Platoon ZOC rule

CptCav · (This post was last modified: 11-24-2007, 01:07 PM by CptCav.)

I understand how you would want to use ZOC's to model screening. The problem is the game time scale. An insignificant unit could end up delaying a significantly larger unit by several hours during which the attacker is only able to advance a few kilometers, which is not necessarily an accurate depiction of reality. How could one reasonably expect a handful of armored cars to screen a three-kilometer front or more accurately conduct a delaying action, which is what ends up being represented? Why should the attacker suffer in its rate of advance so that a screen of a platoon-sized formation withdrawing in front of it be represented? That is what I have a problem with.

However, I do sympathize with you as far as the scenario design issue is concerned. I know that I would be frustrated to have a rule change implemented that would negatively impact a scenario that I have designed.:pullhair:

Regards,
CptCav

Mike Bowen · 11-24-2007, 09:50 PM,

I think VM is right about Tobruk which I also agree is underrated by many and this would be best as an optional. Perversley without thinking it through I did wonder if the request came from VM for other titles. I can see this being a problem for Normandy as well where the AT guards VM created are needed.

I wonder if the simple (but wrong) answer is to rename the AC platoons companies in Tobruk? ditto the AT guards? Can this be done?

If need be have 1 and 2 SP platoons of AC and in Normandy make them 20SP and combine?

Of course my old chestnut of size matters is also valid should units below a certain size not have ZOC eg 1 SP armoured battalions still have a ZOC?

Should some functions eg mine clearance laying bridges be modified by size (yes is my answer)

Sorry I got distracted...

Also will the commando rules affect Normandy and Sicily and Salerno is a bad way?

Mike

Volcano Man · (This post was last modified: 11-25-2007, 07:37 AM by Volcano Man.)

Quote:I wonder if the simple (but wrong) answer is to rename the AC platoons companies in Tobruk? ditto the AT guards? Can this be done?

Yes I can convert recon unit size designators from platoon to company in T41, but it must be a last resort. The problem is that there might be a host of issues encountered if this is forced to occur, like platoon units falling under a company element in the OOB that could be impossible to change because they in turn fall under a battalion. The number of units that would need to be changed and across all the different OOBs would take quite a while, as well as working around any previously metioned problems. :( But T41 will not be destroyed; I will have to do whatever it takes to keep it playable.

In N44, is probably is not as vital because the Germans can stack an infantry kompanie with the AT gun. But I guess that remains to be seen. Changing units in N44 would take even longer to do. I would probably keep it simple and only change the best of guns (75 and 88), if it even needs to be done at all.

As for the new commando rules in N44, I thought about it and I don't see any problems. They will be allowed to blow the AT ditches instead of requiring engineers but it is arguable that that is exactly what happened.

Volcano Man · 11-25-2007, 09:26 AM,

Volcano Man Wrote:The problem is that there might be a host of issues encountered if this is forced to occur, like platoon units falling under a company element in the OOB that could be impossible to change because they in turn fall under a battalion.

Upon further investigation, this appears to be exactly the case. So the OOB design is such that it is not possible to do to this, not without some serious reworking of many units.

Rev Rico · 11-25-2007, 10:26 AM,

Volcano Man Wrote:In N44, is probably is not as vital because the Germans can stack an infantry kompanie with the AT gun. But I guess that remains to be seen. Changing units in N44 would take even longer to do. I would probably keep it simple and only change the best of guns (75 and 88), if it even needs to be done at all.

IIRC didn't a previous update remove the ZOC from AT and Hvy AA guns? If so then it's only the tank, HT, and AC platoons that would now be affected by this update.

Volcano Man · 11-25-2007, 12:10 PM,

Correct, my mistake, I was actually meaning to say the 88 HAA gun units that begin near the beach in some sectors. Not sure why I mentioned the AT guns. Eek

Mike Bowen · 11-25-2007, 11:32 PM,

In Normandy I was thinking about the AT guard units put with AT guns so a zoc wad retained after the AT gun changes and I think these are needed to allow the German line to fall.

In T41 I just wondered if changing the names of the units would do eg AC platoons become company sized if so then only the units that need doing need changing which may not be such a big job.

Mike

Tide1 · (This post was last modified: 11-25-2007, 11:57 PM by Tide1.)

As for Tobruk 41 what will the new rule do to the H2H scenarios ? alot of effort has gone into reworking them. :( If it's going to impact another PC title adversly it should be made an optional rule. Just my opinion I could be wrong.

Glenn Saunders · 11-26-2007, 09:53 AM,

tide1 Wrote:As for Tobruk 41 what will the new rule do to the H2H scenarios ? alot of effort has gone into reworking them. :( If it's going to impact another PC title adversly it should be made an optional rule. Just my opinion I could be wrong.

These Platoon ZOC rules were done for a MC project and based on the input here, John is going to undo the Platoon ZOC on the PzC titles.

Glenn