Unit purchasing before/ during operation.

[ww2steel]

Will we be able to purchase units by their points during these operations or do we have to rely on the old way of just receiving reinforcements?

I certainly hope we will be able to buy by points, especially for smaller battles!

I also hope the ability to make your original OOB is as easy as it is in CMBB now. (‘I want a PzIVH, 2 tank hunter teams, and a 222‘... whatever, rather than just “a platoon of these, a company of this”) This is VERY important to me.

Thanks,

Mike

[Peterk]

Very good question. I also hope that the OOB can be heavily customised by the user. The designer should still be able to determine WHAT is available and in how much quantity, but would be great if players could decide what it is that they want to rush to the front.

[securityguard]

I sorta wondered myself it there would be a 'quick campaign' feature where each side buys certain assests, maybe even templates of units.

[ww2steel]

Very good idea Peterk! The designer could either select 'everyhting available' or just pic what unit they want you to be able to select from. Might be hard to integrate, but would certainly make the type of operation very customizable for the designer!

I HATE the old '0n day 4 you have an 80% chance of getting this specific infantry company. WHat if enemy artillery just took out your last Pak40 and they're rolling on you with a platoon of T-34s???

Mike

[Peterk]

Well it would basically be the Red Barricades style of OOB management from Advanced Squad Leader campaign games.

There's limited quantities of certain types of forces available and you have to decide what to bring on map. It liberates you from trying to be 100% historical and different "purchase" strategies can lead to very different games.

But I don't know if it makes sense for CMC since the maps will be much bigger. It might make more sense just to have everything on board and have the player move what he wants to the hot-spots.

[ww2steel]

Some of the Close Combat series of games used a similar system that I liked a lot. The unavailable units would just be greyed out and a certain number of available units would be onhand for purchase.

[John_d]

Talking of this kind of thing, surely it would be possible to increase the scale of CMC battles by keeping units in 'reserve'. For example, I buy a division or two of troops, but there is some kind of limiting factor on how many I can have on the field at any given time (say two regiments or something). Every time I lose x number of troops on the field, the computer brings in a further part of my force on the CMC operational map as re-enforcements. This way, the scale of CMC battles could be increased indefinitely, as the number of units available to either side would be spread out over time, which is of course a huge variable. It would also make it possible to capture the scale of huge campaigns such as Stalingrad and Berlin.

Also, on the editor, will there be pre-set groups to choose from like in CMBB? E.g. if I want an infantry regiment will I just be able to click on "'43 Guards Regiment" in the editor and immediately have all the troops at my disposal, rather than having to figure out exactly what should be in the group, platoon by platoon. If so, what will be the biggest group available? Division?

[Sergei]

Originally posted by John_d:

Talking of this kind of thing, surely it would be possible to increase the scale of CMC battles by keeping units in 'reserve'. For example, I buy a division or two of troops, but there is some kind of limiting factor on how many I can have on the field at any given time (say two regiments or something). Every time I lose x number of troops on the field, the computer brings in a further part of my force on the CMC operational map as re-enforcements.

Why not just keep reserves? It's not like you are forced to keep all your men in the frontline all the time (nor is it necessarily wise), instead of having them stand back for rest and supplies and ready to exploit or to save the day?

[C'Rogers]

I may be reading this thread wrong, and it has been a few weeks since I have looked at what was going on, but aren't units selected by the creator of the scenario (there are no quick battles as the maps must be made). Thus they are not purchased at all to my understanding.

[John_d]

Only b/c I've heard that CMC will be limited to divisional size solely by the amount of process power it would take to handle more than a division on-screen at any one time. If there were a reserve option, then much larger battles could be fought without causing problems with the processing time

[JasonC]

Um, nobody is going to recreate the scale of Stalingrad in CMBB. Doesn't matter what add on system. Like "IT", the mythical recreation of WW II with individual man counters, it is a dream of monsterhood run amok, that is all. No one could possibly be bothered to put in that much time moving every half squad every minute, in a battle involving millions of men for months. Please keep feet on the ground. CM campaigns can recreate regiment to division actions for a few days of combat, at most - with the second of those already requiring lots of players and a dedicated ref. That isn't going to change.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by JasonC:

Um, nobody is going to recreate the scale of Stalingrad in CMBB. Doesn't matter what add on system. Like "IT", the mythical recreation of WW II with individual man counters, it is a dream of monsterhood run amok, that is all. No one could possibly be bothered to put in that much time moving every half squad every minute, in a battle involving millions of men for months. Please keep feet on the ground. CM campaigns can recreate regiment to division actions for a few days of combat, at most - with the second of those already requiring lots of players and a dedicated ref. That isn't going to change.

A large enough corps of dedicated multi-player could do this; unlikely, but possible.

[Michael Dorosh]

Incidentally, what is all this talk of "purchasing"?

I thought the forces would be designated by the campaign designer and arrive per schedule. What is there to "buy"?

[John_d]

Ok, it would be a waste of time to recreate enormous campaigns that lasted months and involved millions of men, but surely it would be possible to at least double the scope of CMC by staggering the entrance of units. Remember that it isn't CMBB that has to do most of the processing b/c most troops won't be actively involved in combat most of the time.

Michael, I think ppl were talking about the possibility of something like the quickbattle option in CMBB for CMC, or at the very least something on the campaign editor that would allow the relative 'values' of various units to be assessed

[simovitch]

Originally posted by JasonC:

Like "IT", the mythical recreation of WW II with individual man counters, it is a dream of monsterhood run amok

lol - I remember reading that article in "The General" as a kid, with the big "IT" truck pulling up to the guy's house. I thought it was hilarious, yet somehow intriguing...

[Bruce70]

"there are no quick battles as the maps must be made"

Soemthing like quick battles could be fun, but obviously the map would not be auto-generated.

"CMC will be limited to divisional size solely by the amount of process power..."

I don't think there is intended to be any limit in CMC as to the size of forces involved, and I seriously doubt that there would be a limit imposed by processing power (what's to process?). I thought the division size "limit" was based purely on practicality, not an actual restricition of the software. Considering that I prefer small CM:BB games I doubt that I would enjoy even a division-sized campaign.

[Ike]

"IT" actually came delivered to the nearest railroad siding, as "IT" required an entire boxcar for shipment. The largest difficulty our group had, since it was a board game after all, was renting the state of Rhode Island for a year (or two; depended upon whether you took the "Quick Set-Up rule" or the "Optional Set-Up rule"). The players of "Campaign for North Africa" had it booked for a number of consecutive years starting immediately after CNA was published.

Those of you who are old enough may recall the advertisements for "IT" on the old Ed Sullivan Show: "Right here on this very stage, World War Two with the original cast of players!" (chuckle)

[ww2steel]

Purchasing:

I brought this up. My idea was to alter the way that CMBB operational reenforcements are done in CMC. Instead of the scenario designer saying- you get a Tiger a PzIVH and a Pak40 on day 3 he says instead- you get 460 points that are used to purchase units just like in the scenario editor or a quick battle.

Maybe both could be used, selected by the scenario designer- either X vehicles and/or Y # of points. That way a super historical battle would ONLY give you historical troops, but the designer could also give you a certain number (if any) of points to spend on a requisition screen.

That make sense?

Mike

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by ww2steel:

Purchasing:

I brought this up. My idea was to alter the way that CMBB operational reenforcements are done in CMC. Instead of the scenario designer saying- you get a Tiger a PzIVH and a Pak40 on day 3 he says instead- you get 460 points that are used to purchase units just like in the scenario editor or a quick battle.

Maybe both could be used, selected by the scenario designer- either X vehicles and/or Y # of points. That way a super historical battle would ONLY give you historical troops, but the designer could also give you a certain number (if any) of points to spend on a requisition screen.

That make sense?

Mike

Sounds like an impractical idea, and a surefire way to ensure that campaigns instantly devolve into who can afford the best tanks. I'd vote against this if asked to vote.

[ww2steel]

Then don't vote!

As I said, able to be set by the scenario designer.

I would also like to see rarity have more effect to prevent cherry picking, which I suspect is what you're talking about... who can buy more Tiger tanks & earrly KV's etc.

Mike

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by ww2steel:

Then don't vote!

As I said, able to be set by the scenario designer.

I would also like to see rarity have more effect to prevent cherry picking, which I suspect is what you're talking about... who can buy more Tiger tanks & earrly KV's etc.

Mike

CM already operates on "buying armour". Real life commanders didn't do that. I can almost see the rationale in a Quick Battle. In an entire campaign, I don't see a need for having an ability to "buy stuff". I don't want to play "Shopping Mission" I want to play "Combat Mission: Campaign". Real life commanders went with what they were given, they didn't go out and buy it. Part of the burden that makes the game a challenge is utilizing what's given, not outmaneuvering your opponent in the purchase phase...

[ww2steel]

Yes, I absolutely agree with what you are saying here.

My only problem is the discrepancy between what is needed and what is provided in reenforcements. Granted, the better then scenario the designer, and larger the scenario is, the more minimal this problem is. If CMBB could somehow intelligently determine what reenforcements are helpful and could send them, that would be absolutely perfect for me. I agree that 'buying' units is goofy, but I feel that simply getting this certain equipment on this certain date (+- %age) with absolutely no respect to tactical requirements is even more goofy. I could at least make a request for whatever support would suit my needs in a real engagement. My superior may tell me to take a hike, but I could at least ask (hence buying = asking).

Mike

[Sergei]

Life is such that sometimes you just had to face T-34's with toothpicks. If that doesn't suit your tactics, then you must change your tactics.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by ww2steel:

Yes, I absolutely agree with what you are saying here.

My only problem is the discrepancy between what is needed and what is provided in reenforcements. Granted, the better then scenario the designer, and larger the scenario is, the more minimal this problem is. If CMBB could somehow intelligently determine what reenforcements are helpful and could send them, that would be absolutely perfect for me. I agree that 'buying' units is goofy, but I feel that simply getting this certain equipment on this certain date (+- %age) with absolutely no respect to tactical requirements is even more goofy. I could at least make a request for whatever support would suit my needs in a real engagement. My superior may tell me to take a hike, but I could at least ask (hence buying = asking).

Mike

In that case, I would still do something more restricted - list a set of alternatives but instead of "purchase points" perhaps a percentage chance of them actually showing up, and if they do show, perhaps late - or with a different tank type substituted. All possibilities would have to be mapped out by the designer though.

For example - say your main combat units in one scen are the Pz Gren Division Grossdeutschland, Kursk 1943. You start with all units.

The designer has decided that reinforcements are possible from 48th Corps (GD's parent formation).

So instead of buying from a list of every available unit type in July 1943 - (I'll take a platoon of Tigers, two 88mm FlaK, and with my leftover points two snipers and a flamethrower team) - you get to choose from

- a company of Elephant TDs (combat trialling as corps assets) - 50percent chance of showing up due to their mechanical reliability and need elsewhere on the front

- a regiment of Nebelwerfer rocket launchers, from corps artillery assets - 100 percent chance as they have been permanently assigned to your division

- replacement Tigers for your Tiger battalion, maximum of five vehicles, availability dependent on workshop workload

- Corps reconnaissance battalions - three companies of armoured cars (chances greater of getting one company than the entire battalion)

- a Pioneer battalion earmarked for Corps construction duties, depending on how fast it completes a bridgebuilding project

- a company under operational control from a neighbouring panzer division - possibly a company of PzKpfw IVs, subject to their employment on the front, otherwise PzKpfw IIIs.

Etc.

[JasonC]

Um, there were no Elephants on the whole southern front. There are some Russian reports of them but those are mid-identified Nashorns. There was a single battalion of those in AD Kempf (560th), on the right portion of the southern front. Wasn't with the spearheads - it acted as AT stiffening for an infantry corps.

Corps arty had 1 battalion of 210s, 1 battery of 150mm cannons, a few 105s (motorized, only reason up at corps - 1 1/3 battalions), an odd unit of 120mm mortars (only a company), and one battalion of heavy Nebelwerfer.

There was no corps level recon, the practice did not exist in the German army. That was a US kind of thing (added as a screening asset to hold frontage between divisions and the like).

As for repairing Tigers, by the end most of them were in the workshops and at times only 2 were running. Yes some came back out, but not rapidly. A 4 day period after the height of the battle saw 4 Tigers returned to operational; 3 more made it in the 2 days following. So a tank or at the most 2 per day is about all one could expect from the divisional workshops. As for replacement Tigers, only the SS corps got any during Kursk, or even in July as a whole.

As for pioneers, that you might actually get from corps. There were 2 motorized battalions of them, though one was a training unit, and they had plenty to do in the rear areas. There were also a large number of small bridging columns, not combat engineers though, just equipment and laborers.

I'm not disagreeing with the general idea of having some list of potential reinforcement assets and letting the player pick. But for combat purposes, those would more likely be modest KGs from neighoring units shading into your area of operations, or extra artillery support (or even more likely, additional ammo for existing guns), rather than maneuver units sent down from corps. There really weren't any there, to speak of, in German practice.

(In 48 corps the best corps level asset in those terms was a single StuG battalion, but it was attached to 11th Panzer throughout, to bulk up its weak tank regiment).

Just getting groggy on you...