Well we can do that now with a para. If you want to stop a unit using SR you land next to it with the para but you have to attack it to pinn it. I could agreee to the rule if we regard paras as air units.
_______
_______
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Nolan said:I cant agree to that its too open to exploitation. Someone could plonk a para somewhere in the middle of a country and stop any SR in all adjacent areas. There are pinning tactics available in game to stop units using SR. If a player cant use these for whatever reason then its fair ( if not very honorable or realistic ) to cut and run.
And lets not forget its always nice to give the perpetraters of such cowardly escapes heaps on the forum the next day.
_________________
Nolan Paradrops behind the lines are easily destroyed...the rule only applies if enemy units are present in the enemy province. Besides who is going to waste paratroopers on this? Whats stopping the units you wanter to SR actually fighting like they should rather than a mass escape?
Think about it again and give us a decent vote
What use are paras now anyway..hardly anyone uses them....fight the para first..destroy it then SR away. Why we allow mass SR away from danger beats me.A slight modification to the propsed rule could mean enemy units not in retreat!!
Nolan said:
A para dropped in this fashion is easily destroyed. I modified the rule to say that retreating enemy units do not stop SR. This allows the Para to be attacked....destroyed or forced to retreat then you can SR. What we are trying to prevent is mass escapes. Lets get players using armour for the way it was intended.
i rather have it if you take a prov with para behind the lines and loose the para the enemy can not SR still till they take the prov back. which should only take a day to march 1 unit in there
l rather have it if you take a prov with para behind the lines and loose/not loose the para the enemy can not SR till they take the prov back. which should only take a day to march 1 unit in there
I have to vote no to this rule as it stands at present.
There is no need for it. You can pin any force you want down if your trying to encircle them. You just need to use yout airforces and small ground force to keep the forces pined while your armour advances to encircle. There is no difference bwtween doing this on an experienced player or less experienced, its totaly up to the attacker to implement. Its only something ive used in a few recent games to good effect to combat the SR out. It works just fine.
If players wnat to SR 50-70 divisions out 5-6 province back, great, give your land up for free, dosnt bother me. Plus your TC is through the roof for awhile, making a front wide offensive even better while all those troops are tied up.
I can maybe see a small rule for small fronts like in africa, but not for russia or larger areas, no need for it.
And if im saying this major as the person who plays germany the most and would benifit the most from making encirclements easier, you should listen. Encriclements are ment to be hard. Only Russias ineptitude allowed th germans to encircle them easily.
So my vote is NO as it stands.
There is no need for it. You can pin any force you want down if your trying to encircle them. You just need to use yout airforces and small ground force to keep the forces pined while your armour advances to encircle. There is no difference bwtween doing this on an experienced player or less experienced, its totaly up to the attacker to implement. Its only something ive used in a few recent games to good effect to combat the SR out. It works just fine.
If players wnat to SR 50-70 divisions out 5-6 province back, great, give your land up for free, dosnt bother me. Plus your TC is through the roof for awhile, making a front wide offensive even better while all those troops are tied up.
I can maybe see a small rule for small fronts like in africa, but not for russia or larger areas, no need for it.
And if im saying this major as the person who plays germany the most and would benifit the most from making encirclements easier, you should listen. Encriclements are ment to be hard. Only Russias ineptitude allowed th germans to encircle them easily.
So my vote is NO as it stands.
Munster said:
I see where you are coming from but not really what is intended here. A vacant enemy province does not stop SR..only enemy divisions in a province will prevent SR. Pretty plane and simple if accepted. The Para issue is only of minor concern I think..otherwise if we adpot this change everyone will build hundreds of paras and exploit the situation as Nolan has addressed already.
Something which may be more targeted to the problem were really dealing with is this.
If a unit can only SR out with 0 infra provinces then they aren ot permited to SR out. (this prevents majors africa situation)
Armies that only have one province to escape to can only SR out 10 divisions at a time. Once the first group reach there destination the next 10 can move. (this prevents mass evac of millions of troops over one small corridor)
This would be easy enough to implement and i think address what is really two different issues.
If a unit can only SR out with 0 infra provinces then they aren ot permited to SR out. (this prevents majors africa situation)
Armies that only have one province to escape to can only SR out 10 divisions at a time. Once the first group reach there destination the next 10 can move. (this prevents mass evac of millions of troops over one small corridor)
This would be easy enough to implement and i think address what is really two different issues.
mike8472 said:
Its not only for the German player...to engage eveything similtaneously means you have to pause the game a lot. I cant understand what your problem is with it. You want to fight enemy forces or have them SR away? You can still SR you just have to disengage them from combat by moving them back one province. Its realistic and makes sense. I do not know where you are coming from. We all know how good you are but it shouldnt be that complicated. We are going to end up with big stalemates in all our games because Russia and german move big blobs around. This way it forces you to defend a front properly or risk getting surrounded. I for one do not like the use of super blob stacks even though I employ this tactic. I hate even worse super blob stacks just vanishing from the front line.
mike8472 said:
Thats just to hard to implement. As it stands now the SR ability is crap and undermines our games. I would be happy to have no SR ability. If you ask me Paradox should limit SR to 10 divisions a day or somehting and hard code it into the game. Lets just fight our games the way they meant to be fought. This SR crap is no good for the game.
Ok I got your vote...I do not understand it but I got it.
mike8472 said:
No need for a genius like you......We never see breakthrus 4 or 5 provinces long? Why is that? Becasue soon as you get 3 provinces in the enemy just SR away....you may trap a few in the first province by keeping them enagaged in battle. I want blitzreig tactics used not infantry and armour blobs moving 1 province at a time.
major ball said:
I certainly see the merit in it Maj, i just think it would be too hard to police. Having said that i have never played a major land power in this group. Each time i have the game got cut, USA, USSR> SO i don't really have the experice with this group to vote (or so i feel).
My Opinion from the othergames would lead me to vote NO.
I think your idea has good merit, but it would have to be encoded into the game. Like you said 10 units max or something..
For a general rules discussion, you guys sure have spent a load of time worrying about this one issue.
I'd argue no btw. Province sizes in HOI2 certainly have the scope of allowing units to move out through rail/road/canal, etc networks. Players who seek to extricate large numbers of troops from pockets pay the price in other ways anyway - TC drain, loss of units for a reasonable period while SR'ing, and the need to place them back from the front at a 'safe' location.
The rules I think we do need to clarify (most of which we have done so for admirably) are US and Japanese entry, effects of early axis 'uber' aggression, and last of all, the yet to be agreed on peace treaty issues.
For this lone issue, I would state quite categorically that agreeing to a peace where a continous line of 'blocking' provinces are ceded should not be allowed, particularly where these provinces are under no threat, or are not occupied by the nation they are ceded to. I actually think any peace treaty agreed to by major nations once already at war should be broadcast to all players, rather than making small niggly rules about what is and isnt allowed. This way we can reach consensus in game, with the ability to take into account specific situations.
I'd argue no btw. Province sizes in HOI2 certainly have the scope of allowing units to move out through rail/road/canal, etc networks. Players who seek to extricate large numbers of troops from pockets pay the price in other ways anyway - TC drain, loss of units for a reasonable period while SR'ing, and the need to place them back from the front at a 'safe' location.
The rules I think we do need to clarify (most of which we have done so for admirably) are US and Japanese entry, effects of early axis 'uber' aggression, and last of all, the yet to be agreed on peace treaty issues.
For this lone issue, I would state quite categorically that agreeing to a peace where a continous line of 'blocking' provinces are ceded should not be allowed, particularly where these provinces are under no threat, or are not occupied by the nation they are ceded to. I actually think any peace treaty agreed to by major nations once already at war should be broadcast to all players, rather than making small niggly rules about what is and isnt allowed. This way we can reach consensus in game, with the ability to take into account specific situations.
joel said:
I agree woth joel. No rules are needs for the SR issue. If you SR out, you lose alot of provinces, higher TC, a big whole in your front that a good player will exploit and make you pay for it dearly.
The blob issue on the russian front is not caused by the SR issue, which i dont think is an issue anyway. It's caused by the Russia player sitting back and simply countering attacking from 3-4 provinces with huge stacks. In turn the German player then moves huge stacks on sync move to counter this. There is no way to counter this except for the style of play the russian player uses. As the German player cannot use blitz tactics as groups of tanks even 20+ tanks get hammered from 80+ stacks from 3 directions. Just the way it is.
Due to half the group thinking its an issue and the other half saying it isnt, i think its a dead issue for now. If the russian player want to SR out his forces 6-7 province back, good for him, but it will cost him the war.
Playing germany my biggest concern and germanies bigest weakness, is being involved in many smaller battles. No Russian player has really done it so far, instead of fighting just 2-3 big stacks like what has happened in the past, fight many more smaller battles to ware downs germanies manpower. In the early stages instead of simply counter from 3-4 directions into tanks, why not slowly pull back as the german batter against you inflicting far more manpower loses on the germans as the attackers. Maintain a solid fronts and just slowly pull back. Just a thought if you want to avoid the blobs, this would also alow the germans to play a more blitz game like you want with less uber sync stacks.
Its people game style that needs to change to avoid blobs not rules.
I vote NO reployment from the start eg , if units get biuld it should be placed in capital , then move from there , reployment to battle front , but not away from battle fronts .
Well like Mike said..its a non issue. From now on any Divisions going to be surrounded will be SR away. Relasitic or not I will do it. Big stacks, small stacks...everything will be SR rather then destroyed. Your point of SR units away increase TC etc etc..give up free provinces also. Well if you lost those 30-40 divisions because they got surrounded it would that be any better or worse? I will sacrifice a few provinces to save 30-40 divisions any day..no matter what the cost.
The point I am making is it beter to have the player stand and fight, lose his surrounded divisions or SR them away to fight another day.
Try blaming the Russian player for the blobs and counter attacks from many provinces on the Russian front. Its you weak arse German play that refuses to take any chances to try and break the lines. You attack..build up again..attack again..stop build up.... At least with this no SR rule from adjacent enemy divisions you have some incentive to keep attacking and try and surround units. What incentive is there now?
What incentive does the Russian player have to employ the same tactics...We will never see a Stalingrad where 600,000 germans got surrounded because this game allows you to run away before the noose is tightened.
Its a rule employed by a lot of the MP groups....WHY WHY do we allow a mystery free move of all your armies away from danger??????????????????
Stay and fight like you are meant to...in real life it wouldnt happen. Why do we allow it?
The point I am making is it beter to have the player stand and fight, lose his surrounded divisions or SR them away to fight another day.
Try blaming the Russian player for the blobs and counter attacks from many provinces on the Russian front. Its you weak arse German play that refuses to take any chances to try and break the lines. You attack..build up again..attack again..stop build up.... At least with this no SR rule from adjacent enemy divisions you have some incentive to keep attacking and try and surround units. What incentive is there now?
What incentive does the Russian player have to employ the same tactics...We will never see a Stalingrad where 600,000 germans got surrounded because this game allows you to run away before the noose is tightened.
Its a rule employed by a lot of the MP groups....WHY WHY do we allow a mystery free move of all your armies away from danger??????????????????
Stay and fight like you are meant to...in real life it wouldnt happen. Why do we allow it?
Last edited:
mike8472 said:
How so? Why would you SR and leave your front wide open..you would only SR troops that are going to die anyway....you might as well save them by SR away. I am sure the palyer would have other troops in the area.
mike8472 said:
You never employ this tactic as the Geman player? What incentive do I have as a Russian player to try and blitzreig your front when any units that look like gettingsurrounded get a free mystery move away. Who cares if theygo back to Berlin and you los some ground...At least they dont get destroyed.
mike8472 said:
Not all votes are in yet...we still work on majority rules.
mike8472 said:
Come on this is what happens...I defend the border and get crushed as always. How much better can the Russian player defend when you attack stacks of 18 with 72 divisions? Give the Russian player some credit. Yo uthen advance with 50 divisions? Russians meant to counterattack this?
The topic I posted at the moment is the above rule meantioned earlier. The other guys that need to vote please do.
No new rules proposals or modifications. Just vote on the issue.
I propose the following rule for our groups:
For a better game and forcing people to a least fight a rear guard action we say no Strategic Redployment from any province which is adjecent to an enemy province with troops in it(not retreating enemy troops), you must first move to a rear province.
To be implemented in the next new game see how it goes.
Have a look in my previous posts for reasoning behind it...most other multi player groups employ this rule. Lets bring some incentive for aggressive play and elimanate the Blob.
Please vote by replying to this thread. Give reasons if no. Thanks.
I require votes from the following people:
Mighty abstained Have some balls vote yes or no
Mike no
Munster yes
Gunny yes
JH yet to vote
Nolan inconclusive..let us know as the rule is posted here
Joel no
System Lord yes
Ric yes
Major Ball yes
Did I miss anyone?
Please vote yes or no as posted here.
For a better game and forcing people to a least fight a rear guard action we say no Strategic Redployment from any province which is adjecent to an enemy province with troops in it(not retreating enemy troops), you must first move to a rear province.
To be implemented in the next new game see how it goes.
Have a look in my previous posts for reasoning behind it...most other multi player groups employ this rule. Lets bring some incentive for aggressive play and elimanate the Blob.
Please vote by replying to this thread. Give reasons if no. Thanks.
I require votes from the following people:
Mighty abstained Have some balls vote yes or no
Mike no
Munster yes
Gunny yes
JH yet to vote
Nolan inconclusive..let us know as the rule is posted here
Joel no
System Lord yes
Ric yes
Major Ball yes
Did I miss anyone?
Please vote yes or no as posted here.
Last edited:
joel said:
Joel if you read the email I sent you you would find this doesnt even need discussing. I cant see it happening in the future...I think it was a once off.