[WarInEur] Design issues:- cause &effect

[Chuck Sutherland]

Sorry I was away due to a death in my family, so this is old news to you 
but not to me! ;)


------------------------------
SGMINFO at aol.com wrote:
One of the catch 22 pockets of design, is achieving the desired result, 
but incorrecting perceiving the influences of real life pressures.
Take the perennial problem of airborne divisions. In the classic game, 
gamers developed the "parachute & Panzer" tactical role of airborne, 
dropping at every available opportunity to enforce the occupation of the 
hex regardless.
Devastating in France against the 3rd Republic, yet impossible to 
achieve in real life.
Airborne were never used repeatedly as part of any operational plan in 
this manner, by either side, a sort of airborne super artillery.
Airborne ops were a relatively rare occurance, absolutely devastating in 
effect when they went right, but needing meticulous planning and some 
careful thought, before "getting away with it".
In the game, that doesn't happen.
The conclusion is:- some element is missing.
------------------------------


I totally agree the airborne is much to powerful in this game. As for 
their effect I would say they are over modeled because the armor is 
under modeled and thus it balances things in game terms. The thing that 
IS missing is the ability of armor to push through and exploit its 
mobility, so if you "fix" the para issues no matter how you fix them, 
unless you address the lack of mobility to exploit with you will be left 
with even a more broken system that acts even more like WWI!



---------------------------------
SGMINFO at aol.com wrote:
Can that be fixed by changing the factors that influence? or introducing 
a rule to strait jacket the players from straying off the straight and 
narrow?
The latter is clearly the easier concept to apply, but usually 
completely falls down in the application.
For example, cycle all the ATPs in the airdrop for 2 cycles.
After Normandy, Germans heave a big sigh of relief, now certain thaat 
they are free of airborne ops for x turns. As one can see, you can 
create circumstances where a careful panzer pusher can exploit the 
nuances created.
The nearest method that might work, would be one adding uncertainty to 
the equation
For example, ATPs do not cycle, but go to a pool. In the pool, each 
survining  ATP is subject to a die roll, on a roll of 1 it is recycled. 
The rolls to be applied each turn, and the "winning" ATPs then take 4 
weeks to cycle, before being made available once again.
This might engender the feeling of restraint in their use, the players 
realising that airborne resources are delicate, and need careful 
handling, before all the elements can be brought to concert pitch 
together again to repeat the exercise.
The uncertainty element, tends to act as a brake on the assumptions of 
the defender, and as a restraining influence on wild continuous airborne 
ops by the attacker.
At the moment, used in the classical roll, the units clearly dominate 
the French campaign in a way that tends to  completely skew the gamers' 
experience of the campaign.
On the other hand in the standard game the combination of units and 
application of the standard rules, almost force the attacker down the 
same road to resolve the impasse inherent in the defensive interplay of 
forces.
--------------------------------

The simple fix is to make the owning player plot 4 turns ahead of time 
where the drop will take place, this way if reflects the planning needed 
to execute such an operation and also will add the element that says 
drop even when it seems like a bad decision because they did not want to 
wait another month for the updated plans like the allies did in late 
summer at Arham. As for forcing a retreat everytime, perhaps retreats 
should be forced no matter if airborne are used or not unless you are 
defending a city or fortress or maybe a town, then you should be allowed 
to take a EX to stay in the hex. But allowing attacks during movement 
would stop people from taking EX's instead of retreats and thus would 
make paras a moot point. You would have to make cities be able to ignore 
retreats to allow the defenders to hold the hex at least until it was 
flanked and cut off.

-------------------------------
SGMINFO at aol.com wrote:
Experience of the attrition option raises the spectre of French Collapse 
in 1940 almost every time, without using airborne, so some moderating 
influence on their arrival may be a necessary balancing agent, to 
prevent France 1940 going down the road of garranteed defeat in a 
totally ahistorical manner.
I might point out that experience so far with attrition options, is that 
Hitlers fundamental appraisal of the prospects of an autumn campaign  
seem to be very accurate, more perhaps than he dreamed.
Only once have I managed to snatch stalemate (more by luck than design) 
from the Jaws of defeat in France, and that was without the use of 
airborne being available to beef up the German attack.
------------------------------
What are the computer rules for attrition?


------------------------------
SGMINFO at aol.com wrote:
So the questions on the strategic level are:-
Are the current rules overplaying the tactical role of airborne?
Is there a way of restraining without fatally compromising them?
If they are restrained, does this have the unintended effect of 
destroying the balance in the standard classical French campaign? i.e. 
Making the German mountain too high for them to climb?
------------------------------

Yes
Yes
Yes unless armor is also addressed.

-- 
Chuck Sutherland
Technology Specialist
Gamewood, Inc.
116 South Ridge Street
Danville, VA 24541
(434) 799-8407 x218