J P Wagner Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I was planning to add this to the Cheating thread, because this method of play was mentioned, but decided not to have that topic veer astray. I was wondering though if the ability to sell off units, and then once purchased anew, placed anywhere you please is good for game balance? I think the game would be a greater challenge if this ability was either removed from the game or altered even further .... for example: The MMP's are not added to your pool until the end of your turn, thus you could not use these funds to immediately purchase and place new units.... Cut the funds received even further so that a player would really need to be in a desperate situation to want to take such a hit... Have it as an option on the main screen whether disbanding units will be on or off.... Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terif Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 If you sell a unit you only receive maximum half of the mpps it is worth (at supply 10). And usually they are at lower supply (supply 5 means you only get 1/4 of the costs !). For ships you even get only 1/10 of the purchasing costs. Therefore selling units is only the last option (especially when Axis tries a Sealion), except for some french units and the UK bomber. And its good to have that option in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin P. Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I also find selling units and reclaiming tech chits to be a valuable option for the defender and contributes to a more interesting game when playing against a human player. For example - If the French could not scrap any units the Germans would always know the exact disposition of their opponents. Selling units allows the French to alter the makeup of forces - an armor unit, additional corps or an HQ unit - before Germany begins their invasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I don't like the idea that units can be sold. I have no problem with the ability to disband a unit, but don't like the idea that you recover MPPs by doing so. Notice the previous posts in favor of the disbanding, all are doing so from a playability perspective. I agree that it adds to the playability of the French, to be able to vary the units you start off with, but a better method of doing that, even in SC as it is today, is to give the French MPPs, as part of the starting "bid". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I'm for keeping the status quo. The most I would agree to is the suggestion made above that you have to wait until the following turn before using the MPPs, though that might require some fiddly programming to work. It is totally realistic to disband units as it happened during the real war and allows more flexibility in our games. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 Bill101 This is not about realism. The problem with the current system is also related to the instantaneous creation of units. Hence, disbanding units anywhere in the world, allows you to create a totally different unit someplace else, that same turn. Thats playability, not realism. While units were stood down quite often in real life, there were restrictions on where they were able to be reused, not to mention the time delay. Thats the realism part we lack in SC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 The problem with the current system is also related to the instantaneous creation of units. Disbanding units is fine but the MPPs should not be collected until the end of the turn, during the production phase. That would be easy to do and help prevent some gamey strategies. Another thing to help offset the instantaneous unit issue would be to have all new builds be for strength 5. This would also be easy, allow for low strength garrison units if desired, and force players to reinforce/"train" new units up to full strength over one or more turns. It builds in a reasonable production delay without too much bookkeeping to worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 Bill Macon Another thing to help offset the instantaneous unit issue would be to have all new builds be for strength 5. This would also be easy, allow for low strength garrison units if desired, and force players to reinforce/"train" new units up to full strength over one or more turns. It builds in a reasonable production delay without too much bookkeeping to worry about. While I don't feel this is a good way to go for SC2, as a fix for SC its a very good idea. Having understrength units (I'd even go for lower than 5), would force you to keep them out of the front lines. And having another turn required to build them to full strength, in effect would take another two turns, since you couldn't move them. Very good idea. Combine this with that understrength unit having different experience bars based on national differences, and you've solved the experience bar issue, something we've both wanted. You could even go to the extreme of the purchase unit being one (1) strength point, giving you nine (9) turns having a one (1) str pt increase per turn so as not to lose the experience. Of course, in dire straights, you could "rush" the training, giving you a less or no experience bar unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts