vveedd Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I have played v.1.6 game and AI attempted to make invasion of Norway with two corps and without HQ . It hasn’t succeeded, of course, so it withdraws corps in to mountain tiles. I pay no attention to them and because of lack supply (supply was at 0) these two corps stay there almost whole game. This situation, of course, is totally unrealistic. Any ideas how to solve this, let’s say, funny situation? To my opinion, if unit has supply at 0 for some time should be destroyed automatically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 they dont seem to have supply 0 of weed it seems...puff the magic dragon if ya catch my drift Drug-propaganda is nothing we want here.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Rambo and me had a similar situation, I had a British Corps in North Africa that managed to pillage enough of a living off of no Supply and No Cities in the Desert of Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco for nearly 2 years before it finally captured an empty Tunis. Hmmmm, I do not think even 10,000 men would've lasted long in those regions. This is my idea since this 0 supply factor is abused by hard to find units that go park and then come back later for recon missions... Each time a Unit leaves it's supply in a place where we know it cannot forage a living we give it say 5 turns at 0 supply, -1 Strength Point... Perhaps this is generous, but it would do away with this gamey aspect to SC2 where units just sit idly hidden for 2 years in a place where there is no water or supplies, think of 200,000 men in a Desert it wouldn't have happened! Mountains in Norway can be worse, the ice would've killed a lot of them. Certianly there are regions in Europe that could support a 0 Supply unit. However perhaps lowering the strength to 2 or 3 after a certain amount of terms would do away with some of the gamey aspects to this part of SC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributar Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 vveedd ---It's difficult for me to picture what your situation actually is...however i will try to do what i can. A friend of mine had a similar situation to your's, he parachuted a fallshirmjaeger onto the Norwiegian Mountain's and was then unable to move them at all!. So he got more assault troop's and took 'Oslo'!,...so now with a 'Supply-Base' available, he landed an 'HQ' into Norway, then moved the 'HQ' towards the Paratrooper Unit, but i think within 5-Squares of Oslo[Keep the HQ on regular terrain...as Mountainous-Terrain will reduce an HQ's ability to provide supply]. Now with the 'HQ' providing supply [Of course the Summer is better for supply than the Winter...as well, it can make a difference!]...and it being a good time of year [spring or Summer?]...the stranded paratroop's were finally able to dislodge themselve's from their self-induced imprisonment!. I have extricated unit's in other situation's myself by using a similar procedure!. I hope this help's you out!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vveedd Posted March 7, 2007 Author Share Posted March 7, 2007 Originally posted by Retributar: vveedd ---It's difficult for me to picture what your situation actually is...however i will try to do what i can. A friend of mine had a similar situation to your's, he parachuted a fallshirmjaeger onto the Norwiegian Mountain's and was then unable to move them at all!. So he got more assault troop's and took 'Oslo'!,...so now with a 'Supply-Base' available, he landed an 'HQ' into Norway, then moved the 'HQ' towards the Paratrooper Unit, but i think within 5-Squares of Oslo[Keep the HQ on regular terrain...as Mountainous-Terrain will reduce an HQ's ability to provide supply]. Now with the 'HQ' providing supply [Of course the Summer is better for supply than the Winter...as well, it can make a difference!]...and it being a good time of year [spring or Summer?]...the stranded paratroop's were finally able to dislodge themselve's from their self-induced imprisonment!. I have extricated unit's in other situation's myself by using a similar procedure!. I hope this help's you out!. I appreciate your help but I already knew that. My mentioned situation is when nobody does anything extra for a certain time period and what then should happen with this unit. Liam’s situation is the same and he explained this better than me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyazinth von Strachwitz Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 A possible solution for a future patch could be to reduce unit strength by 1 for every turn with a supply value of 0... that solves the problem in the long run. And it is a bit more realistic... there are urban myths in military history about a german army who was encircled in a russian city and put on supply zero.. and got wiped out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 This situation, of course, is totally unrealistic. Any ideas how to solve this, let’s say, funny situation? To my opinion, if unit has supply at 0 for some time should be destroyed automatically. A possible solution for a future patch could be to reduce unit strength by 1 for every turn with a supply value of 0... that solves the problem in the long run. And it is a bit more realistic... Be careful comparing apples and oranges. There are differences between unit strength, supply and morale, and how they factor into unit readiness. A unit out of supply will have its morale exponentially decay, so its readiness will decrease over time. Eventually a supply=0 unit will become combat ineffective regardless of strength. Should it be automatically destroyed at some point or not? With SC2's many options for turn length, Hubert needs to be careful. With a seasonal turn length in winter in the default campaign, it's easy to say it's unrealistic that a unit out of supply should survive in the snow for so long. With 2-week summer turns and perhaps shorter turns for operational campaign mods, it would be equally unrealistic to automatically destroy a unit after only a few days/weeks. If anything, it might be useful to create a surrender criteria for unit morale less than some editable parameter, say 10-20% or something. It would take a couple of turns for a previously supplied unit to drop to this level if out of supply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I see nothing that needs to be fixed. So you have two units just sitting there doing nothing, big deal. The locals are making a living off the land. A army could too if it did nothing else. History is replete with cut off units and garrisons that lasted a very long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 A army could too if it did nothing else. Possibly, but then, They wouldn't - in any militia Sort of sense, BE... an "army," would they? More like a straggling band of vagabonds. Many accomplished and respected war games Simply... removes the unit. I would also favor doing just that. Bill has a good point, WRT to varying turn lengths, So... make it a specific # of days/months, No matter what the "game time." No matter you are playing macro or micro Kinds of scenarios. Maybe a new acronym - CtC, "Cut the clutter," eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 No capable of offensive operations sure, but still an army. Get them back in supply and they're good to go. I think the game is better with that latent threat there than just having 250,000 men magically disappear. You want them gone, go kill them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 puff the magic dragon if ya catch my drift Way cool Kuni! A little Scando Mondo quiz! Let's see... "drifted through a dream?" Don't sound quite right, how about? Had eyes like Lucy in Diamond disguise? Nah, that ain't it, ummm, ...lived by the Sea? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Originally posted by Lars: No capable of offensive operations sure, but still an army. Get them back in supply and they're good to go. I think the game is better with that latent threat there than just having 250,000 men magically disappear. You want them gone, go kill them. Valid point, Lars, and yet... if removed, I would also argue, It would have the added benefit Of eliminating a lot of that Stray and VERY a-historical Sort of helter-skelter "amphib Ops." Commandos or Paras could do it, But that is - what? A Brigade, at most? This business of launching VERY expensive Amphibs and floating Corps, or even Armies all over The 7 Seas, Is one thing I really don't care for. Many have made a good point WRT to D-Day, for instance, Just how daunting a task That in itself was, In terms of planning/logistics. Why allow "stray units" (... other than Partisans) To cause such potential mayhem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Because stray units can't do anything unless you get them back in supply. Bypassing them and letting them rot is a still a valid option. It's not like we have hordes of them cluttering up the screen. . Who knows, it might draw your opponent into making a mistake in coming to their rescue. Is it really worth the time to "fix" something that isn't really "broken"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Because stray units can't do anything unless you get them back in supply. They can land - anywhere and everywhere! And occupy a vacant city. Which is... un-real, at least, to me. Now, IF we should have a Militia/Security Sort of inexpensive unit, well, Then I wouldn't care how many Expensive Amphib Ops you might undertake. As is, For the Axis most especially, There are, at this SCALE, too many Locales to cover. I think you are down-playing the scale here. And, Not allowing for the actual problem, Which is, as stated, The casual manner in which a player Can just throw Corps all over the place. If it was hamlet to 'ville, Sure, Straggling vagabonds would indeed Be able to make a SIGNIFICANT difference, Combat wise. But ~50 miles per tile? Anyway, My best guess? You'll have your status quo. Though, Never can tell, especially If enough folks clamor for a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vveedd Posted March 7, 2007 Author Share Posted March 7, 2007 Originally posted by Lars: I see nothing that needs to be fixed. So you have two units just sitting there doing nothing, big deal. The locals are making a living off the land. A army could too if it did nothing else. History is replete with cut off units and garrisons that lasted a very long time. :confused: :confused: 250.000 people are living with locals? Come on, this sounds even more stupid then magical disappearing. Partisan unit can live with locals because they are locals but 250.000 men? Even more - 250,000 enemy men? I am talking about corps or army at enemy soil. You are saying that German soldiers will live with British locals after unsuccessful Sea Lion? Be serious, please. Originally posted by pzgndr: With 2-week summer turns and perhaps shorter turns for operational campaign mods, it would be equally unrealistic to automatically destroy a unit after only a few days/weeks.[/QB]I agree. They should be automatically destroyed after a few months, maybe 6-9?.Or some attrition option like Liam suggested. [ March 07, 2007, 09:40 AM: Message edited by: vveedd ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 What's the scale of a square again? Plenty of land to support that level of population. Dave, think you went off on a amphib tangent. I was just talking about the odd cutoff unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonslayer Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I have to agree with Lars on this. There is no problem with the way it works now. If a corps decides to land in a random, unprotected city then the enemy should be prepared for such an eventuality... that's what the navy is for isn't it? If the defences are well prepared then it will simply be another Dieppe. Having renegade troops in the mountains happened a lot in the balkans... granted they were irregulars but the principle is the same. Leave it alone I say! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I agree with moon - I had hte AI do this too - but they came within an ace of actually capturing Oslo (this was the British in 1943!!) - it's mistake was that het 2nd unit moved to north-west of Oslo then attacked - had it attacked and then moved it would have captured the city. As it was I put a German Corps into het city and farmed the British for experience and MPP's - I'd knock a couple of points off - they'd replace them - playing the AI can be so rewarding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 On that last radio quiz show, Looks like - the... aye-aye's - have it! My my my my, Just scratchin' muh back here, Having me a mighty fine popsicle, hey, C'mon you hot roddin' Thick-slick, dual-ly exhaust Rumble Cats Out 'er in the Valley, What you cravin' to hear? Ring, ring. Ring - RING! OK, OK, hold the phone Mister Jones! Say hey, Speak up! This is... The Wolfman! :cool: What's that? All the way from The wilds of... Minnetonka? Wha... t! Crackle! Pop! Dave, think you went off on a amphib tangent. I was... Snap! Sickle! Say again? You REALLY gotta hear... "The Slaveship Tangerine Dream?" Ha-ha ha-ha HA! Aw Me - Yeeoooooow, Naw, we ain't got that un, but, Let me spin THIS here Red Hot wax through ya, See if you Buff Cool Music Dudes can cotton to - who's These... new Cats From outta Town, Go! Controller-Man Joe! "We all live inna... " "We all live inna... " _____________________________ Opla dee Opla da, Opla... so. Ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Now that was a tangent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 No, THIS is a tangent: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vveedd Posted March 8, 2007 Author Share Posted March 8, 2007 Moonslayer,Stalin's Organist I am not talking about situation when you take protected or unprotected city. As I know in SC2 when unit is cut off, supply is reduced in phases and when suplly is >0 it is ok that unit can move or attack. I am talking when you unload unit and can't take nothing and supply reaches level 0. That unit can't move and shouldn't stay there and do nothing for unlimited period of time. It is unrealistic situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 vveedd, Just a kind of friendly suggestion. QUIT! Running over to that other board And shouting all over the place! About how terrible this or that feature Is... with SC-2. How THEY should avoid making The same sort of mistakes, and etc, See what I mean? You CAN make your points, Here, there and anywhere WITHOUT constantly mentioning Or comparing with SC-2, true? Personally, I get a bit disgusted by that, Since I have put damn near 5 years Of my - one and only life Into helping make THIS game The best it can be (... small contributions, and certainly no more than MANY others here have also done over the years). Hubert has staked his own life, His very livelihood, On making, and improving this game, When, I have no doubt, He could be making a LOT more $$$ Using his considerable talent and skills In some other fashion. And so, Here's the thing. Sooner than later folks are gonna get the idea That you are being, ummm, two-faced And even... traitorous, Since very many - not merely me, Have a REAL "rooting interest" In seeing Hubert succeed, and, Do well enough that he would choose To CONTINUE improving this great game. Know what I mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Originally posted by Normal Dude: No, THIS is a tangent: You're going to tell a draftsman about tangents? Sheesh, I've even got buttons that do that for me now. Btw, got one that's any good at secondary auxiliaries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Hold on, let me check my graphing calculator.. my TI-89 Titanium does everything... now if I can just figure how to use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts