kurt88 Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 The Supply Lines thread got me thinking on how HQ's could be represented in SC2. Let's say first that HQ's for minor countries like Finland or Spain could be 'bought' with mpp's from majors like Germany or UK. AND that the units from minor countries could benefit from the approriate minor HQ for 100% (considering the nr. of hexes that the unit is seperated from the HQ). Minor units could ALSO benefit from Major HQ's, but only at let's say 50% (considering the nr. of hexes the unit is seperated from the HQ). IF SC2 would give us a bigger map, the 'visibility' of the supply lines and bonuses could be greatly enhanced. Korsun Pocket has an interesting feature : a bonus for divisional integrity. Let's say we could form army groups or armies in SC2, consisting of a number of units (armor, infantry, artillery, air?) and then we could select a HQ for each group/army that could give a bonus for cordination among other things. HQ rating : 8 units supplied/bonused : 8 CONSIDERING THE NR. OF HEXES THAT UNIT IS SEPERATED FROM THE HQ HQ rating : 4 units supplied/bonused : 4 CONSIDERING ... This could be nicely presented on a SUPPLY MAP. [ January 13, 2004, 04:41 PM: Message edited by: kurt88 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin P. Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 Kurt88, I agree that Major powers should be able to purchase HQs for their minor power allies. They should also be able to purchase additional army and corps units for the minor power allies, perhaps at a higher cost, based on the number of cities in the allied country; Example: Sweden/Norway (1 or 2 cities) - can purchase Corps Example: Spain/Turkey (3 cities) - can purchase Armies and Corps As for minor country HQ's I would also have the cost be constant but the leadership ability be random as you rarely knew how good/bad a minor country general would be in battle conditions - say 90% level 4, 5% level 3, 4% level 5, 1% level 7 - and minor powers that had recently been at war (Finland, Spain, Turkey) should have a greater chance for more capable HQs. [ January 13, 2004, 05:38 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin P. Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 For SC2 - Supply Management Tech (or Logistics) Each odd level of Supply Management increases the number of units that a HQ can supply by +1. Tech Level 0 - 5 units Tech Level 1 - 6 units Tech Level 2 - 6 units Tech Level 3 - 7 units Tech Level 4 - 7 units Tech Level 5 - 8 units The US should probably start with Supply Tech 1. [ January 14, 2004, 02:38 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friendly Fire Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 Alternatively, I suggest that HQs should exert some, albeit reduced, level of C&C for allied units. It always bugs me when my UK HQ doesn't do anything for a Canadian unit... This could make some interesting situations in the game, it might become worthwhile (for example) to send an Allied HQ to Spain to assist in the defense... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt88 Posted January 14, 2004 Author Share Posted January 14, 2004 They should also be able to purchase additional army and corps units for the minor power allies, perhaps at a higher cost, based on the number of cities in the allied country; Yes, agreed. Alternatively, I suggest that HQs should exert some, albeit reduced, level of C&C for allied units. See my post above. What about conecting units to HQ's ourselves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 I think it would be good if we could connect units to HQs ourselves, but we would probably want the computer to automatically assign where we didn't, otherwise we could spend half of every move assigning and reassigning until we got it right, making online games a bit slow. Another thing I'd like HQs to have is a few AA guns and a low defensive combat value. Not a great deal, but it would be nice if they weren't such easy pickings. After all, all armies put AA guns and troops to guard their supply lines, yet in SC the HQs (which partially represent supply lines) never do any damage to attacking units. Not even when they are entrenched in a city with level 5 AA radar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt88 Posted January 14, 2004 Author Share Posted January 14, 2004 I think it would be good if we could connect units to HQs ourselves, but we would probably want the computer to automatically assign where we didn't, otherwise we could spend half of every move assigning and reassigning until we got it right, making online games a bit slow. Good point Bill, that would indeed be usefull. And I agree that it should be harder to hit HQ's from the air.Maybe just downright make it impossible. A SUPPLY MAP would also be helpful, to get a clear view of the supply situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin P. Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 In my opinion, HQ units represent supply depots that allocate resources to nearby armies. If so, then they should be easy to hit from the air if spotted. That said, I would have an adjacent air fleet (not a bomber fleet) shield a HQ unit from being spotted by opposing air units - what the enemy can't see it can't attack. Example: HQ is next to 1 friendly Air unit = 40% of enemy air units spotting it. HQ is next to 2 friendly Air units = 20% of enemy air units spotting it. HQ is next to 3 friendly Air units = 10% of enemy air units spotting it. HQ is next to 4 friendly Air units = 5% of being spotted by enemy air units. PS: IMHO the best Anti Air defense during WWII was another Air Fleet, Anti Air Guns make you feel better but in reality they were largely ineffective unless deployed in large numbers. [ January 14, 2004, 02:35 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzeh Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 It really depends. There are two types of AA guns, big guns for shooting at high-altitude bombers, and smaller guns that fire quickly for low-altitude attacks. It doesn't exactly take a lot of low altitude guns to stave off an attack by a smaller group of ground attack aircraft. The bigger guns had a low rate of fire and were primarily restricted to fighting off strategic bombers. Of course, I think the effects of airfleets should be more abstracted, though, so what do I know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 Edwin P wrote: In my opinion, HQ units represent supply depots that allocate resources to nearby armies. The supply depots may be hidden, but the trucks, horses, railways etc. used to move the supplies around would be pretty easy to spot. Just giving HQs a low AA defense figure (not a high one, as Edwin is right that AA guns were never very effective at preventing attacks) goes some way to redressing the balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 You know the HQ supply thing is kind of uncertain it seems. Why not have an actual superimposable number in each hex to signify the supply in that hex ala TOAW. After all its nothing but a formula,... a piece of cake for a computer. Attach it to a hotkey.....problem solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts