Readiness, morale, and, combat strength

[ev]

Combat strength affects readiness and morale. However, garrisons have a maximum strength of 5, as opposed to 10, for pther units.

Are garrisons therefore locked into lower readiness and morale levels? Or, does the game engine adjust for the fact that garrisons are smaller units when computing readiness and morale?

[Ivanov]

That's a good one:) Let's see what the Gods Of War have to say about this subject:)

[ev]

It seems the Gods of War took the weekend off.

[Ivanov]

I do understand that even the Gods Ov War need some weekend rest. Let's wait until Monday

[Hubert Cater]

As it is now they would be locked into lower readiness and morale levels as it does not take into account their maximum strength being lower at 5.

I could consider changing this but at the same time I might just leave it as Garrisons were never meant to be strong units in game and more or less just place holders as needed.

[ev]

Thanks Hubert, I knew you would drop by sooner or later. Really appreciate it.

I was thinking of doing a mod. I thought of having some units with max strength of 8 and others with max strength 5 (not garrisons). I guess these would be stuck at lower readiness as well, right?

...if so, I thought I would give them somewhat higher combat values to compensate. Any advise?

What I am trying to do is to make units that fight well, but die quickly (lack depth).

[Hubert Cater]

Higher combat values will definitely help and with a bit of trial and error you should be able to find the right balance... good luck

[ev]

Thanks Hubert!

This is a small heads up on what I am thinking...

Corps in SOE and Detachments in CTA seem to last for ever. In fact, they seem to be able to survive just as many attacks as their larger brethren. They inflict less damage to the attacker, but they last just about as long.

I think smaller units should die faster than larger units.

...so, my idea is to reduce the maximum strength of detachments (detachments in CTA or corps in SOE) while increasing their combat values... so that they die faster yet are still able to cause some damage to the attacker. Ultimately my goal is as follows:

In SOE, on average (ex random factor), in a single turn:

A defending Army should be able to stand the attack of 4 armies before they die, maybe 5, but not 6.

A defending Corps should be able to stand the attack of 2 armies before they die, but not 3.

(I assume (Defense Bonus + Entrenchment) = 2.)

(I assume tech level 0 for both attacker and defender.)

(and, I assume no experience, no artillery, equal supply for defender and attacker, etc.)

Any thoughts or reactions out there?

[Glabro]

Hmm, I'm not feeling it, especially with those numbers and those defense values.

Unit destruction is a dramatic thing, the unit either becomes "combat ineffective" if in supply or scattered if out of supply. But in what kind of situations did that happen historically outside encirclement? Someone with more knowledge should answer.

The main difference between corps and army as organizational units was that the army would cover a wider area (with corps), I don't necessarily see a difference in depth. It's a bit problematic in a game like this with two different unit scales both occupying the same area.

I'd probably go with corps only (with army stats) and have the former corps units as indenpendent light divisions for scouting, maneuvering and occupying..essentially perform the role of cavalry from WW1.

The problem with lower max strength is that the unit operates reinforces to full strength even in low supply conditions. Perhaps this is acceptable for such fast units? Maybe I'd cap both them and garrisons at 8.

[ev]

From my readings of WWII, Germans in Russia lost depth as their line got over extended. Small units covering wide fronts were easier to break through.

An army is three times the size of a corps +/-, hence it should be able to achieve a lot more depth when defending the same front.

Furthermore, maybe SOE corps and armies should be replaced by detachments and corps. A dettachment would be something like a reinforced division. A tile seems to have around 40 miles. A dettachment would have around 16,000 men. That would make 400 men to a mile. From my readings of wwii that would seem enough to cover the whole front but not enough to organize a true defense in depth. But, i am no expert.

Dettachments would be a bit stonger than a garrison. Relatively fast. But lacking staying power because they do not have sufficient numbers to provide a true defense in depth.

Special forces would also have reduced strength, but much higher combat values. They would be faster, very good recon (higher spotting range), extremely good soft attack, but not so good against tank because they would not have heavy weapons. They should be vulnerable to a counter attack. You should have to be careful when and where you use them.

You could use SF where there are no roads and terrain is rough, dessert, marsh, or woods. They should be able to move accross this type of terrain much faster than other units.

[Glabro]

Yes, that's what I'm going to do, just corps with army level stats and detachments, as you say.

But I don't see why Special Forces need to be lower strength? They simulate SS corps and similar, not "commando" style units, correct?

[ev]

But I don't see why Special Forces need to be lower strength? They simulate SS corps and similar, not "commando" style units, correct?

I would keep Special Forces and Heavy Infantry appart.

I have thought of creating a specially heavy infantry unit. This would be a lavishly equiped SS unit. It would only be faster if the player chooses to motorize it. But, without motorization, it should be no faster than regular infantry. But these SS units would not be Special Forces.

Special Forces were very light. They carried little anti-tank, and mainly small arms. They were trained in infiltration and recon. They were meant to operate under conditions of little supply, behind enemy lines.

There were instances of brigade level SF operations during wwii. So I guess, it would not be too much of a stretch to have detachment level Special Forces in a game.

[Glabro]

I suppose those would be limited to Str 5 then, but with very high SA values, would work like Partisans, just better, correct?

This could work if the default unit size is corps.

[ev]

Yes. That is the idea.

[Glabro]

So, ev, did you find out how to set the max strength of units? What about resources, can they go lower than 5?

[ev]

So, ev, did you find out how to set the max strength of units? What about resources, can they go lower than 5?

The editor looks much the same as the SC2 editor. In SC2, there was a table where you could tweak with the combat values and max strength of each unit. I dont have my computer with me, but I will get the name of the table later and post it.

As for resources, I plan to leave them as they are, at least for know. But I remember seeing you could change those as well.

[Glabro]

The table in the editor doesn't have the max strength option, just the other combat stats.

The resource editing tool doesn't allow values below 5.

[ev]

The table in the editor doesn't have the max strength option, just the other combat stats.

You can always use the "garrison" template to get around this. Take a garrison, change its name, give it higher combat values and more action points...

...still, I remember seeing something. I will check when I get back home.

The resource editing tool doesn't allow values below 5.

A lot of people have objected to the idea of supply<5, so I probably would not touch this. What I might do is eliminate some towns all together. ...but, even that would come later down the line.

[Glabro]

Thanks. I didn't even know you could create new unit types.

Or did you just mean replacing all the garrisons with that? That wouldn't really work...

And the supply <5 is something that works when you have a lot more supply units going about. It's pretty ridiculous that an occupied non-port town can somehow replenish and supply a unit that conducted amphibious landing on it without a proper invasion, capture of a port and supply elements.

[ev]

Thanks. I didn't even know you could create new unit types.

Or did you just mean replacing all the garrisons with that? That wouldn't really work...

And the supply <5 is something that works when you have a lot more supply units going about. It's pretty ridiculous that an occupied non-port town can somehow replenish and supply a unit that conducted amphibious landing on it without a proper invasion, capture of a port and supply elements.

I could not find a way to create new unit types. Maybe Hubert can help us here.

On the other hand, there may be ways to use the existing slots differently. Take for example partisans. The US, Germany, England... never use the partisan slot. Maybe partisans can become special forces.

Also, we could collapse garrisons and dettachments into one single unit type with Max Str 5.

This would free the Corps Slot for a new type of unit (e.g. Mountain Troops, Skii Troops, or, Light Infantry Corps).