I remember that the yellow, white, and black numbers on the blocks represent manpower, steel, and oil resources to build, respectively. What's the red?
Yes cadre is red. You'll notice that you need it to either build special units (amphib, airborne) or to improve the quality (letter) of a unit. With this method, there is a very consistent cost to benefit relationship with each step. Manpower buys you conscript level troops. Cadre allows you to upgrade them to elite units but you need to keep burning cadre to keep them at the elite level. Also one other change with cadre is that you can substitute it for anything i.e. manpower, steel, or oil. This gives you more resource flexibility so that you can still build an oil or steel step even when you don't have any. It also makes cadre the most precious resource of all, so in the long run it will be very wasteful to substitute with it indiscriminately.
Er, sort of. There are a few discrepancies with that. The German 9th, 11th, and 12th Armies are still C units when they use cadre to upgrade.
I'm also wondering why there's a quality difference between the US, British, and German airborne and amphibious units. Why are the British units, for instance, B-grade units, while the American units all C-grade? What's the quality difference between US and British paratroopers and 'phibs?
The German amphibious as a C? I understand that. They didn't have the kind of amphibious experience that the US and British forces acquired. I also understand why the Soviets never do better than C.
How many times one can read he's a genius without blushing? Michael, You truly are a genius! (But as a Polish, and AFTER you put Polish blocks, I am sorry no Western - Allies Polish block is included). I know it'd not be strong (max 2 steps). But: IICorps under Anders, Sosabowski's Paratroopers and 1 Armoured Division commanded by Maczek - all of them combined together would make a nice 2-step B army. Never did, but it's not the point... + there were 3 Polish Armies formed in USSR. I know you've had this discussion once, but since SOME (pre-war) polish blocks appeared...
Er, sort of. There are a few discrepancies with that. The German 9th, 11th, and 12th Armies are still C units when they use cadre to upgrade.
I'm also wondering why there's a quality difference between the US, British, and German airborne and amphibious units. Why are the British units, for instance, B-grade units, while the American units all C-grade? What's the quality difference between US and British paratroopers and 'phibs?
The German amphibious as a C? I understand that. They didn't have the kind of amphibious experience that the US and British forces acquired. I also understand why the Soviets never do better than C.
Damn! Those are all typos. It's amazing when you stare at something so long you develop blinders. I'll have to update the file...
About discrepancies Robb mentioned - I guess There were 'uneven' armies in Wehrmacht. Some to hold ground and 'fill' frontline, some to tear enemy frontline, some to pursue and blitz. There were few armies consisted of fresh, green and poorer trained than German 'average'
I'm also wondering why there's a quality difference between the US, British, and German airborne and amphibious units. Why are the British units, for instance, B-grade units, while the American units all C-grade? What's the quality difference between US and British paratroopers and 'phibs?
The German amphibious as a C? I understand that. They didn't have the kind of amphibious experience that the US and British forces acquired. I also understand why the Soviets never do better than C.
The Americans and British are now oil/cadre for airborne and steel/cadre for amphib. This way it is very difficult for them to build good amphib and airborne units until late in the war.
About discrepancies Robb mentioned - I guess There were 'uneven' armies in Wehrmacht. Some to hold ground and 'fill' frontline, some to tear enemy frontline, some to pursue and blitz. There were few armies consisted of fresh, green and poorer trained than German 'average'
Actually I have a pretty simple formula: If the army was formed from 1939-42 and shipped to the Eastern Front, it is the cream of the Wehrmacht - C1/C2/B3/B4 block. If it was formed in 1939-42 and left in the Western Front or Balkans it is a C1/C2/C3/B4. If it was formed after the Waffen SS was created i.e. 1943+, it is a C1/C2/C3 block. Not only is it a reflection of concensus ratings of the units by historians, it's going to nudge players towards historical deployments without them needing to know a thing about the actual order of battle.
I'm also wondering why there's a quality difference between the US, British, and German airborne and amphibious units. Why are the British units, for instance, B-grade units, while the American units all C-grade? What's the quality difference between US and British paratroopers and 'phibs?
The German amphibious as a C? I understand that. They didn't have the kind of amphibious experience that the US and British forces acquired. I also understand why the Soviets never do better than C.
The Americans and British are now oil/cadre for airborne and steel/cadre for amphib. This way it is very difficult for them to build good amphib and airborne units until late in the war.
That makes sense. Are there still the B-unit and C-unit differences between the US and Americans? From a historical perspective, that doesn't make sense. From a gameplay perspective it might. If you need to limit the number of B-unit amphib and airborne units. The US and British airborne and amphibious units are going to work together a great deal of the time in any event.
Are there still the B-unit and C-unit differences between the US and [British]? From a historical perspective, that doesn't make sense. From a gameplay perspective it might. If you need to limit the number of B-unit amphib and airborne units. The US and British airborne and amphibious units are going to work together a great deal of the time in any event.
The British and American units are identical. The amphib assault mechanic makes it so that D-Day is very risky against a well prepared German defense (Rommell's plan) unless you have (2) B2 amphib units and air superiority. You need to survive one round to establish a beachhead. Attrition hits on the attacker's units must be step losses in amphib landings. If OKW HQ and the 5th Panzer Amry are in Paris, they can counterattack any landing spot. With a fortification block, an infantry army (usually the 1st, 7th, or 15th), the 5th panzer army, and any ground support and the Germans could easily score 4 hits. That means waiting another year before trying again...
The British and American units are identical. The amphib assault mechanic makes it so that D-Day is very risky against a well prepared German defense (Rommell's plan) unless you have (2) B2 amphib units and air superiority. You need to survive one round to establish a beachhead. Attrition hits on the attacker's units must be step losses in amphib landings. If OKW HQ and the 5th Panzer Amry are in Paris, they can counterattack any landing spot. With a fortification block, an infantry army (usually the 1st, 7th, or 15th), the 5th panzer army, and any ground support and the Germans could easily score 4 hits. That means waiting another year before trying again...
Makes sense. But can you airdrop in airborne units at the same time, to bulk up your landing force? And if so, doesn't that mitigate your risk? Otherwise, what good are airborne units?
You haven't talked much (at all?) about that airborne mechanic. Is there one that affects play much? Or is it just a way for the Germans and the Allies to get troops to places they otherwise wouldn't be able to?
The British and American units are identical. The amphib assault mechanic makes it so that D-Day is very risky against a well prepared German defense (Rommell's plan) unless you have (2) B2 amphib units and air superiority. You need to survive one round to establish a beachhead. Attrition hits on the attacker's units must be step losses in amphib landings. If OKW HQ and the 5th Panzer Amry are in Paris, they can counterattack any landing spot. With a fortification block, an infantry army (usually the 1st, 7th, or 15th), the 5th panzer army, and any ground support and the Germans could easily score 4 hits. That means waiting another year before trying again...
Makes sense. But can you airdrop in airborne units at the same time, to bulk up your landing force? And if so, doesn't that mitigate your risk? Otherwise, what good are airborne units?
You haven't talked much (at all?) about that airborne mechanic. Is there one that affects play much? Or is it just a way for the Germans and the Allies to get troops to places they otherwise wouldn't be able to?
Airborne units allow you to overstack (ignore normal front limits) and land in the region behind the frontline. But you can't do either without air superiority. So yes it mitigates the risk. I didn't really spell it out in detail but if you land 2 amphib and 1 airborne, then you can have 6 steps. They need to survive the counterattack and the subsequent German action round. If they do that's when you can start SRing units into the region and presumably breakout in a few rounds.
Hi, just a short note: The sig runes are still on the German SS blocks. With that the game can't be published in Germany because of the laws against fascist symbols. I suggest to remove it if it is planned to distribute it also to the German market and avoid a banning of the game in Germany. Otherwise you have to print a special German game version but I think that is not planned?
(The symbols are only allowed in combination with history books or movies and so on - swastikas or certain kind of runes or other symbols used by the nazis printed on toys, PC games, board games and so on counts in Germany as belittlement or glorification and is forbidden by law)
Thanks for the info. It's been made mention of several times and they SS runes will be removed from the print edition. Most of us purists enjoy historical accuracy on the playtest blocks but those symbols will surely go away.
Note that the rectangles representing the unit icons are not always perfect. It looks as if some were drawn off grid, making one corner jog in a pixel or more.
These look better than the previous set, but I still think the various colors of text over the backgrounds would look better if the text was "backlit"--black for light text, white for dark text.
Note that the rectangles representing the unit icons are not always perfect. It looks as if some were drawn off grid, making one corner jog in a pixel or more.
These look better than the previous set, but I still think the various colors of text over the backgrounds would look better if the text was "backlit"--black for light text, white for dark text.
That is an artifact of the conversion from AI (Illustrator) file to PDF. The blocks are all perfectly on center in the original file.
The problem with backlighting the text is that I may confusing as which is oil (black) or steel (white). Is white text on black background oil or steel... I'm trying to find the perfect background shade for each nationality to maximize the contrast between white, black, yellow, and red. Red is proving to be the most difficult color....
Thanks for the info. It's been made mention of several times and they SS runes will be removed from the print edition. Most of us purists enjoy historical accuracy on the playtest blocks but those symbols will surely go away.
Mike
They might be sold for a good money in 'black market' anyway. Just two fennigs
on the Internet...
