Page 1 of 1

Two questions

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 11:57 am
by goodwoodrw
1 How do you increase rail capacity
2. What is the need of Airfields, it appears you move your air groups almost anywhere the map

RE: Two questions

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 11:58 am
by tyronec
1. you can't
2. for rough terrain

RE: Two questions

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 12:10 pm
by goodwoodrw
So is rail capacity for Germany set at 100 for the duration, it be variable and have the ability to grow.
And why would bother building airfields lots of ground deploy air units

RE: Two questions

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 12:43 pm
by AlvaroSousa
Usually you don't add airfields in Europe. They will be very useful in the Pacific.

RE: Two questions

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:49 pm
by goodwoodrw
What about the rail why is it set. I believe you should be able to develop railway points. On railway does strategic bombing have an effect on rail?

RE: Two questions

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 11:56 pm
by AlvaroSousa
Because rail isn't really an option. It is an absolute which has a lot greater impact.

As for strat bombing on rail I researched this and there is no way to do it without breaking the game. It is abstractly represented by interdiction.

RE: Two questions

Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 7:34 am
by goodwoodrw
Alvaro, It is absolute cos that's the way you designed it, I have no probs with this in isolation, collectively it doesn't make sense, the game has convoys that moves stuff, it has amphib ships that move stuff, it has transport that moves stuff and supply trucks that move stuff, all those mode numbers can be increased. Railways move stuff, but it is treated differently having a fixed number of points, takes away a strategic element from the game. Unless there is something I've missed in my time with the game.

RE: Two questions

Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:46 am
by AlvaroSousa
I'll give you a better example of absolute.

Buying Spain. Axis having Spain as an ally is a game breaker. SC2 did it as a purchace for X amount of production. It is either 100% worth it or 100% not worth it because the cost is too high and that can be calculated.

The same is for rail. If I allow rail to be build clearly any North African strategy would build rail from a pot connecting to Egypt. But the cost has to be cheap. If I make it expensive then it is an absolute no decision.

Then there are also other gamey aspects at play. So say the Allies build rail all over the middle east. Now the Allies have complete and easy free reign to move units between Egypt and the USSR.

Axis player reroutes the rail in Norway so he always gets his iron ore through Oslo instead of Narvik. It will either be worth buying or not in production cost.

So allowing rail creation is a function of absolute cost effectiveness and can create too many gamey situations that unbalance game. This was an idea I did think about early on but after a lot of thought and purposely trying to break my own game by thinking "what sneaky crap can I do with buying rail that breaks WarPlan" I decided not to put it in.