Kisskiller Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Hihi regarding hq there is a consideration to be made, hq represents the infrastructure and logistic chain of command of any given army no matter who the leader is, the leader is the commander of the hq. Therefore what IMO is wrong is that nations have a limit to the hq they can buy they should always be able to buy a low level HQ,(let's say level 2) that would mean that as nations they have no longer good commanders but they still have the knowledge of what an HQ is. this is important because in SC hq helps units quite a lot no matter the rating and in certain situations everyone is going for the kill of the hq knowing that is the only unit the enemy can't replace. best regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ev Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 ...as the map becomes larger, I have the feeling we will need more HQ's. In SC1 I was never short of HQ's. Sometimes I was short of MPP's to buy HQ's - but that is a different story all together. But in a larger map, things may play differently... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roosevelt45 Posted May 5, 2004 Share Posted May 5, 2004 I was short of HQ's quite a lot actually. Especially the Italians had too few HQ's in my opinion. But even if this wasn't the case it's not very realistic to limit HQ's now is it? for example: When Germany was running out of recources at the end of the war, they still had HQ's of course, because they needed them. They probably didn't work as well as when the Germans invaded France but they existed. So in these cases a low-budget HQ( ) with a low rating could come in handy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ev Posted May 5, 2004 Share Posted May 5, 2004 ...elsewhere in this site I suggested there should be a technology area that improved the number of units that could be attached to an HQ. As per the suggestion of one of the fellow persons in this forum, I would call this tech area C3: Command, Control and Communications. As a country reached higher tech levels in C3, upgraded HQ's could control more units. Hence addressing Roosvelt45's concern. An increase in C3 tech would allow allow an HQ to control more units, and would also increase the contribution of the the HQ to a units combat performance. I am not sure I would increase the command range of an HQ as a result of higher C3 tech levels. A very large command range can create a real mess of the playing field. Elsewhere I suggested that at C3 level 0, HQ's would only command 3 units, but, at C3 level 5 they should command 8 units. Of course, a player would most likely upgrade the better HQ's, while lower rated HQ's may be left at their initial C3 levels... so these HQ's become your low-budget HQ's. See Roosevelt 45's suggestions. On a separte note, improved C3 levels should increase the readiness level of all units, whether or not they are attached to an HQ. HQ's with higher C3 levels should have a higher contribution to the combat readiness (or the like) of the troops under the command of that HQ. But this contribution should be in additon to whatever benefit the unit derives for its own C3 level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts