Rework Purchase Units...

ubernaut

@Stohrm that purchase window is already too big for many screens on complicated maps but maybe if there was a row which showed production capacity there could be a way to have the best of both worlds so to speak.

Stohrm

@Cernel I think I understand what you're saying; but from my perspective: if the units were placed right away they would be invisible and unusable. They would then be made visible and active at the end of the turn (as before).

ubernaut

@Stohrm also there might already be some related logic in the code whenever you select a sea zone as your production site the engine auto distributes the production between any adjoining land territories with production capacity.

Cernel

@Stohrm said in Rework Purchase Units...:

@Cernel I think I understand what you're saying; but from my perspective: if the units were placed right away they would be invisible and unusable. They would then be made visible and active at the end of the turn (as before).

This would be still a purely custom ruleset, as in all core games you can purchase a carrier before combat, then decide if this carrier is being built in England or in Australia (for example) when you have to place it.

Cernel

Another benefit of such feature would be to support all those cases not covered even by the warning of having purchased more units than you can place (since with this method the player itself would be restricted by placement on what it wants to purchase). 270BC comes to mind.

On the other hand, this system would not work with movement phases in between, if the units allowing placement are mobile. 270BC comes to mind, again (the legionaire placing the fort).

beelee

@Stohrm

yea so when Placement comes up it just shows your factories w/e that can place, in the right side area where your buys show up, and then you click on those individually which would take you to the main purchase window where you purchase for that factory/we. Is that what you're thinking ?

If so, as Cernel says above, if I understand him right, it would require another step/phase. Idk if that's a big deal or not as far as java code goes. Sometimes stuff is real easy. As in doesn't take a lot of time to do : )

redrum

This or some for of this has been discussed a few times in the past.

Most likely if we did implement it, it would be essentially optional where you could buy without specifying place location or have a way to click on the territory where you intend to place them when purchasing (mostly would just be a way for players to more easily purchase and track where they intend to place). Then when you actually have placement phase, it would default to placing those units where you indicated but you could always undo and place elsewhere.

simon33

@redrum said in Rework Purchase Units...:

This or some for of this has been discussed a few times in the past.

Most likely if we did implement it, it would be essentially optional where you could buy without specifying place location or have a way to click on the territory where you intend to place them when purchasing (mostly would just be a way for players to more easily purchase and track where they intend to place). Then when you actually have placement phase, it would default to placing those units where you indicated but you could always undo and place elsewhere.

I don't see much merit in having such a facility if it is optional for the players. However, if it's optional at a map maker level (perhaps allowing a map option to use it) then it opens up possibilities which make total sense. Strikes me as a limitation in the A&A games that you can buy something intending to use it in one place but then (say if a battle goes against you) mobilise it somewhere else.

One thing which does irk me about the place units phase is that for powers with only one potential place they can mobilise it still asks me whether I want to do it, even though mobilising is mandatory.

i have no problem with the idea of a placement cost because that has no effect on existing maps. My guess is that it would work like Edit|Add Units.

Cernel

Of course, the fact that you have to decide what you are producing before rolling the dice, but you don't have to decide where you are producing it, doesn't make sense, realistically speaking (extreme example, for v5 or v6: you buy 1 battleship before rolling the dice, but decide if you are building it in the United Kingdom or in India only when you mobilize it (beside the fact that India was not able to build battleships, for real, of course)).

Having a way to determine both what and where, instead of only what, before rolling the dice for the turn, has my moral support, but now it is becoming very unclear if this topic is only about usability or about adding a custom rule (for realism or whatever).

simon33

The other arguably extreme example is producing a CV which is the only landing spot for an attack but then placing it elsewhere.

Hepps

@simon33 You could probably achieve this in the current engine by moving the purchase and place phases to the beginning of a turn. But instead of buying units you buy a placeholder unit for each individual unit type. You would place those holder units beside the respective factory then add triggers at the end of the turn that changes those into real units.

simon33

Wouldn't that need triggers in every territory which could accommodate a factory? Or not?

Hepps

@simon33 Yup

simon33

So possible, but unwieldy. I suspect you also need a separate trigger for every type of unit. So if you have 13 unit types as in Global 1940, and I estimate 30+ territories, 390 triggers.

Cernel

@simon33 No. You just need those units producing the final units (at end turn). Then, you just need a general trigger per player, removing them anywhere from the map. I'm actually doing something like this in a map I'm making, but, of course, this is a work around. Also, there is at least the matter of placing in hostile sea zones, if not placing in your territories with enemy units in them (in case the map has politics). In my game, they are just like the regular units, except that cannot move. You could also doing it by having all units at movement 0, but receiving a movement bonus during CM, as long as the new units are placed after that (in this case, no triggers needed, but the battlecalculator won't work well).

simon33

You know, this could be really easy. Just set the movement to zero when placing. Can't see how that would break any existing map. Then that re-raises the issue of why purchase and place have to be different.

Hepps

@simon33 I would probably find it really annoying to have all kinds of units on the map I can't move. Now I'd have to remember all my purchases and where I had placed them. A situation that would be even more complex if you already had a bunch of units in the same territory as where you have a factory and are placing 0 movement units.

The other issue is whether you could have placed units with zero movement while all the existing units (very same units) would retain their movement? I'm not even sure that is possible.

Cernel

@simon33 said in Rework Purchase Units...:

You know, this could be really easy. Just set the movement to zero when placing. Can't see how that would break any existing map. Then that re-raises the issue of why purchase and place have to be different.

Beside risking breaking some existing map that might have a same turn with placement then combat move (I cannot think of any), sure.
I would welcome the following 3 changes:

Units are immobile as default, and get the ability to move (of their movement value) at the same moment they would get any movement bonus (default at start of Combat Move).
You cannot purchase units that have cost=0, but when you are in the placement phase, you are free to place infinite of those units (say, just like if you bought a million of them, at no cost, during a preceding purchase phase).
You can assign placement costs to units (working like fuel costs, but for placing the unit).

Then, here you go, you just need having all units at cost 0, set their costs as placement costs, not having any purchase units phase, but just a placement phase at any point after combat move.

As a matter of usability only, you could add a remaining movement value for each unit, displaying like the stack number (maybe using Roman numerals, to distinguish it from the stack number itself), that would be basically good for tracking aircrafts movement anyways.

Cernel

@Cernel To be clear regarding displaying remaining movement, if you would have a stack of 3 fighters, one with 4 remaining movement and two with 0 remaining movement, instead of displaying them as 1 stack with stack number 3, you would display them as two stacks, one with stack number 2 and no remaining movement number, and one with stack number 1 and remaining movement number IIII (if using Roman numerals (I much prefer "IIII" over "IV")) or remaining movement number 4, with some way of distinguish it from the other numbers (stack number and damages).

simon33

@Hepps said in Rework Purchase Units...:

@simon33 I would probably find it really annoying to have all kinds of units on the map I can't move. Now I'd have to remember all my purchases and where I had placed them. A situation that would be even more complex if you already had a bunch of units in the same territory as where you have a factory and are placing 0 movement units.

The other issue is whether you could have placed units with zero movement while all the existing units (very same units) would retain their movement? I'm not even sure that is possible.

I understand what you're saying. Ideally, these new units would be invisible until the end of the turn which increases the complexity. Also, they need to not be granted movement at the start of combat movement, if you are playing a map with purchase before combat movement.

Regarding the 2 stacks for different movement values, it is possible this has merit although it doesn't work this way now and would increase the clutter on the screen. Not sure if this is a goer.