A little more realistic model for replacements?

[George40]

Having continued to play and enjoy SC2 WaW, I have had a thought. The engine heavily reward keeping a unit alive even at 10% over losing it all together due to instant replacements up to 90%. It seems a little wrong to be able run XIV Panzer to 10% strength at Stalingrad and then instant 1 week 90% replacements. So here is a thought for some future version of the engine or campaign:

50% of hits are "organizational" and can be instantly replaced as in the current system.

50% of hits are "structural" representing the distruction of men and equipment

Replacing this 50% requires drawing from a replacement pool (would have to manufacture replacment points in areas like armor and infantry) or can be drawn from other units. I there are no replacements available you can not achieve more than 50% repair until you create them. So I unit that took 4 hits could only be repaired to 8 strength until replacements were manufactured (1/2 or so normal manufacture time).

It would be interesting to add a strategic transport cost to the replacments as well and perhaps a delay if you were off a rail line.

It may be more complicated than most players would prefer, but it is an idea that intrigues me.

[scottsmm]

Not a bad idea, it's just simplicity might just be the best quality SC has. So based on that I would think that it might need a little tweaking to simplfly it.

Maybe just make it so that you can reinforce a unit from 1 to 5 instantly, and then add in another reinforcement to the action list of a unit. Have this work the same way as elite reinforcements work only have it cost as much as 1 reinforcement point would cost. From there it would take five turns to get the unit to fill strength again (minus elite reinforcements where applicable).

The only problem then becomes what happens to a unit with a strength value of 5,6,7,8,9?

[arado234]

George40 its not a bad idea but like scottsmm said SC2 is based partly on simplicity and fun to play.Also by doing that you will also start to cut back somewhat on the overall combat because it would take a unit so long to get back to any fighting strength.Also with the strength of airfleets you could just pound a bunch of enemy units down and then just roll right over them.Could prove real trouble for Russia.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Likewise, for ships they can only repair 1 (or 2) strength points per turn max.

[scottsmm]

Very true Arado, I wasn't thinking that much of air units. I guess if SC went through with this idea then they would have to re-construct the basics, then again Hubert is already talking about making SC3 totally different, so who knows.

Although then again maybe there should be something for this, just have it be some sort of compromise, as you have to admit having a unit go from a strength of 1 to 10 is a little unrealistic. So what if they made reinforcing units a little harder by raising the cost for reinforcement points? idk I just figured I would through it out there.

Allow ships to be able to receive 4 strength points a turn. Remember a typical turn is usually at least a week, and well the Yorktown got repaired in I think only a few days. Granted she paid the price for these quick repairs.

[arado234]

scottsmm some of these turns represent 1 week and some(in the fall and winter)equal 1 month?So in one way being able to bring a unit back to strength sort of makes sense.I guess if you start adding in overall men available(Germany was dumb in that she really didnt start using women for manufacturing untill much latter in the war)then yes George40 is right.

[scottsmm]

arado, If Germany did use women it would go in total contrast to what Hitler was preaching for years. Who knows what the cracked SS forces would have done when all the sudden everything changed... That's one thing the Nazi's never liked, change.

Anyway to get back on track in order for either my compromise form of George40's idea, or his own idea, I think that it will have to come on SC3 (totally new game engine). This is of course if SC even wants to use this idea, and to be honest I doubt they do. It does make sense though that you shouldn't be able to make an Army of 100,000 strong drop to 10,000 and then fully reinforce it to 100,000 in a week, or even a month if it falls on those three turns of the year. Not to mention it would probably take the reinforcements from Germany much longer to reach their designations points in the winter then in the summer. btw I think you already know this but during the fall and spring months the turns are 2 weeks. Also in PT all turns regardless of the month are ten days. These are facts I'm sure you know, I just figured I'd post them anyway.

[SeaMonkey]

This is of course a good point, but there are some drawbacks, wouldn't be as much combat and lots of losses to air strikes and naval bombardments.

Another good point is the time allocation per turn which if you think about it, there is some credence in bringing a unit back to full strength if in greater than 5 supply. This is one reason why we use SAC to reduce efficiency and supply, the interdiction model.

I'm going to offer one other comment I haven't heard and that is how units deploy themselves in a real battlefield setting. It is next to impossible or I guess improbable that a commander will deploy all his combat troops forward, remember the size of SC tiles. Our SC units are spread out in various echelon configurations, most likely never more than a third of the combat troops are on the line, they are rotated from front to rear, even in platoon sizes, there's always reserves.

What I'm saying is even though a unit suffers a strength loss of great magnitude, not all these men and weapons are killed or destroyed, they just become combat ineffective for awhile. Rotated to the rear, they will be patched upped, reinvigorated, rested and fed with medical attention and will regain their combat prowess. Their equipment will be repaired as their other combat echelons rotate to the fighting, so what you represent is the staying power these large SC units possess by adding replacements. See the logic?:cool:

[scottsmm]

I see what your saying SeaMonkey, but in short it still comes back to one really good quality this series has, and that is simplicity. At the same time though sometimes Armies strengths were 200,000 men strong, but in this SC game they can't exceed 100,000.

I hate to say it but is there anything out there that is the perfect WWII strategy game? Of course this is a rhetorical question, as nothing is perfect in life. One thing which bugs me about this game is that you just hurl millions of men, thousands of tanks, aircraft, support vehicles, etc headlong is some mad attack. It's not really realistic, but the reason for this is yet again simplicity.

One last thing I would like to mention is the SC editor is by far the most user friendly editor I've ever seen. If you guys want to give yourselves a headache you will use one of combat missions editors, and try to develop a good map, I dare you without getting any migraines first.

[SeaMonkey]

Can't say I've been exposed to anything better than SC. A few games have features I prefer, but as far as a well rounded game, simple and realistic, SC is head and shoulders above anything else.

By the way Scott, what's up with your Midway campaign? Have you completed it, at least as far as an H to H model?

[scottsmm]

Same here. SC, and I've also tried out a few games, and none have even come close to being so easy to use, and yet fun too. If you're looking for a complicated strategy game you can find them, but they seem to only give you headaches, so what's the point in playing them?

Unfourtantely my laptop crashed, and we had to reinstall the operating system, this is what happens when you spend close to $2,000 on a dell laptop . Anyway my external hard drive that I bought to back-up all my files didn't work for some reason, so I lost my baby, when it was only about 1-2 hours away from completion. I spent a good portion of my day working on, when I could, and after about 6 months this happens. If only I uploaded to the battlefront registry, as then I could simply download it all over again, and finish it. Oh well no use in crying over spilt milk. And on top of it all when I re-downloaded the basic Midway Major, and was going to begin to work on it again, I received an error message when I tried to open it up in the editior (couldn't find unit scripts). It's probably, because the basic Midway Major campaign was originally worked on as v 1.00/1.01, and now I'm running v 1.02. Any help here guys, I'd really appreciate it. Same thing went for my operation Z mod only I spent about a 1/5th the time on that then I did my Midway mod.

[scottsmm]

Sorry btw SeaMonkey, I know I should have contacted you with this info early, it's just I've been so busy, with trying to get my laptop back in shape, family vacations away from the internet, my job, etc.

[SeaMonkey]

Wow! Sorry to hear that Scott, my condolences, I know how much time it takes to do a mod...hey! your not dead yet, later ..give it another try.

My Vostro 1700 has been clicking away, spent less than a grand, wife's got a 1500 series, less than $600...no problems for us, this is my fourth Dell.

[arado234]

Thats true aboUt SC in that the simpicity of play makes it so much fun.

I think your right scottsmm in that you would need a whole new game system if you are going to start making major changes.

The only game I ever played that was realistic to the point of almost to much realism(once I got the hang of it then it was probably the best game I ever played as far as realism goes)was Squad Leader.There is no hope of creating ANY strategic WW2 game that indepth.

I will say that imho Third Reich rivals the SC series but its biggest downfall was the lack of support and the bugs in the game itself.I have never played any game that even comes close to the support that the SC team offfers.I keep hoping someday Hubert will get the rights to Third Reich and make it the game it truely could be.

[scottsmm]

Yep the laptop I have know is sort of like the early version of the Tiger tank. An amazing beast when everything is going as it should, but it can all the sudden erupt into a huge fire ball with no other reason, besides the fact the tank was temperamental at best.

To be honest Brad I feel the same way about SC as when the pats lost the super bowl to the inferior and very lucky Giants. Just don't want to think about, the only difference is I wasn't personally involved in the pats loss, but this little thing that's just him was directed only at me. No biggie though, after all it's only a mod.

Arado I couldn't agree more that it will take a whole new game system for any major changes.

Who knows Hubert does seem to have some pretty big plans

[George40]

From SeaMonkey:

What I'm saying is even though a unit suffers a strength loss of great magnitude, not all these men and weapons are killed or destroyed, they just become combat ineffective for awhile. Rotated to the rear, they will be patched upped, reinvigorated, rested and fed with medical attention and will regain their combat prowess. Their equipment will be repaired as their other combat echelons rotate to the fighting, so what you represent is the staying power these large SC units possess by adding replacements. See the logic?:cool:

I agree, that is why I originally suggested allowing 50% of damage to be repaired immidiately with no manufacture, training, and deployment delay. The problem is that in wars equipment is destroyed and men are killed. Unless you have set up a supply of replacements it takes time to manufacture new equipment and train new soldiers. In fact, during WWII for USA forces, even with a fairly mature replacement system getting "worn" divisions back into fighting condition took a while due to the delay of integrating replacements.

The above is why I think a replacement pool and/or slower rate of replacmenet would make the game more fun for me. It would be interesting to have to decide when to pull that partial strength tank army of out the line for a tfew turns to replinish or whether to push forward at reduced strength.

It might not be more fun for many or most, but like the rail and road lines, I think it is a small change that could have a big impact on how the game plays and feels. For me I suspect it would be for the better.

[scottsmm]

hmmm well what if you factor distance into the equation? It's something I sort of hit on with one of my last posts. Fact is to send reinforcements from the east coast USA to Okinawa would take some serious time. Same with the Germans sending troops deep into Russia, especially in the south near the Caucasus.

However let's remember this is a game George, and games imho should always be fun, otherwise what's the point in playing them? Yes this is a strategy game so there is a lot of thinking involved, but none the less it's still a game.

[arado234]

Remember we all have the same atvantage/disatvantage this rapid replacement and operating offers.