than army size from occupying a hex.

Naval units are another story altogether.

Not being able to concentrate most of your fleet in one hex is a serious problem in WW I, because it prevents a convincing representation of large-scale surface engagements like Jutland. The need for the ability to form doomstacks in WW II isn't as great, but naval operations in the Med and during a Sealion invasion don't feel right without it. Fortunately most of the naval game involves commerce raiding over large areas, so the problem isn't too glaring.

Well, we have 20 miles, so this type of stacking you are suggesting would be an improvement for the near future.

I remember this topic being argued to death in the Matrix forum.

sorry to bring it up again..LOL

To have initiate the first thread and have the chance to be selected as a beta tester, I could tell you that no stacking is not really an issue with the current gameplay.

The only problem is that Malta is a little easy to conquer because lacking of Air support when there are no other allied Air units nearby.

I still would like to see stacking implemented for two reasons:
1. if someone wants to increase the number of units using the editor, it may become a problem.
2. if SC3 is going in the pacific or global.

Cheers

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

To have initiate the first thread and have the chance to be selected as a beta tester, I could tell you that no stacking is not really an issue with the current gameplay.

The only problem is that Malta is a little easy to conquer because lacking of Air support when there are no other allied Air units nearby.

I still would like to see stacking implemented for two reasons:
1. if someone wants to increase the number of units using the editor, it may become a problem.
2. if SC3 is going in the pacific or global.

Cheers

Why isnt it an issue now?

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

...I could tell you that no stacking is not really an issue with the current gameplay.

A good final word on this subject! [;)]

An explanation would be helpful for those of us that don't know.

ORIGINAL: cdcool

An explanation would be helpful for those of us that don't know.

1. The engine of the game supports no unit stacking.
2. This is unproblematic because the game needs no unit stacking. [8D]

The way the game currently handles stacking is not realistic.

Designing a wargame involves deciding where it should sit on a sliding scale with simulation at one end and game at the other.

SC has a lot of nice chrome and features, but the core design sits deep in the game side of that spectrum.

A suprising number of serious wargamers have recently commented at a wargame site owned by neither Matrix nor Battlefront that they would never consider buying the game, and the lack of stacking is usually the first thing that gets mentioned (lack of hexes used to be the first). Though I am a regular there, I have not participated in any of those discussions because of the NDA.

Even when this series lived primarily at Battlefront, it was surprising how little crossover there was between the players of Combat Mission and Strategic Command.

Hardcore wargamers tend to be a little short-sighted when it comes to beer and pretzels. Fortunately there aren't very many of them, so if you must lose a market segment, it's not going to be too painful.

Having said that, I think what the game does is interesting enough that you could attract buyers from that particular market segment, as long as you don't offend their delicate sensibilities. If you say beer and pretzels loud enough some of them will relax their insistence on realism. And I take it there are quite a few frustrated HOI owners out there who would welcome a more realistic treatment. Just be careful when you describe SC's naval combat.

This is Hubert and Bill's game, and they have to make and live with the design and development decisions. Anything anyone else says is just chatter. I'm reminded of a Spanish poem translated by Robert Graves that went something to the effect of "Bullfight critics ranked in rows crowd the enormous plaza full, but only one is there who knows, and he's the one who fights the bull".