East to West and West to East movement in the US issue

[Christolos]

There are several cities in the US, both in the Western and Eastern portion that can be used to shuttle units from West to East or from East to West.

I'm playing a PBEM game where I am defending the US against the Germans in the East, and Japan in the West, so I have been making use of the locations that allow movement across the country. The issue I had was that I had inadvertently placed an infantry unit in an Eastern city that would shuttle it to the West, but I would have liked it to stay where it was because it was guarding a crucial section of my defensive line. The unit moved West next turn leaving a big gap in the front.
It would help a lot if players could be prompted to move West or East with units placed in locations designated for this, prior to the unit or units actually moving. This way, players can decide to stay put in a particular city if it would be advantageous to do so. In other words, the movement should not be automatic such that it would allow units to stay in place if the player chooses to do so.

C

[sveint]

As an invading player how does this work? If for example if I conquer Western US, how can I attack the East?

[pjg100]

Uh oh, I think I know what's coming . . .

[Mercutio]

You have to split the US to Japanese occupied in the west, Nazi occupied in the east and a neutral zone in the rockies. Then you have to chase "The Man in the High Castle"

[BillRunacre]

ORIGINAL: Christolos

There are several cities in the US, both in the Western and Eastern portion that can be used to shuttle units from West to East or from East to West.

I'm playing a PBEM game where I am defending the US against the Germans in the East, and Japan in the West, so I have been making use of the locations that allow movement across the country. The issue I had was that I had inadvertently placed an infantry unit in an Eastern city that would shuttle it to the West, but I would have liked it to stay where it was because it was guarding a crucial section of my defensive line. The unit moved West next turn leaving a big gap in the front.
It would help a lot if players could be prompted to move West or East with units placed in locations designated for this, prior to the unit or units actually moving. This way, players can decide to stay put in a particular city if it would be advantageous to do so. In other words, the movement should not be automatic such that it would allow units to stay in place if the player chooses to do so.

C

Hi Christolos

Can you let me know what location this affected?

Thanks

Bill

[BillRunacre]

ORIGINAL: sveint

As an invading player how does this work? If for example if I conquer Western US, how can I attack the East?

By placing units on the marked locations they will move from east to west or vice versa.

[Christolos]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre
By placing units on the marked locations they will move from east to west or vice versa.

But what if we would like the unit to stay put and not move? Shouldn't we be offered the choice, especially if it would be better in terms of holding a defensive line.
I would think this could be implemented in the same way as moving Axis units out of or into the Med, where we are asked if we are sure we want this to happen.

As I stated in the initial post, I would have preferred that my unit did not move to the West...

C

[BillRunacre]

I understand, I must admit that I had thought I'd chosen the locations where ideally they wouldn't be important combat locations.

So if any locations would be better off moved then I'd like to do that regardless, as if a Decision were added it would keep firing every turn a unit is in that position, and reducing the amount of times that happens would be good, i.e. to reduce frustration at seeing the same Decision keep popping up every turn asking if you want to transfer a unit from east to west or vice versa.

[HamburgerMeat]

Is there a way for these decisions to only trigger if axis land troops are present in the US? Maybe thatd be the best solution, but not sure how diffixult it would be to code

[Christolos]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

I understand, I must admit that I had thought I'd chosen the locations where ideally they wouldn't be important combat locations.

So if any locations would be better off moved then I'd like to do that regardless, as if a Decision were added it would keep firing every turn a unit is in that position, and reducing the amount of times that happens would be good, i.e. to reduce frustration at seeing the same Decision keep popping up every turn asking if you want to transfer a unit from east to west or vice versa.

Thanks Bill.

I understand that it could be annoying to have the decision fire every time, but I don't imagine that it would be that often or for that many units at a time, especially since in most cases, one would want to have the unit move.

C

[BillRunacre]

ORIGINAL: HamburgerMeat

Is there a way for these decisions to only trigger if axis land troops are present in the US? Maybe thatd be the best solution, but not sure how diffixult it would be to code

This is possible, and that would reduce the appearance of any Decisions which would be beneficial, good thinking.

[BillRunacre]

ORIGINAL: Christolos

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

I understand, I must admit that I had thought I'd chosen the locations where ideally they wouldn't be important combat locations.

So if any locations would be better off moved then I'd like to do that regardless, as if a Decision were added it would keep firing every turn a unit is in that position, and reducing the amount of times that happens would be good, i.e. to reduce frustration at seeing the same Decision keep popping up every turn asking if you want to transfer a unit from east to west or vice versa.

Thanks Bill.

I understand that it could be annoying to have the decision fire every time, but I don't imagine that it would be that often or for that many units at a time, especially since in most cases, one would want to have the unit move.

C

Understood, I must admit that implementing this will be a lot of work which is why my natural inclination is to prefer that fixing some locations would largely resolve it.

Otherwise it's a bit of a big project because there are 7 loops from east to west and 6 the other way, including those in Mexico and Canada.

They'll all need Decisions added to them (presumably just Allied ones, unless an Axis invader would be likely to need the choice too?) and these would need to be added to all six campaigns.

So while it makes sense to have this, I don't want to promise anything in this regard at the moment.

[sveint]

There are three hexes in western US almost on the coast, shouldn't these be removed/reduced? To Minneapolis if I remember. They make combat/movement in that area awkward.

[Christolos]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

ORIGINAL: Christolos

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

I understand, I must admit that I had thought I'd chosen the locations where ideally they wouldn't be important combat locations.

So if any locations would be better off moved then I'd like to do that regardless, as if a Decision were added it would keep firing every turn a unit is in that position, and reducing the amount of times that happens would be good, i.e. to reduce frustration at seeing the same Decision keep popping up every turn asking if you want to transfer a unit from east to west or vice versa.

Thanks Bill.

I understand that it could be annoying to have the decision fire every time, but I don't imagine that it would be that often or for that many units at a time, especially since in most cases, one would want to have the unit move.

C

Understood, I must admit that implementing this will be a lot of work which is why my natural inclination is to prefer that fixing some locations would largely resolve it.

Otherwise it's a bit of a big project because there are 7 loops from east to west and 6 the other way, including those in Mexico and Canada.

They'll all need Decisions added to them (presumably just Allied ones, unless an Axis invader would be likely to need the choice too?) and these would need to be added to all six campaigns.

So while it makes sense to have this, I don't want to promise anything in this regard at the moment.

Understood.

Thanks Bill.

C

[pjg100]

I agree with Sveint and Christolos. I am currently defending the US against a Japanese invasion. The Japanese have taken California, Arizona, and southern portions of Nevada, Utah and Oregon. Suddenly, Japanese troops teleport from Oregon to Minneapolis - unexpected, to say the least. The "far away" loops in the east and west US should be removed, if its not too much trouble.

Ideally, from the remaining loops that are close to the map edge it should be optional as to whether to move the troops to the other map, for the reasons already expressed above. However, if it is too much work to accomplish this I understand.

[ThunderLizard11]

I've only had one game where Axis invaded the West Coast and they were pushed back pretty quickly. Not sure this issue is such a high priority given how rare combat in the US actually is at least in the MP games I've played so far. Maybe Allied players should consider leaving a few garrisons out West and move a few BBs/DDs to the West Coast. I still don't see how Japan can have enough mpp to mount a serious US invasion.

[sveint]

Sorry but this is my newest thing, a full scale invasion of the US by Japan.

Here is how it goes:
1) Max diplo to keep the US at 5%
2) Invade western US with EVERYTHING Japan has, leaving only minimal garrisons vs China

So far it is not looking good for the Allies (what else is new). And I messed up pretty bad in both games, with a refined strategy I don't see the Allies having any chance at all. Of course the old strategy of Germany throwing 100% effort vs Soviets still works just as easily.

[ThunderLizard11]

ORIGINAL: sveint

Sorry but this is my newest thing, a full scale invasion of the US by Japan.

Here is how it goes:
1) Max diplo to keep the US at 5%
2) Invade western US with EVERYTHING Japan has, leaving only minimal garrisons vs China

So far it is not looking good for the Allies (what else is new). And I messed up pretty bad in both games, with a refined strategy I don't see the Allies having any chance at all. Of course the old strategy of Germany throwing 100% effort vs Soviets still works just as easily.

This is against AI right?

[sveint]

Of course not

[pjg100]

I am playing Allies v. Sveint in one of the games he mentions above. I don't know whether on net the US invasion will benefit the Axis - we are in May 1942 so too early to tell - but it was a surprise twist that has made the game more fun for me! I didn't really take the invasion seriously until I started seeing HQs, air units and regular armies rolling up into the Rockies. Actually, it could have been much worse - if an Intel reveal hadn't tipped me to the approaching transports one turn prior to landing, he would trapped most of my carriers in San Francisco Bay! Anyway, thanks Sveint for an exciting game!