The Competition & Teaser Thread

[Xaver]

Well, for me under company level is tactical and abstraction needs be reduced, this is why i never like a lot Tiller Campaigns because uses infantry units with a simple numeric value. Smoke maybe is not a critical feature (in part because like you say not in all periods smoke was avaliable for tanks) because are other things that at platoon level has their point but keep in mind that a less abstract use of smoke could be needed... at least the idea of a defensive bonus like i say, think for example in desert battles or steppes, you have sand storms and similars, maybe they not strong enough to block LOS but can affect to the direct fire effectivity.

Ummm good question about LOS, i understand that when a hex is overstacked it becomes a blocking LOS hex for both sides, enemy cant shoot behind it with direct fire but same for friendly units, maybe the only question is if tanks can shoot indirect over infantry units spoted by a company element... i know that tanks are usually for direct fire but many times are examples of indirect fire specially over infantry or a static objetive.

EDIT: they say this

"This has been fixed by having LOS only blocked by units that are 50% or more than the stacking limit. Lower than that limit and you can see and fire at those larger units trying to move forward - through the screening unit."

But here i have a question with armor units... an infantry company can block the LOS of a tank unit??? i can understand that armored units (tanks or mech/mot infantry) when are over 50% stack limit block a tank unit LOS but when we talk only about infantry (on foot with no vehicles) is not a little strange see them blocking the LOS of tanks that are sometimes double in size than a man??? Stugs and other low profile vehicles sure are blocked but not a lets see Tiger commander that is in a good spotting plataform.

[ComradeP]

Provided the tanks and infantry are moving on the same terrain in terms of height, I'd say infantry blocking LOS for tanks (which in this case primarily means line of fire as the infantry can still spot targets) when moving in tactical formations is still accurate as otherwise the risk of friendly fire might be too high. Knowing tanks are sending MG bursts aimed at their backs through their ranks won't improve their morale.

However, when the infantry is entrenched or even in improved positions, that would change as the tanks could occupy overlook positions behind the line.

[Xaver]

Well, if tanks are attacking tanks i dont see the motive they hold fire when infantry is in the middle and well if they attack infantry in training soldiers learn go down, suck mud and leave the support weapons in rear do their job shooting over their heads... is very Hollywood the training of infantry using real fire shooting burst over their heads and well if they are dug-in or in bunkers i dont see the problem to shoot over an overstack hex.

The rule is a good idea to prevent exploits but generate his own exploits like use infantry on foot to screen tanks... oposite for me is correct, tanks screen infantry but well, you cant compare the size and quality of cover.

Maybe game needs diference between overstack with infantry/guns (pure infantry i refer, infantry with no vehicles or on foot status) or tanks/mech-mot infantry, i think that in first situation infantry/guns dont block LOS, they only reduce the fire power over units attacked behind the overstacked hex (same when a unit covered behind overstacked hex attack enemy) and when are tanks/mech-mot infantry overstacked they total block LOS and prevent direct fire behind them

Maybe the problem is that when you do a general rule some specific situations are not covered like this.

Really this kind of situations need be tested on "battlefield" when we can do it??? i feel a little

[ComradeP]

It might also be a scale thing: technically, when a unit is 1 hex away from another unit, he might be 1 meter away if both at adjacent hexsides or in this case almost 500 meters away if both units are at the furthest edge of the hex from the perspective of the other unit.

Tanks driving 250 meters behind the infantry wouldn't be able to see or do much unless the infantry isn't in front of them. They'd still need to keep checking which units are friendly. Tanks within coordination distance can effectively support infantry units.

At 250 meters, the infantry is also probably not aware where the friendly tanks are, as infantry situational awareness also drops dramatically when they come under fire. A buttoned tank crew also loses a significant amount of situational awareness aside from communications with other tanks over the radio. It's one of those wargame luxuries that we always know where our units are, whilst real life soldiers were more often than not rather clueless about the specific position of the troops involved in an assault other than the troops they could see.

It's not just whether or not there's a physical obstruction that matters the most for units supporting eachother in echelon (I'm not saying you dispute this, it's just a statement).

Maybe the problem is that when you do a general rule some specific situations are not covered like this.

The problem with such situations is that players will try to use the rules to their advantage, which means that the people who exploit the gaps or flaws in the mechanics can have an advantage over their opponent who doesn't or is unaware of the possibilities to do so.

[Dog Soldier]

I think you will find using units over the 50% stacking limit to try and meat-shield another unit is not worth the cost in extra casualties and fatigue the screening unit will take. I been able in test to decimate units exposed thus so they are rendered ineffective the rest of the scenario. If you think the minimal gain in using a 50%+ meat shield is worth it, then do it. I found an easy way to counter it in testing. I am sure everyone else will figure out the appropriate tactic to use also. BTW, using your infantry like the 'innocents' in 1914 will result in the same result.

Dog Soldier

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

You have to draw the line somewhere, just like cops have a line for speeders. A 55 mph zone, a cop may allow one to go 60, but had an Aunt get pulled over for doing 61. Again, one has to draw the line somewhere.

The smoke thing if one unit in a stack popped smoke, most likely wouldn't cover the whole lot, but would still be a small hindrance. But if another unit in the hex popped smoke, it would help and then another and another. I think it could only be done by assuming the minefield, but on a temporary basis. One unit pops smoke, you get a level one smoke, two units, level 2 smoke etc etc. The problem with that sounds like it would be a whole lot of work for little gain to the game.

I don't want to see anything trivial to delay the game being released. I refer to my earlier post about hanging from the gallows and nuts roasting over the campfire. :)

I'm ready to jump in blind. My mind also wanders badly now thinking of the future possibilities of other titles for this series. Ok, so I'm practically drooling, get over it. Dog Soldier is not the only dog on the forum. :)

It sounds sad to a point that most of my life now is spent at the house, at least 90%, with a dog that doesn't speak a lick of English and only understands what he wants, when he wants. But it's not sad because I am doing what I want most of the day, just like a dog, but I do smell better! Ya'll will have to trust me on that one. :)

[Xaver]

Damn, i dont want see the game delayed more but this is like when you talk with friends and some beers about what is your "Fantasy team" or "Dream team", you know everybody has an opinion and something simple like select 11 players (or 5 in basketball, i know 0 about Rugby/american football and baseball hehehe hehehe) could finish in a WWIII

Well, smoke in game looks like take a "middle solution" like in block by stacking, both are present in a simple way and well maybe they work enough well but i like perfection in things i love HAHAHAHAHAHA

Ummm a little question about LOS, you have in consideration burning wrecks??? if you kill a tank or vehicle in a hex the hex "wins" a permanent stack value??? i think if you destroy 3 tanks in a hex it has as basic staking value the 3xstaking points from destroyed tanks, i doubt game has this but is only an inocent question from an inocent man

PD: where is Strela??? we need their teaser images, i want see the secret Santa´s red army

[Strela]

Ummm a little question about LOS, you have in consideration burning wrecks??? if you kill a tank or vehicle in a hex the hex "wins" a permanent stack value??? i think if you destroy 3 tanks in a hex it has as basic staking value the 3xstaking points from destroyed tanks, i doubt game has this but is only an inocent question from an inocent man

PD: where is Strela??? we need their teaser images, i want see the secret Santa´s red army

From my favourite FAQ.....

Vehicle wrecks have been included. Wrecks impact road movement and visibility. Each wreck counts as 10 against the road movement limit in a hex. In [game title] the road movement limit is 75. If there were 3 wrecks in a hex only 4 vehicles could move through the hex at a time and still use road movement. Once 8 wrecks are in a hex, no road movement is possible and in forbidden terrain such as swamp & marsh, vehicles would not be able to enter a hex under any circumstances. Once a hex contains wrecks over the road movement limit (In [game title] this is 8 wrecks or more) it is considered to be a permanent smoke hex and will block all LOS through the hex.




And because Xaver continued to plead, here is the first shot of the OPFOR;

2x Size (Photoshopped)



Actual in game size


David

[Compass Rose]

If that is what the 3rd Santa Support Co looks like, I can't wait to see her two sisters, the 1st and 2nd Santa Support Co!

[GerryM]

I think the Morale value is way too low for the Elves working with that Santa.