shagher

RESISTANCE UNITS/ TOWN base supplies!

10 posts in this topic

Gents,

As we are talking a lot lately about the idea of town base supplies....

How about keeping the current format, Brigades/Divisions/Army, moving from town to town....  But once AXIS enters Belgium/France/England territory those towns are fielded with town base "Resistance units".

This would be more historically accurate! Same when Allies enter/ AO an AXIS {German} town. {volkstrom}

Small units that could defend a town for a while, mostly Rifles and Bazookas/ Schrecks....  Therefore no more pure softcaps.... And this could buy time for real Brigs to deploy or paras or whatever. Could eventually design semi civilians outfits....  Just an idea...

How about staying historically accurate????

 

Thoughts?

 

shagher.png

 

 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shagher said:

Could eventually design semi civilians outfits....

That is probably a no, depicting death of civilians doesnt generally bode well.

 

12 minutes ago, shagher said:

But once AXIS enters Belgium/France/England territory those towns are fielded with town base "Resistance units".

That aside, say what?
You want opposing faction units spawning into a town owned by the other guy, when it isnt contested or anything?
Just random partisan guys popping in?

Axis start off inside of france\belgium, you want them to have to deal with random partisan spawners going mole happy inside their secured towns behind their backs?
Wont that be kind of weird?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jwilly said:

Just another design suggestion that would improve the game for one side.

If that even?
Maybe i am reading it wrong though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was, a considerable percentage of suggestions here are suggested because they'd be more fun for the suggester's side.

No consideration of how they'd simultaneously improve the marketability of the game, and the delivered game-fun for both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it side biased saying all towns should have a small garrison in them - which has been suggested 100 times over?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, delems said:

How is it side biased saying all towns should have a small garrison in them - which has been suggested 100 times over?

 

That isn't
But what is suggested above, while not biased in anyways, doesnt seem like something that would play well
If i read the suggestion right, he is suggesting to allow partisan resistance forces to spawn into an enemy owned town
So the owner will always have to contend to crazy knife wielding guys popping out of the buildings they own even when said town is secure.

Maybe i read it wrong?

Where it does become biased maybe with out meaning to is Allies start in friendly territory 100%
Axis on the other hand start with one foot inside captured enemy territory after having come through the ardennes forest and nearly to the river.
So axis would start the map with crazy allied resistance fighters spawning out of their kitchens and bathroom sinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real WWII German army historically had something like 20% of its forces committed to rear area security. So would the German side be expanded by 20%? Every German town would have a security platoon that could spawn at every possible in-town spawnpoint, with older-model tanks and with gapless AI infantry everywhere around the town perimeter, and the partisans would only spawn in the way-out-of-town woods, right?

The kill ratio in the Army Group Center area was 80:1, "partisans" to security troops. A standard tactic in areas where partisan activities occurred, was just to either kill, or capture and deport to manufacturing areas, everyone civilian and replace them with population from elsewhere. Would that be modeled accurately?

The current game is marketable in Europe and Russia because it doesn't model those aspects of the war that are proposed to be added, and the military forces that were involved in them. There are laws in Germany, France and I believe Russia that would come into applicability if the game were to go in the proposed direction.

I'm envisioning the effects on marketability of a YouTube video of machinegunning a series of folks in civilian clothes.

Historically realistic? Maybe. But if we want to continue to have a game to play, not even close to a good idea.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, jwilly said:

The current game is marketable in Europe and Russia because it doesn't model those aspects of the war that are proposed to be added, and the military forces that were involved in them. There are laws in Germany, France and I believe Russia that would come into applicability if the game were to go in the proposed direction.

Japan also i think as well as some other countries i think.
Depicting civilians in a WWII game, where said civilians die, would not bode well for marketability at all.
There is a reason every town in WWII Online is devoid of anyone but soldiers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was practically no resistance activity in Belgium, the low countries or France until after France had fell. The reason for this is that the Germans had come down like a ton of bricks on towns where they suspected (often erroneously) that they'd come under fire from "Franc tireurs"; during the 1914 advance. Hundreds of civilians were shot. Not infrequently this was as a consequence of unseen allied soldiers firing from within the town, rather than civilians resisting. This rough treatment was one of the things that impelled the great coloumns of refugees in May of '40, the presumptions being that a frontline would form as it has in 1914, and that the Germans would behave in the same way - hence no-one wanted to be the "wrong side of the line".

As to the idea, not sure really. Most resistance activity was intelligence gathering/cutting telephone lines, killings were relatively rare by Resistance groups because of the taking of hostages, until there was a realistic prospect of liberation before the Germans could intervene. Hence the uprising in Paris only occurring shortly before Leclerc's armour arrived. Consequently I don't think there's much of a basis for armed resistance groups being modelled.

Edited by fidd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.