Tiles - did they matter?

[Kuniworth]

After playing for a couple of month the answer must be -

YES.

Defence are much harder than in SC 1 which is a real problem when making scenarios like I try to do. There is simply to much attacking directions to create anything like a defensive line. That is the main flaw of SC 2. It's not a game breaker but make the game far more difficult to get balance.

The second big flaw of tiles are supply-lines crossing each other and units able to move in more directions. This makes cutting of enemy units eg panzer tactics much more of a slugging fest than the art of maneovour = bad for operational level scenarios.

So to conclude; HEXES were the right way to go and the people crying for it back then was right. As I said SC 2 is a good game but it could have been better.

I'm hoping a possible SC 3 will have hexes and a editor like this(with some extra features).

[Blashy]

Personally I prefer the tiles.

Hexes did not offer the maneuvaribility that you saw in WW2.

SC1 felt like WW1, line ups of units facing each other.

That is how I feel about it.

[SeaMonkey]

I think hexes would have been just fine with the fight then move feature we have now.

It means with proper planning you could get 4 attacks concentrated on one hex excluding Air and Artillery(rockets) assets.

With tiles you can get at least six and probably more like eight ground attacks on a single tile.

Pretty tough to form any kind of defense.

A fix is forthcoming.

[pzgndr]

I don't see any fundamental problem with tiles versus hexes. The extra directions provide some obvious advantages to the offense, that's true. The concern I keep seeing is that the defense needs some help. There are a couple of tweaks that might help.

One idea is that the terrain defense bonuses could be bumped up. Even clear terrain should provide some inherent defense bonus, much like the old Third Reich game had defenders doubled on clear hexes. So clear could have +1 values, forests +2, mountains/marsh +3, etc. Not sure if this might be too much or not, but it would be worth experimenting with a mod to find out.

Another idea is to increase the Adjacent Enemy Units and/or Blitz Attack/Movement penalties. Right now these are both +1 but they could be increased to +2. This would help the defense cover gaps a little better. Again, not sure if this would slow things down too much or not, but it's an option.

Subtle changes like this might be all that's needed to fix the defense problem. Has anyone tried doing something like this and willing to share results?

[Yogi]

I don't mind the tiles, but have to admit that watching units move diagonally through & between two enemy units can be a little frustrating.

[Retributar]

What i see missing is 'Zone of Control' movement penalties!.

Remember the old 'Zone of Control' feature in the game's of our past?...it seemed to me...to work well...and alievated this...

watching units move diagonally through & between two enemy units can be a little frustrating.

...problem!.

Moving into the space between two enemy unit's is fair...but, moving 'diagonally through & between two enemy units'...doesn't ring right with me!,...without some kind of movement penalty kicking in!.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

It ain't half as frustrating as watching diagonal

squares flip control, despite virtually surrounding

an enemy unit/units, and having the enemy unit

magically teleport out of danger, or merely reinforce

in place. There should be no op move or reinforcement

through an enemy ZOC*, and hexes shouldn't flip back

until control is re-established through some valid

means.

*[unless said reinforcement is through a friendly unit]

The diagonal movement problem could be solved by

either of two ways: making diagonal movement cost

1.5 (or 1.4) times as much as straight movement,

or by R.'s suggestion.

Combat is pretty bloody as it stands-in a recent

game, suicide on the Russian front was leaving any

unit with less than 9 strength points adjacent to

2 or more enemy units-it almost invariably gets

wiped out, usually by 2-3 attacks.

[SeaMonkey]

Agreed JDF, leaving a unit in proximity of enemy units beginning their turn is certain death.

There is no "stand and fight" feature in SC2 except in fortifications at level 8.

I don't think the additional movement penalty will be enough. We need something, not much, to give the defense some teeth. We should be, at least, able to hold a defensive position for one turn.

I have some ideas on mobile defensive measures but have not tried any out, since I haven't been as far as Barbarossa yet.

Some veterans of that campaign should be able to comment. A screen of corps, with others in deployment for potential "surprise contact" stops if undisclosed by enemy air, might stop the advance.

Of course at that moment you would have to unleash the mobile reserve(Tanks, Artillery, and Air) for the counterattack, then bring up a couple of more corps(+mobility level) to screen your exposed reserve(the Tanks).

Takes quite an assembled force, don't know if its feasible, 6(2 upgraded) corps, two tanks, two rockets, two AFs. Someone has bound to try.