satalight countries

[afrika31]

will each individual satalight country have it's own generals, tanks, armies and so on or will it be up to the germans to place there units in there allied countries? i for one know that in SC when i was tough pressed for units trying to take russian cities, i did no need finland to continuously need support.

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

Finland will have its own HQ:Mannerheim.

Some time ago, there was a discussion about more independance for minor countries and whether(Am I writing that right?) they should produce their own units and tech level.

One of the propositions was that every time a minor country would normaly have spared enough MPP's(so this ammount of time depends on the recources of the minor)to purchase a corps, a corps will appear at the capital city.

I don't know how HC eventually decided to do this, but I hope he read the thread were this was discussed, there were a lot of good arguments defending different solutions.

[With Clusters]

I'm not sure if HQs for minors is definite or not. But I do believe the game will include (optional, of course) "force pool" limits for both minor and major powers. Meaning, if a minor country's unit is destroyed, it can be rebuild, up to a pre-determined max number of units. In old SC, if a minor country unit was destroyed, they couldn't be rebuild, and even if they could, why would you bother, since they'd be less effective, and probably more expensive (if you had any 'industrial' tech). But now, if the major ally has a "force pool" limit also, it may take units from wherever possible, even lower quality minor units if necessary. I doubt that minors will control of their own MPPs though. The major power "patron" will still get their MPPs, and decide whether to 're-build' lost minor units or not. So in an optional game with no "force pool" limits, I doubt you will ever see much in the way of rebuilt minor units (unless somehow they are way cheaper than compareable major power units).

[ev]

Originally posted by With Clusters:

(unless somehow they are way cheaper than compareable major power units).

Now, that is a thought. Actually, it seems this will happen, albeit indirectly:

Say we are using soft limits. And, Germany already hit its soft limit. So, now each German unit cost an extra 25%. This makes each German unit more expensive than its Rumanian counterpart.

Or say we are using absolute limits. And, say Germany already hit its hard limit. Since Germany cannot make any new units, it must resort to the manpower of its allies to build new armies.

The idea of having some sort of limit is a good one. However, there is something I do not like about it:

Say Germany can make up to 30 infantry armies. And say further it already reached that limit, but subsequently lost 5 armies with the Germans. Can we make another 5 new armies as soon as we have sufficient MPP's?

Germany (and England) had serious manpower limitations. As early as 1942, Germany the Wermacht could not draft enough men to replace losses in the eastern front. Germany faced a shortage of manpower much before it faced a shortage of tanks, airplanes, gas or just about anything else. It was the #1 shortage faced by Germany.

Replacement of infantry losses (not just creating new armies, but simply replacing losses in existing units) was a huge drain in manpower. The game should find a way to model this fact. One idea:

Limit the number of infantry combat points that can be purchased through any calendar year. It should not matter whether the player is buying new units or replacing losses in an existing unit, all purchase of infantry combat points should count towards this yearly limit.

Infantry is the most manpower intensive unit. Purchase of Armored, Air and Naval combat points could be discounted at a reduced rate.

If a player does not use all available manpower points during a calendar year, all or part of these manpower points could be rolled over for the next year. I would suggest that 80%-90% of unused manpower points are rolled over; 20%-10% are lost.