Just thinking, one item I always found frustrating in PG was the usage of paratroopers. Ie, you were completely dependant on your airlift capicity to whatever the scenario designer allocated for that particular battle. I realize that historically it might make sense to limit it but lets face it, building a core force to your liking could lead to ahistorical force compositions (going 'air heavy" was a viable yet risky option) and thus the next battles you fight to then be forced into historical "reality" vs the ahistorical means of getting there doesnt make sense.
Maybe if a player could "purchase" air lift (and maybe even 'sealift') capacity during the purchase/refit phase before going into the next batlle. These one time only "units" would be moderatley expensive so players could really have some tough decisions to make.
Paratroopers
Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design
-
TheGrayMouser
- Field Marshal - Me 410A
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm
Ha ha, and a core force of panthers, tigers and tracked artillery with ALL mechanised infanty (all being pioneers, the best infantry on the german side) isnt gamey??rayduhz wrote:I actually like the air lift capacity. It prevent players from going air lift heavy and bouncing around the map. Too "gamey"
-
TheGrayMouser
- Field Marshal - Me 410A
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm
I think plausibiity isnt the issue but flexibility for the player, why allow one ahistorical core force but allow another (i mean what percent of German forces were motorized let alone mechanised, 10-15%?)rayduhz wrote:Not as severely as all paratroopers. At least there is some variety. That setup is a lot more plausible on any front as opposed to all paratroopers.
Any ways even if a player wanted to make all paratroopers and had airlift for all of them , many scenarios would still be brutally tough if not impossible. What happens in rain or snow where all air movement is halted ?
( i really hope they keep the same structure for weather conditions, mud and fuel, ammo levels, really made a contrast betwen the excellent tactical use of the best units(tigers Wespes etc) offset by there operational deficiencies, low fuel and ammo capacity, cost etc)
Cheers!
That is true, very little of the German Army was mechanized in such a manner, but even lower paratroop forces. None the less, every game will have its ahistorical factors brought into the fore front. I think I will try a paratroop force in my next PG campaignTheGrayMouser wrote: I think plausibiity isnt the issue but flexibility for the player, why allow one ahistorical core force but allow another (i mean what percent of German forces were motorized let alone mechanised, 10-15%?)!
I completely agree that they should keep the same weather, ammo, fuel, etc. restrictions as challenge to harder campaign. I cant imagine playing otherwise.( i really hope they keep the same structure for weather conditions, mud and fuel, ammo levels, really made a contrast betwen the excellent tactical use of the best units(tigers Wespes etc) offset by there operational deficiencies, low fuel and ammo capacity, cost etc)
I never understood why so many people always want to insist that unit selection is somewhat wrong in a game if it is not HISTORICAL. YOU are supposed to be the commander (& purchaser) of your own army here. It is YOUR choice on what core you want etc. You are NOT SUPPOSED to be bound in any way to something that some others have done in history, since this is YOUR choice.I think plausibiity isnt the issue but flexibility for the player, why allow one ahistorical core force but allow another (i mean what percent of German forces were motorized let alone mechanised, 10-15%?)
Had Yamamato never lived to reach his position, the Japan navy would not have commisioned the carriers it did. And because of that, to this day we'd have never ending complaints from people in Pacific General (for example) on how Japan should NEVER be allowed to purchase multiple carriers, since OBVIOUSLY she never did, and hence that could never happen realistically, or whatever secondary rants you wish to append to that.
Experience Ratio = (def exp level + 2)/(att exp level + 2)
Entrenchment Ratio = (def entr rate + 1) /(att entr rate + 1)
Actually they had infrastructure and knowledge but they didn't had resources to finish started projects. I think that it depends how YOU as a player performs in a game otherwise it is not realistic to win a game where you play as an Axisadherbal wrote:It depends more on the availability of technology and material during the war. Allowing Germany to mass produce Carriers is probably not realistic in a war game since i'm guessing they did not have the infrastructure and knowledge for that.
If you are more successful during campaign than we can assume you have more resources on your disposal and lets say in some super-hypothetical invasion of USA you could have carriers as an Axis player when London and Baku oilfields are under your flag as well.
-
TheGrayMouser
- Field Marshal - Me 410A
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm
Well, that quote you are quoting was from my post and I was actually expressing what you are:Obsolete wrote:I never understood why so many people always want to insist that unit selection is somewhat wrong in a game if it is not HISTORICAL. YOU are supposed to be the commander (& purchaser) of your own army here. It is YOUR choice on what core you want etc. You are NOT SUPPOSED to be bound in any way to something that some others have done in history, since this is YOUR choice.I think plausibiity isnt the issue but flexibility for the player, why allow one ahistorical core force but allow another (i mean what percent of German forces were motorized let alone mechanised, 10-15%?)
Had Yamamato never lived to reach his position, the Japan navy would not have commisioned the carriers it did. And because of that, to this day we'd have never ending complaints from people in Pacific General (for example) on how Japan should NEVER be allowed to purchase multiple carriers, since OBVIOUSLY she never did, and hence that could never happen realistically, or whatever secondary rants you wish to append to that.
Keep the options available to the player to buy what he wants
(actually i started the thread to see if the ability for allowing the player to purchase airlif capacity be added to the game so if you want paratroopers to be able to do their "thing" they can do so on the players terms and not be limited because the scenario designer only allows 1 or 2 or no airlifts in a specific scenerio)
-
TheGrayMouser
- Field Marshal - Me 410A
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm
he he, i think the problem the Germans had was they would have OVER engineered a military unit , and then come out with 6 variants .Obsolete wrote:LOL @ German engineers not having knowledge to design a type of military unit...i'm guessing they did not have the infrastructure and knowledge for that.