Sc2 - Targeting Generals

[Edwin P.]

During WWII both sides attmepted, with not much success, to kill opposing generals. This proposal allows both sides to attempt adopt this tactis.

SC2 Option

Cost: 40MPP per attempt, one attempt per turn.

Commission a strike team to target any enemy HQ unit that is spotted. 5% that the commanding General is killed and the targeted HQ is replaced with another randomly selected HQ unit (who may be of higher or lower skill)

Now the Axis can target Eisenhower and the Allies can target Rommel.

[ April 05, 2004, 02:39 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[jon_j_rambo]

Yeah, but that's luck, not really strategy.

[Wehrmacht]

Good idea Edwin, as always. But there is already much more efficient way of killing enemy generals, you can just attack them with lots of air. Enemy loses his HQ forever (and lots of MPP's) and a lot less luck is needed. But on the other hand, this way you could kill enemy generals that are not in the strike range of your air.

But anyway, good idea

(and sorry about my not-so-good English)

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

I have to agree, it is unwise, this will just open a door to unwanted silly nitpicking minor detail wargaming. It isn't a rolegame or sum sort of tactical sim.

It's grand strategy, and special ops is just to minute a detail for my tastes.

[Shaka of Carthage]

I'd like to re-suggest an idea that was discussed before regarding HQ's.

Normalize the HQ cost per nation (ie HQ for Germany would be one cost), then when you purchase a HQ, you are randomly assigned the Leader for that HQ.

Then, have a small percentage chance that the HQ Leader is removed (ie demoted, died by accident or assassin, promoted, resigned, whatever else you can think of) and replaced by a new Leader.

It would stop our ability to operate with 20/20 hindsight in terms of the HQ's we use, and even when we get the guy we want, no guarantee that he will stick around.

It would also be nice, if there was some more variation in what the Leader traits are.

For example, I personally like the idea that the units that are attached to a specific HQ, when it comes time to move them, won't move. Maybe the orders got delayed, lost, or even ignored.

Another example, Rommel, while he's rated as a eight (8), can only control a maximum of three (3) units. Those three units can include Axis Minors and/or Italians.

You get the idea, and I'm sure we all can come up with some creative ideas that are Leader specific.

[Edwin P.]

Building on Shaka's Idea

1. You can attempt to replace, for a cost in MPPs, the commander of a HQ unit but that HQ and the units it commands can't move during that turn. This allows one to change commanders but imposes a cost on doing so.

2. Futhermore, politics may prevent the reassignment of a general. Thus you might order a general to be replaced but find out that politics prevents the orders from being carried out. The chance for the change of command being executed would vary by country - Russia 95%, Germany 80%, US 70%, UK 60%, France 10%, Italy 10%. Naturally, if the change of command did not occur that HQ unit and the units it commanded could not move during that turn.

3. When you get/replace a general his rating and the readiness of units he commands is hidden until the first time a unit he commands engages in combat.

4. Units not commanded by a HQ unit have a 1-2% not to move.

5. HQ units should have a bonus tied to a type of unit. Example: Bilbao should give a higher readiness bonus to Italian AirFleets than to Italian Army units. Rommel should give a higher readiness bonus to Armor units than to Army Units.

[ April 05, 2004, 09:05 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Brian (the semi-wise)]

Personally, I don't think this advances the game much. But it's an idea to be considered. And all ideas are good. (I just want the Pacific)

[jon_j_rambo]

General's not obeying orders already exists, it's called misclicks! I was playing Liam the other night. I had a 3-star experienced Bomber in Malta, scouting the area, taking safe pop shots, entrenched, everything.....Until I miss clicked the bomber to attack a Luftwaffen (LF) in Sicily. I was so pissed, I surrender the whole game just because of that. That Bomber was my pride & joy at 3-star.

Brian --- If there's going to be a Pacific SC, it will need an entire redesign. The Naval / Air would need changed.

[Blashy]

I'm not for it, but once again, add this as an on/off option.

Best way to go is to make as much of this game player configurable, meaning on/off options.

As for HQs, I just want to be able to assign who controls what, none of the random effect like SC.

[JerseyJohn]

"During WWII both sides attmepted, with not much success, to kill opposing generals."

-- Edwin

Actually there weren't too many instances of this in WWII, though the comparatively few that did take place were notable.

The two most famous are the Americans shooting down Yammamoto -- an incredible operation that by all odds should have failed. And the British organized the assination of Reinhard Heydrich, more a slave driver and mass executioner than a commander -- he was the equivalent of a four star general in the SS, though his duties were purely administrative. He presided over the Wansee Conference, for example, and organized the Holocaust. The Chezchs referred to him simply as, "The Butcher."

The British made an attempt to kill Rommel in North Africa but it was the reverse of the Yammamotto operation, it should have succeeded but happened when Rommel wasn't at his HQ -- come to think of it, that was most of the time!

Another British attempt was made the assasination of Hitler in his mountain residence relying more on his own disregard for personal security (at home) than on a large effort. Two would be assasins failed to get very close and the operation was aborted.

Hitler didn't believe in such operations and I don't know of any, off hand, that the Germans conducted.

Eisenhower thought he was being targeted during the Battle of the Bulge when English speaking Germans began popping up behind the lines in American MP uniforms. He took precautions but here too I don't think his assasination was one of the objectives, it was the spreading of confusion behind American lines.

How much do these things actually affect the course of events?

Would Japan have lost almost the same way if Yammamato had lived? Probably, not even his genius could have pulled them out.

Was the SS just as brutal with a dead Reinhard Heydrich as when he had been alive? -- They sure didn't become humanitarians afterwards, starting immediately with the wiping out of Lidice and all it's innocents because it happened to be the assasination scene.

Overall, I can't say this is a bad game idea, but I can't really say it seems overly important.

[ April 07, 2004, 01:12 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]