An idea for a new class of units - medical unit types

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Let's not read too much into this - medical class units are just units that assist with morale and therefore disruption recovery, and comes in several different types. I'm just trying to wring the maximum variety and fun out of the game.

There are already things in place to help units recover from disrupt.

If medics, why not USO shows? Maybe have a bonus if the USO show contains Bob Hope?
How about "Doughnut Dollies" to help recover morale?
How about a Chaplin unit? No, not Charlie (though, he would help too!)?
We discussed "Brothel Units" on the Matrix forum.

How about negative morale?
The weather is bad. Getting trench foot when in trenches.
Positive morale?
When an air attack goes against an adjacent wagon and not the combat unit. When an artillery barrage scatters.

How about the Germans get a roll for singing Lile Marlene?

When does it end?
In the scale of the game the morale system works just fine. If there are not enough officers, then that may be a designer issue?

And, it is not a matter of changing flavors and having options. I simply think that the scale of the game gets lost in the "what I would like to see" thoughts.
It is how we got the naval units and on board airplanes? And, how we got six minute tank bridges?

I would not mind having ambulances. But, that they effect the game is where I begin to have a problem.
What if I wanted night combat to be a completely black screen, because I thought it would be cool? You would not be able to see terrain or any units. Yet, you would have negotiate terrain and find the victory hexes while bumping into enemy units? Where does it end?

Before we change the vanilla (with toppings) game to chocolate without toppings, can we step back and see what effect it has overall?



HSL

[Warhorse]

I did a complete translation to all the Cold War exe's, three times now, but whenever you try to use them, the game would crash, after the third time I gave up, as it took hours of time with resource/hexeditor to do this each exe!!! Sorry, I tried, just doesn't work, not sure why, I never had a problem like this in all my years of fiddling with these exe's?! Must be missing something the person who did the exe's for Stefan did with them?

Was doing the platoon files as well, but that takes a lot of time as well.

Also, you don't need DG to play Cold War!!! Download and play!!

[PawelM]

As as I am concerned if all these novel units (medics, kamikaze planes, atom bombs, brothels and female nurses for increased morale boost) are contained in a special mod and I have a choice not too use it then I do not mind.

[Herr Straße Laufer]

LOL!
I just do not want to have influenza introduced to a "healthy" sick ward.



HSL

[Big Ivan]

Interesting topic!

Lot of pros and cons and passion.

IMO the system really doesn't need more units and here I agree with Ed. There are more out there than I have ever used or probably will use. Some of the ones like the on board planes and ships don't work well.

If anything and what I would like to see is the old old request of improving the A/I. Its a dog and really needs some work we all know that. If anything we should focus resources on that.

Also my old old hype of combining units. The lone 1 factor Sherman platoon in a hex with a four factor Sherman platoon. The game engine should allow for combination to make a 5 factor single Sherman platoon. I'm saying combining not splitting. Splitting although interesting adds other issues that may make the engine unmanagable. The system is built on the platoon and that should be the minimum sized unit.

Finally the random battle generator needs some, no a lot of work. If you pick a bridgehead the generator should setup a random bridgehead not a face off in fields and hills. If you pick pocket breakout the random battle should setup with forces in a pocket.

Sorry don't want my post to turn into the ultimate wishlist. But these are some of my thoughts. I'd much rather see and improved game engine rather that more unit types.

Thanks for hearing me out.

Ivan the Big

[Kool Kat]

Before we change the vanilla (with toppings) game to chocolate without toppings, can we step back and see what effect it has overall?

We've had these discussions... many times over... about the introduction of "novel units" into the JTCS game system?

Initially, these ideas are "kool" ...but the is in the details?

For me... I really would like a better understanding of the details in the "pending" 1.05 game patch. What rule changes? Different units? More countries?

and...

...when can players expect the 1.05 game patch to be released? Date? Year?

[Panther]

Wow, very interesting opinions here!

Ed, Marlene Dietrich for the germans and Glenn Miller for the GI´s, ok?

I/we had a few ideas for this game. The "medics" found a place into the game, also the leaders that you can set into the armoured vehicles.

You can like the "medics" or not, it´s not a must ... only an idea for more playable features.

A few things in the Campaign Series games are not perfect for all ... but all in one it´s a damned good game and i like the different views here. I spent and will spend further a lot of my free time for this fantastic game!

I´m sorry, had i known that my game find so many friends here i had developed an english version too. Please excuse that i can only present the german version, but for all veterans it should be no greater problem to play CWE.

Ashley, if you have time i would like to play a modern war scenario with you. Feel free to pick one up and send it to my mailadress.

R
Stefan

[K K Rossokolski]

This is as good a thread as I have seen here in a long time, because it covers matters germane to what CS did then, does now, and might do in the future.....if, indeed, there is one for our old game. When did it first appear?....18 years ago or thereabouts, with East Front, about six countries, but recognisable today. I think the only transport in the first version was wheeled..trucks and 1/2Ts. Boats came later, I think. The game sold itself as a strategic level historical game, with the ability of players to create their own battles, and of course to play games via email.. Later, along came WF and the much maligned RS..but which included night combat. Last was DG, again much criticised, which was modified by Jorge Grillo and others to produce DGVN. The latest important completed mod is Mike Amos' excellent Korea.
New versions of the game brought in a world of new combatants, and a plethora of new elements.
What other game could have you developing an organisation for a small Spanish Civil War battle one day, researching the map for the Nomonhan/Khalkhin Gol battles the next day, and finishing the week placing your formations, units and elements for O'Connor's attack on the Italians in 1940? We have seen force development to vastly expand such matters as engineer capability, transport capacity etc. Clever ideas have sprung up to enhance realism, for example we can blow full hex bridges by dint of a little map adjustment. By making a one digit adjustment to the battle file, we can tell the sun to rise or set. Marvellous stuff.
But that ability to accept change is NOT without limits, and I fear that is the problem we face now. Ongoing success in development has lead, I think, to the belief that anything can be done. Up to a point, that is true for land warfare, which by its nature is a two dimensional affair, with bumps.
The CS world does this nicely...eastings/northings, elevations, bit of swamp here, village there, some hills here, river running at the foot there. You can do a nice accurate map within the limits of the available terrain features. So, why not bring in full naval and air warfare? An aeroplane is just a highly mobile tank, after all. Isn't it? And a battleship...well, sort of a super landing craft., bigger guns, harder to sink. Easy-peasy, as my grandson Tom says.

The blokes who gave us CS knew better. They knew that CS can do relief, it but cannot do altitude. They understood that CS, being essentially two-dimensional, couldn't do sea and air warfare, which by their very nature are THREE DIMENSIONAL. So they reduced air and sea elements to the land requirements. Paratroops apppear without seeing the aircraft from which they jump. Works for me. Naval guns are simply off-board arty, whilst a very adequate simulation of amphibious landings was achieved. Air strikes, set at the scenario level, zip across the screen, not always on schedule, sometimes miss their target, sometimes go blue-on blue , sometimes don't turn up. JUST LIKE HOW IT WAS.

However, attempts have been made to give us the whole gamut of air and sea warfare. Thus we have such gems of simulation as the non-submersible submarine which can torpedo things ashore, the fleets of immobilised battleships, their crews not interested in damage control and repair, and cargo ships that can carry no more cargo than a truck... On-screen aircraft seem to have spawned something called the airfield bomber, which whilst never getting airborne, somehow shoots its bombs at the enemy. What absolute rubbish, and I can understand buyers of CS thinking they might have chosen the wrong game to spend their hard-earned.

As for medics. No way..what effect would they have except as eye candy? And I for one have ethical issues with introducing an element that by all the laws of civilised warfare are not to be targeted. In gaming terms, very difficult to set a score. How do we give a quantitative value to the destruction of say a hospital in Russia in 1943. No real time TV then!

Enough for me. Those who started reading this are probably asleep by by now. I will start another thread with some ideas on how the old game can be improved.

[John Given]

Awesome comments fellas - please keep 'em coming.

I will attempt to address some of the concerns that several of you have made, one at a time.

First, I want to mention that the main purpose of the thread is (obviously) meant to gauge the club's opinion of medical class units...and IF I were to receive a generally positive response, submit a request to Jason Petho to include this class of units into the 1.05 patch.

So far, reaction to this class of units seems to be roughly two-thirds against their inclusion into our hobby. However, you have to admit, that if we are to have (as Rod Cole succinctly puts it) non-submersible submarine which can torpedo things ashore, the fleets of immobilised battleships, and cargo ships that can carry no more cargo than a truck... On-screen aircraft seem to have spawned something called the airfield bomber, which whilst never getting airborne types of units in the game, how could one not realize that the very nature of this unit is one that is not only realistic, but has (arguably) a minor effect on the game outcome?

Ok. Back to my list (your list). Here we go.

Posted by PawelM - Friday, February 1st, 2013 10:22 AM
Next after medics we will get front line enterteiners group( all dancing and singing). This will follow by spies and assasins and we get to Total war and Civilisation type game :)

I'm sorry, but that's just plain rude. I have stated before I have no intention of doing anything to the game that could cause balance issues. I believe I already stated the role of medics in my first post.

Herr Straube Laufer If medics, why not USO shows? Maybe have a bonus if the USO show contains Bob Hope?
How about "Doughnut Dollies" to help recover morale?
How about a Chaplin unit? No, not Charlie (though, he would help too!)?
We discussed "Brothel Units" on the Matrix forum.

How about negative morale?
The weather is bad. Getting trench foot when in trenches.
Positive morale?
When an air attack goes against an adjacent wagon and not the combat unit. When an artillery barrage scatters.

How about the Germans get a roll for singing Lile Marlene?

Another rude post - but I'll respond anyway. As I already stated, I am not (we are not) advocating anything that would harm our favorite hobby. What I want to know specifically is why you think medics would be impractical to use. And as I also stated, I'm well aware that officers have a morale function, but they ALSO have a command rating which improves attack for subordinate units, and ALSO improves the supply range of subordinate HQ units. So, officers can do THREE things, these proposed medical units, can do ONE thing (help with morale / disruption).

Ivan the Big If anything and what I would like to see is the old old request of improving the A/I. Its a dog and really needs some work we all know that. If anything we should focus resources on that.

Also my old old hype of combining units. The lone 1 factor Sherman platoon in a hex with a four factor Sherman platoon. The game engine should allow for combination to make a 5 factor single Sherman platoon. I'm saying combining not splitting. Splitting although interesting adds other issues that may make the engine unmanagable. The system is built on the platoon and that should be the minimum sized unit.

Finally the random battle generator needs some, no a lot of work. If you pick a bridgehead the generator should setup a random bridgehead not a face off in fields and hills. If you pick pocket breakout the random battle should setup with forces in a pocket.

I completely agree John, I would submit this to Jason as improvements needed for the future. However, it has nothing to do with medics. Btw, would you expound upon WHY you think these types of units should not be included? I want your opinion, my good man.

Posted by K K Rossokolski - Today 01:41 AM As for medics. No way..what effect would they have except as eye candy? And I for one have ethical issues with introducing an element that by all the laws of civilised warfare are not to be targeted. In gaming terms, very difficult to set a score. How do we give a quantitative value to the destruction of say a hospital in Russia in 1943.

Ok, now this is a good post (and points made), and I must admit this threw me back a bit. I never even thought about the moral or ethical issues of putting this to JTCS - but remember - we're talking MILITARY medics here - MASH units. Not civilian hospitals. However, it does raise an important point - should we in effect, allow for the inclusion / targeting of hospitals and non-combatants?

No eye candy Rod - I already stated these units have a game function, though a relatively minor one.

Lastly - there is one obvious point I want to make - none of the current scenarios would have them, and these units would likely be very rare in future scenarios. Medics won't suddenly start appearing all over your favorite games.

Once again, please keep the comments coming.

[K K Rossokolski]

Military or civilian..doesn't matter. Protected by Geneva, and indeed by our own cultural imperatives. The alleged deliberate targeting of VC/NVA medical facilities in Vietnam was a source of great controversy, as I recall. The inclusion of civilians in Modern Wars reflects the very great difficulties faced by modern ( and not so modern...Vietnam is now nearly half a century ago) soldiers in dealing with ROE.
I do not share your opinion that some posters have been "rude". They have, as I read it, simply expressed disapproval of an idea that I also believe is of no value to the game.