Capco

On 1.36 and the Race to the Factories

12 posts in this topic

Hello all.

 

There's only been two campaigns since 1.36 came out, but there's been a consistent observation I've noticed between both sides.

 

Prior to 1.36, making a race to the enemy factories while ignoring the rest of the front usually left you vulnerable.  In most parts of the map, you wouldn't have enough divisions to push forward and cover your flank at the same time.  

 

However, in 1.36, you can take whatever crazy maneuvers you like with your capture paradigm, because there is always supply no matter how long or big the front line is. 

 

In the first campaign, the Axis made it to within a couple towns of the French factories without capturing Brussels or Antwerp (although I believe these towns were eventually capped before the end).  Likewise with this current campaign, the Allies have pretty much ignored the south and ran straight for Essen, Koln, and Dusseldorf.  

 

Imagine if the front was just a large squiggly line that went back and forth all over the map.  Every single town would have supply (and a decent chunk of it).  It wouldn't make any sense but it's entirely possible now.  That's not right (and this was all predicted btw).  

 

Personally, if this trend continues I think it only reinforces the notion that the garrisons actually need to be more garrison-sized and that we need more flags on the map.  That way such unrealistic map advances can potentially be checked.  A garrison-only force would not be able to cover the flank against a proper attack with movable brigades.  

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would support that type of change if we can figure out a way for brigades to be able to be moved properly/automatically without relying on HC.. Its already been demonstrated that when HC is not present, reliance on the brigade system, as the primary force, is an utter failure. When this was being done, that was my same suggestion, but I had no answer for the brigade movement system relying on players. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news is u have the core mechanics in place to continue to nibble at the edges to find a sweat spot. 

A combination of adjusting TOE's in garrison vs. moveable flags .... and possibly increasing the number of those flags a bit .... i think there is a great opportunity to find a good middle ground.

Interested also to hear from those in HC ... can you say HC numbers increased at all .... or about the same.

Edited by choad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SCKING said:

Personally I would support that type of change if we can figure out a way for brigades to be able to be moved properly/automatically without relying on HC.. Its already been demonstrated that when HC is not present, reliance on the brigade system, as the primary force, is an utter failure. When this was being done, that was my same suggestion, but I had no answer for the brigade movement system relying on players. 

I think if you could create a .fallback command that allows us to manually set fallbacks for brigades, it would essentially be the same thing as AI damage control to some degree.  Someone (even a GM) could log on for 5 minutes a day to make sure via a simple text command that flags don't stupidly fall back into pockets.  A big reason why there were catastrophic map failures was because of bad fallbacks combined with the fact that it sometimes took hours and hours to fix those fallbacks.

 

It wouldn't fix every instance of issues with no HC but it would be a big help.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until there is a way to automate brigade movements without player intervention, I don’t see a way to justify making brigades the dominate supply for each side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SCKING said:

Until there is a way to automate brigade movements without player intervention, I don’t see a way to justify making brigades the dominate supply for each side. 

That's not necessary.  You can just add another division and/or cut the garrison supply lists slightly.  Garrisons would still have the majority of the supply accorded to them, but it would shift the needle in a better, more dynamic direction without going back to a pre-1.36 situation.  

 

If every map just turns into this bulge towards the losing side's factories, the campaigns are going to get old very quick.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2019 at 9:38 PM, SCKING said:

Personally I would support that type of change if we can figure out a way for brigades to be able to be moved properly/automatically without relying on HC.. Its already been demonstrated that when HC is not present, reliance on the brigade system, as the primary force, is an utter failure. When this was being done, that was my same suggestion, but I had no answer for the brigade movement system relying on players. 

Make HC more attractive. Bring in command-control tools, allow HC to easily see what town a bde falls to and where it's going to fall. Allow moves to be stacked and timed, eg "move Bde X to town Y in 31 minutes". Bring back HC uniforms. Create better chat channels, more fit for the game. Tweak the TOES set up to mitigate JBWS

So many things could have been done to retain the key advantage of TOES, namely a more realistic simulation of a front line and to provide complexity and variability to the game

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2019 at 7:08 AM, SCKING said:

Until there is a way to automate brigade movements without player intervention, I don’t see a way to justify making brigades the dominate supply for each side. 

100% agreed. Brigades taking a dominant role, as it currently stands manually maneuvered, is contradictory to the entire design purpose of 1.36. Brigades were intentionally optional with an automated movement of stable supply known as Garrisons, and we have seen players be quite a bit happier about that, and our High Commanders have more room to breathe. These are in keeping with the design goals and it seems we have succeeded in that regard, which is a win.

To this day, we do not have a sufficient number of HC officers online (though it seems to be getting better) to manage supply like this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/17/2019 at 9:37 PM, XOOM said:

100% agreed. Brigades taking a dominant role, as it currently stands manually maneuvered, is contradictory to the entire design purpose of 1.36. Brigades were intentionally optional with an automated movement of stable supply known as Garrisons, and we have seen players be quite a bit happier about that, and our High Commanders have more room to breathe. These are in keeping with the design goals and it seems we have succeeded in that regard, which is a win.

To this day, we do not have a sufficient number of HC officers online (though it seems to be getting better) to manage supply like this. 

CC  Allies are winning and still have no HC in game at times.

Garrison supply gives both sides a chance to fight that movable brigades did not when HC were absent or struggling with the demands the role placed upon them.

S! Ian  

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course .... it was a necessary change. Glad they went hybrid route though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/16/2019 at 2:19 AM, Silky said:

Make HC more attractive. Bring in command-control tools, allow HC to easily see what town a bde falls to and where it's going to fall. Allow moves to be stacked and timed, eg "move Bde X to town Y in 31 minutes". Bring back HC uniforms. Create better chat channels, more fit for the game. Tweak the TOES set up to mitigate JBWS

So many things could have been done to retain the key advantage of TOES, namely a more realistic simulation of a front line and to provide complexity and variability to the game

This, along with a vetted/point/vote whatever system of reserve officers that aren't line HC but can pick up map moves in a pinch.

 

WORKED GREAT WHEN WE DID THIS IN CONJUNCTION WITH SQUAD LIAISON IN AHC.  DIDN'T WORK LONG RUN DURING DOWNTURNS BECAUSE THE RESERVE GUYS WEREN'T CODED SEPARATELY AND GOT HAMMERED BY PLAYERS AS THOUGH THEY WERE HC.  Hmmm, didn't try that, and could have avoided a LOT of pain and unsubs and had tighter team org all along.

 

 

Edited by Kilemall
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/16/2019 at 0:19 AM, Silky said:

Make HC more attractive. Bring in command-control tools, allow HC to easily see what town a bde falls to and where it's going to fall. Allow moves to be stacked and timed, eg "move Bde X to town Y in 31 minutes". Bring back HC uniforms. Create better chat channels, more fit for the game. Tweak the TOES set up to mitigate JBWS

So many things could have been done to retain the key advantage of TOES, namely a more realistic simulation of a front line and to provide complexity and variability to the game

Agree - While I was eager to see 1.36 (HTBS) in action, I preferred TOE only and the war of movement that came with it. A very good argument could be made for small garrison forces in towns but honestly, TOE did a better job of recreating the war on a strategic level. The historical TOE campaigns prior to 1.36 were some of my favourites (not all felt that way I understand)

This being said, post 1.36 there is still a lot of room to improve this if the desire is there. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.