Proposal: NEW Generic HQ

[Desert Dave]

Seems as though we go through cycles, like Neitzsche once supposed, and now is the time to suggest the following:

(... perhaps JJ and several others have also requested something similar, I can't remember all the details of the various threads... they can jump right in and clarify their own proposals/desires)

Off-screen trumpet: TA DA!

***I would VERY much like to see a NEW HQ unit!

Size 1, 2 or 3 and designated HQ-1, HQ-2, and HQ-3. Costing 175, 200 and 225 MPPs, or thereabouts.

Additional restrictions (... justifying the lower cost): This unit could ONLY provide supply for one, two, or three units, depending on the HQ size, of course.

Rationale:

We need a small HQ to allow for those limited, attrition style combats.

1) For instance, in Bergen. The German player could buy a 2-sized HQ to support the garrison there and one Air Fleet... which is sorely needed to provide air cover for the subs (... and/or harrass the new! Murmansk Transfer hexes) since they would use... something akin to JJ's proposed "exit Arrows" to raid into the Arctic, Norwegian or North Atlantic Seas/Zones.

Or, in our expanded SC2 the placement of Naval Air (... our 3rd AF type!! to include tactical, strategic and now, expensive, specially tasked... naval air!) would require these kinds of small HQs... for instance, the Brits could use this to support Alexandria and the Eastern Med. And, the USA could utilize them to protect that NEW! sub hunting facility in Iceland!

2) Next, the generic HQs could be used to direct those mostly ineffective Minors such as Hungary or Bulgaria (... also, our New! Commonwealth units, which arrive, randomly at Suez, depending on which SPECIAL EVENT occurs, and when!)

These HQs would support ANY units, so you would have to manipulate them and keep your Minor units in a separate cluster as much as possible, else these rash but game mini-HQs would end up dispatching highly experienced, high-tech Panzers! :eek:

(... we could even use the new HQs for the Minor countries like Finland, or Sweden, or Spain, which arguably SHOULD have some better field leadership than Belgium or Denmark and other similar Sacrifical Lambs.)

3) And, the generic 1, 2 or 3-sized HQs could be purchased by, say, Russia to fill in the gaping gaps and protect VITAL interests (... such as those 2 Ore resource hexes near the Black Sea) until they could afford higher rated leaders.

4) These new generic 1,2 or 3-HQs could perform SECURITY for those areas vulnerable to nefarious "sneak attack" such as the Baltic States or Southern Italy (... and, incidentally, they would boost that Strat/Naval Bomber that the Germans always provide to protect the mighty cowering Italian Navy)... remember,

***these generic HQs support ANY units within range, BUT, ONLY a number based on their strength, with limited supply due to smaller size)

All in all, IMHO, this is an idea whose time has cycled 'round... this I would most definitely like to see in SC2! You? :cool:

[Carl G. E. von Mannerheim]

I like it, but I want one to be named 'Mannerheim'

:cool:

[KDG]

I'd love to have a wider range of HQ's and HQ costs. Start at 300 MPP's, and go to 500.

300 gets level 1

325 - 2

350 - 3

375 - 4

400 - 5

425 - 6

450 - 7

475 - 8

500 - 9

Some countries may max at level 4, others at 6, etc. Allowing a few cheaper ones would be nice though.

[JerseyJohn]

Immers

Great idea, you're right, it's time has come. I don't think the number of units an HQ supplies or controls would depend upon it's performance level. A generic 2 should still control 5 units, but it wouldn't do it as well as Manstein's 9 -- with that understanding I support your idea 100%.

KDG

Also a great idea and fully compatable with Immer's concept. Behind that 100% as well.

Replaceable HQs One of the things I dislike with SC is the fact that, while the creation other units is inexhaustable, major countries are limited to a fairly small number of HQs. I don't think they should be irreplaceable; there are always officers to be promoted and plenty left over to form HQ staffs. These ideas of Immers and KDG would provide a way around that. Personally I'd just as soon not have names on HQs, or perhaps writable names as in the other units.

It would also be good if we could click on an HQ and click on a ground or air unit 5 hexes or closer and have that unit linked to that HQ. If the unit were more than five hexes away at the end of a turn the link would be broken and the computer could attach it to a new HQ till the Human player chooses otherwise.

CvM

I don't know if anyone's ever thought of this before, but wouldn't it be great if Finland had it's own HQ unit and they named it something authentic like Mannerheim, or perhaps Sibelius?

[ May 22, 2003, 03:10 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Shaka of Carthage]

Here is my proposal for the HQ issue.

Headquarter Unit

Cost of 400 MPP. The leader is randomly selected by the computer from the leadership pool (ie current HQ leaders). Once that pool is gone (or the nation doesn't have any HQ leaders), then the leadership rating should be randomly determined. We could then name this "generic" HQ anything we wanted.

The existing effects of HQ would be what they are currently. We now only need one more thing to give everyone what they want.

Naval Command Ship

In effect a naval HQ. Problem is, do we really need one? That is for the rest of you to decide. And if you say yes, what effect would it have?

[Edwin P.]

Shaka

I really like the idea of randomly selected HQ units. Not only does it make leaders more affordable it introduces the uncertainties of war.

Once that pool is gone (or the nation doesn't have any HQ leaders), then the leadership rating should be randomly determined. We could then name this "generic" HQ anything we wanted.

Another excellent idea, but being a history buff I would want to have the generic leaders be assigned an historical name after the rating is determined, but perhaps this is too much to ask for.

I also assume it would be too much to ask for the ratings of the leader to remain unknown until their first battle.(and now I see how my comments can make a nice simple adapation into a major project)

As for the Naval Command ship, in the ETO I do not see the need. If SC2 encompasses the PTO then I would like to see Naval commanders that affected the fleets they commanded.

[ May 22, 2003, 10:21 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[John DiFool]

Awhile back I posted an idea where there would be

a hierarchy (2 levels at least)-a front commander

(Eisenhower) who would control up to 5 HQs under-

neath him, from a distance of (say) up to 20 hexes.

[Edwin P.]

John DiFool

What would a front commander unit contribute to the HQs serving under him?

Jersey John

I was thinking about linked HQs as you mentioned and started to wonder what would be the effect of having a time lag between the time when a HQ lost control of a unit and the time that it could assume control of a new unit. Say 1 or 2 turns. This would provide players an incentive to keep units of a HQ together.

[ May 23, 2003, 01:31 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Shaka of Carthage]

... but being a history buff I would want to have the generic leaders be assigned an historical name after the rating is determined

I understand the desire, but in the context of the system, what you are really asking for is to expand the current HQ leaders pool. I don't see a problem with that.

The "random" generic leaders are a representation of leaders whom no one has heard of. That way one of the HQ's could say CUSTER or SHAKA.

[JerseyJohn]

John

I agree with Edwin, the idea is interesting but a bit vague. Would there be a pyramiding of HQs, Theater Commanders like Kesselring and von Rundstedt overlapping Army Group Commanders like Rommel and von Mannstein? Not a bad idea if combined with an expanded HQ pool.

Edwin

Yes, that's a good point; although the HQs are so slow it would really prevent attacks from progressing blitzkrieg fashion. On the other hand it simulates armored spearheads having to wait for infantry and supplies to catch up -- except 2 hexes a turn for HQ becomes a tortoise and hare situation.

Shaka

Agreed entirely, the names are only cosmetic and in all likelihood most players would end up leaving them blank.

Getting back to CvM's long standing request for a Mannerheim Finnish HQ -- this is definitely a necessity as more and more players are developing ways to knock Finland out before it has a chance to influence the game. I think Finland should also have an airfleet, as Sweden does. I'd locate the airfleet NE of Helsinki with the Mannerheim HQ one hex farther east, putting the two corps and Isthmus Army all in supply.

[ May 23, 2003, 01:59 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Desert Dave]

KDG ... why so expensive on your level 1, 2 or 3 HQs? Unless you agree with notion that these NEW! generic HQs would still support 5 units?

See, my principle intention was to provide a LOW COST HQ for the "stray fire-fights" which occasionally occur away from the main fronts.

Jersey ...I justify the LOWER cost (... else, these HQs may not be used so much?) due to controlling ONLY a FEW units... hmmmmmm, well, perhaps we could allow these generic HQs to be the ONLY HQs which could select which units it controls?

This would more surely insure that you would be controlling that specific AF needed in Bergen (... or, in our & your NEW! SC2 map, Trondheim or even Narvik?)

Shaka ... O Big LA, what a flush-life, story-book City, what a terrific Tangerine Land... I fell in love with that vamping Damsel back in '68 when I got mustered out of the Army (... the CONTRAST in these 2 Gestalts was so discreet and decided!) and to this day I REFUSE to listen to all & any who claim that she has fallen to husk & seed, that She is holed up in a ramshackle road-house over on Sunset Blvd with the ghost of Jim Morrison, reading old tattered Black Mask & Dell Noir paperbacks... no, no I say, She is merely girding herself for that MGM Grand! come-back... :cool: etc.)

Anyway, here we are tasking generic HQs for SPECIFIC and small-scale encounters... it is imperative to get the EXACT kind of HQ that you need!

**Though I do like yer proposal for a Naval HQ... this would work best if we finally get Sea Zones in SC2, so that a Naval HQ based in a port on THAT ZONE, would influence all naval sorties. This would require more CHOICES by the SC Field Marshal... as the Brits, do you risk sending the Admiral to the risky area of the MidEast?

Edwin P ...the idea that a randomly selected HQ is unknown as to ability, UNTIL the battle is joined is a good one... assuming you can still select the SIZE you need (... also assuming a list of names will be provided in SC2).

John DiFool ... Interesting idea of Front Commanders - why not? They would gain/lose experience just like the Field commanders. To this I would add: RANDOM EVENTS which would change some of their abilities and/or ratings according to whim, and not merely victories or defeats... else, the German Front Commanders would be much too strong and damn near OMNIPOTENT! :eek: in the mid to late game, yes?

CvM ...if there is any justice, if there are ANY blue-birds flitting to & fro in this our post-modern Eden, THEN ABSOLUTELY!! you shall receive... a new HQ unit in SC2 that perceives all and eveything in every way ANEW!!... each and every instant of every Finnish day... named Mannerheim!!

*****************

A couple of other ideas:

1) Rommel should be SPLIT into two separate ratings... in order to encourage using him in the Med, I would give him a 6/10 split. Used in Europe he is rated 6... send him to the desert and NOW! he is rated 10!! :cool:

2) This may be stretching things, but I wouldn't mind seeing "random re-assignment."

Of course, this fits with many of our general requests for SPECIAL EVENTS, but wouldn't it be daft if SUDDENLY!!! your (... nameless, faceless, Kafka-esque :eek: ) Supreme Commander, or bespectacled Clerk! arbitrarily re-assigned Manstein RIGHT IN THE MIDST! of a key battle in Kursk!

Let's do it!!

[ May 23, 2003, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: Immer Etwas ]

[disorder]

its always something---

[ QUOTE] Of course, this fits with many of our general requests for SPECIAL EVENTS, but wouldn't it be daft if SUDDENLY!!! your (... nameless, faceless, Kafka-esque ) Supreme Commander, or bespectacled Clerk! arbitrarily re-assigned Manstein RIGHT IN THE MIDST! of a key battle in Kursk!

[JerseyJohn]

Immer

Your reasoning makes sense, my main concern is that without stacking we'd end up having a lot 1 unit HQs cluttering the board doing virtually nothing. On the other hand, each of these weak HQs could also serve as ordinary corps with the advantage of maintaining their own supply line while supplying one, two or three other units.

In the Bergen example, a weak HQ could garrison Bergen and maintain a full strength air unit, which I'd go along with. In terms of Cost there might be a temptation to always buy the weakest version of HQ instead of ordinary corps.

I like the additional ideas as well, for example the variance within a leader's performance rating. Rommel was definitely at his best running along the front lines micromanaging the action. Which wasn't entirely good because his HQ staff were often unable to find him in emergencies. He did less of that in France and might have matured a bit as an Army Group Commander but the truth is he was a tactician at heart. A fine example of the Peter Principle.

[Edwin P.]

Here's an idea;

1. Front Commander

Gives a +5% to +10% readiness bonus to HQs within a radius of 10 hexes. This reflects the priority allocation of supplies to a front. Thus a 60% Rated HQ becomes a 70% rated leader.

A front commander costs 500MPP.

Players have a choice; buy a new HQ unit to support more combat units or purchase a Front Commander to increase the readiness of exisiting HQ units.

2. HQ Commanders

Supply Depots and coordinating staff for up to 5 Units.

3. Unit Commanders

Gives a unit a bonus/penalty based on the leadership ratings of the unit commander.

Example: +1 SD, +1AP, +10% Readiness, -1AP, -5% Readiness.

Cost 80MPP.

If the unit dies the unit commander dies with it.

4. HQ Pools

Players could purchase HQ Commanders from one of 2 Force Pools:

a. Known HQ Commanders - As per the current force pool.

b. Unknown HQ Commanders - The value(s) of these HQ would be determined randomly. All would be available at a fixed prive of 300MPP.

Thus players decide between activating a known HQ Commander or taking a chance and activating an unknown (with a value of 2 to 9) HQ commander.

Value for Unknown Commanders:

5% Value 2 <> 10% Value 3 <> 15% Value 4 <> 35% Value 5 <> 15% Value 6 <> 10% Value 7 <> 5% Value 8 <> 5% Value 9

[ May 23, 2003, 08:03 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[KDG]

KDG ... why so expensive on your level 1, 2 or 3 HQs? Unless you agree with notion that these NEW! generic HQs would still support 5 units?

Yes, they would support 5 units. This way the gaming engine doesn't need to be changed.

Instead of ranging from 300 to 500 in cost, we could make a level 1 HQ start at 200 up to a level 10 at 500, in increments of 30(200-230-260,etc).

I'd also have limits on the number of HQ's and the types available per nation. France & Italy may get 1 each of levels 1 to 5, while Germany has 1 each from 2-10.

[JerseyJohn]

Edwin

I like those ideas as well.

KDG

Very good point. Ideas stand a better chance of going through if they can be adapted within the current game engine.

[ May 23, 2003, 05:01 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]