Just another idea

The common meeting place for SEOW veterans and noobs alike, sharing feedback, ideas and experiences.

Moderator: SEOW Developers

Post Reply
II/JG77Hawk_5
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed 10 Jan 2007 1:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Just another idea

Post by II/JG77Hawk_5 »

This has probably already been suggested before but here it is.
How about seperating battlefield material from the men that man them.

Eg. A tank is just a static tank unless it is manned by men from a specified unit, an artillery piece is static until manned etc. You get the idea.

This would allow major items such as artillery pieces, tanks, bunker guns, machine gun bunkers etc to be captured and then used by the enemy.

This would only occur if a unit surrenders or deserts. When this happens currently, the material is also destroyed, but if left on the battlefield once the troops have abandoned it could be put into play by the enemy if campaign rules allow it but only if the enemy have the resources to man them.

This in a way already happens for aircraft when an airfield is captured doesn't it?

Maybe material could be just given in ID number (eg. T34_475) when it comes into the sector but it is the men that occupy it that then give it its unit designation. To take it further, only specific troop types can occupy the specific types of material but HSFX doesn't have enough different infantry types for this maybe. (Think of loading a tank crew into a Kubelwagon and driving them out and drop them off at a captured T34).

Factories could then is some cases be designated as training camps when churning out infantry/tank crews/artillery unit types etc.
We can do this now of course but it would just make them more strategic targets for broader reasons.

Then of course men must be transported to meet the material from the factory and put it to use. Supply columns with appropriate troop types meeting tanks and other material loaded on trains.

I think all the systems are in place to do this now except the code to make the unit name be attached only to the crew and for the object to revert to just a static object once abandoned.

This will no doubt increase database size and is quite a change in how SEOW deals with things but hey, its just an idea.
II/JG54_Emil
Posts: 272
Joined: Thu 07 May 2009 10:45 am

Post by II/JG54_Emil »

Great Idea!

This way we could introduce 3rd parties that have a chance to take control.

I am the Dänish.
:D
IV/JG7_4Shades
Posts: 2202
Joined: Mon 08 Jan 2007 11:10 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Post by IV/JG7_4Shades »

Me? Ich bin ein Berliner!

Back to the topic, it is a nice idea but I suspect it may take a significant structural change to make it happen. I can't even get a picture in my mind of how to make it happen. :shock:
IV/JG7_4Shades
SEOW Developer

Image
Post Reply