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

[John Given]

Glad to see the comments are still coming. Ok, I'll answer a few more for the road...

Posted by Herr Straßen Läufer - Monday, February 4th, 2013 06:52 AM Sending ideas to Jason to have them dumped into the game is how we got things like bomber bases, extreme assault, variable visibility, heavy bridge construction engineers (that can theoretically build a bridge that armor can cross in six minutes), subs that cannot "sub"merge, on board aircraft that occupy a hex space and can change victory hexes, etc..
None of these "added" to the game. Some have gone as far as fracturing the CS community.

I agree to a point here Ed - I would agree that 'unrealistic' units might have a damaging effect on our hobby. They certainly have caused some bitter arguments. BUT...

a. This is why I created this thread. I want people to talk about their arguments for or against such an addition as medical units.

b. How many scenarios are there, really, that have the above units you mentioned? A handful at most...out of what - over 1,500 scenarios between all the CS games (mods included)? These 'bad' units you mentioned don't effect me at all, because I never see them (I realize that's not your point, but try to look at it from my point of view for a sec).

c. I am most certainly not the person or persons who advocated adding these units (the grounded bombers etc) to the game. That's not what you're implying, is it?

d. In the past, I have sent lists of 'missing' vehicles to Jason that should have been in the game oob, but were not. (I suspect several of us have, actually) One example - the Flakpanzer I. (About 50 were made, they mostly served on the East Front. Pz I chassis, open topped, 20mm AA gun). He said these absent vehicles will be added in a later patch.

And he is quick to correct me when I mention vehicles to be added that turn out to be already in the oob. So Jason is very aware of what is actually missing and what simply has a narrow date range / availability in the oob. He's very thorough.

Another example - defense factors for soft (motorized) vehicles - they should all be raised to 2, for the sake of continuity. Jason agreed and said it will be corrected in the next patch. (IMO, part of our 'duty' as gamers to watch out for and help to correct oversights like this, right?)

e. ANYTHING not "oversight or absent unit" related, like this topic, I take it to the forums. That's out of respect for my fellow hobbyists. Remember my "armor thickness / defense factor formula" thread? I felt that was important enough to bounce off everyone - even though it would have altered the defense factors of only a handful of armored units.

Posted by Herr Straßen Läufer - Monday, February 4th, 2013 06:52 AM As far as medics affecting only the hex they are in? Isn't that already factored into the morale of individual units?

If you want the unit included in the game as "chrome" I'm all for it. Scenario designers can use them at their wish.

As to your first sentence - yes. That function is already covered by officers, but i would like to remind you of an earlier snippet I pointed out in an earlier post of mine -

a. that officers are often few and far between;

b. They often won't affect (boost) all the units in a hex);

c. I tend to keep mine with the HQ's to boost supply range;

d. And, they tend to be valuable - I always loose my officers to lucky shots or artillery. I don't like to risk them.

That's FOUR reasons!

As far as them being 'chrome' as you say - yes, that's one way to put it. Medical units like this will not affect the game much.

Posted by Skryabin - Yesterday 10:32 PM
I may be missing the point, but what I can't get is why those medical units are going to affect moral? Are they psychiatrists? If loses of a platoon SP include not only killed, but also wounded, I would expect medical unit to have some chance of increasing one Strength Point to an infantry platoon that carried heavy SP loses. Like helping wounded and getting them back in fight. A small chance, but still. And NO LOS for those medical units for sure. This way it would work for me...

Ok, some good points here.

a. These proposed medical units are affect morale because there is no real way to simulate 'healing' within the confines of the game engine. Higher morale represents men becoming ready to fight more quickly - the removal of the disrupted status. As we all know, as units loose morale, it becomes harder and harder to recover - in many cases might mean the unit will NEVER recover from this status before the scenario ends, effectively removing that unit from effective combat operations.

b. As far as medics recovering strength points - as far as I'm aware, that's beyond the limitations of the game engine. Nice idea, though.

c. No LOS for medical units - an excellent idea! And I agree completely - this is a 'must have.'

And here's a few ideas of my own -

1. that medics should only be able morale-boost / heal infantry type units only? Just throwing that out there.

2. Ambulance-type medical units having a cargo capacity - infantry type only, but no more than one strength point for the ambulance...this means that only really shot-up units could be given transport (presumably to a MASH hospital, or at least into safer territory). However, while riding inside, I'm not sure if the morale boost function would be enabled - that might be a game engine limitation. Might have to unload to 'heal.'

Well, I've seen a lot of positives lately. Not all that many negatives. I'm still waiting for a 'make or break' argument. Trying not to step on any toes. In retrospect, I probably should have created a poll instead - and put this to an actual vote. :whis: