End of Zombie Stacks

We've all come across that 60 unit stack of a player who's been defeated and in their rage puts all their units together and sends them on a rampage until eventually (and predictably) the AI takes over and slits it up.

I'm trying to think of an instance during WWII when a country put all their armies in one city or area or wondered around Europe or anywhere else for that matter, with all their units ... and can't think of such an event.

Here's my proposal and it has 2 parts.

Part A

1- Hard limit on number of units that can be put into a stack. Max of ONLY 10 units in a stack. Not 11 and one doesn't fight, but ONLY 10 units can be stacked. No more "Meat-shields".

2- ONLY one stack (belonging to same player) can be moving within each other's VIEW RANGE at any one time. Aircraft can't be set to Patrol over each others Blue Bubble "area of effect", but could Bombard targets in that are in your own unit's Blue Bubble "area of effect". Multiple waves of Bombers attacking same target, was normal.

3- If the same players stack enters into the View Range of another moving stack belonging to the player, then the stack faster stack keeps moving while the second (third, fourth and so on) stacks stop, and wait (same as Delay order). Once the first stack leaves the range, the new fastest of the group begin moving (faster stacks will get out of each other's way quickly hence this would be the priority).

Part B

1-All units fall into 4 categories of units, Land units, Air units, Naval Units and Stealth units.

2-Only one stack of each category can be in the same territory at the same time. Therefore you can have your stack of embarked Land units as convoys escorted by a Naval Stack when crossing water, with Air flying overhead and a stack of subs patrolling below (and that would be only way to have 4 of your stacks within sight of each other and able to move).

3-If one of your stacks (Stack A) moves into the View Range of another of your stacks (Stack B) which is NOT moving, then Stack A proceeds to move and can move through it's range unobstructed.

4-Every stack bombarded by Air units defends as normal.

5-Every stack hit by Ranged fire takes damage as normal.

Foreseeable effects.

You can walk 10 stacks of 10 units each into a city you wish to defend and have all 100 units in Stalingrad, but to leave the city, you have to do it by Splitting the main stack into smaller stacks and walking them out one at a time. While in the city, only 10 units fight, while all 100 receive damage (same as now).

You can have multiple stacks or ranged fire units move into range and attack a single target from different direction, but only one AA stack can fire at range if inside the VIEW RANGE of another stack of the same country. So you can't "Flower" arty stacks and have them all fire. Same thing for AA within range of another AA stack, only one returns fire (the one dealing most damage).

I think this would "spread" the combat out across larger area and make for more "Battles" instead of the ever so common Rage Quit abominations we see regularly.

This would Improve the effectiveness and damage that cooperating players can deal. (D-Day was a combined attack by Allied forces of USA, UK and Canada. This would help in recreating those kinds of moments.

It would turn the map into dozens of smaller Battles instead of One Huge one which just didn't happen....

General Maximus Decimus Meridius - "Are you not entertained?"

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

20 Replies

this would be historically correct, BUT, this is an incredibly stupid idea in my opinion because

one, what if you are moving your troops to the border and are the panasian doctrine, the view range would stop all your 2 units because there is a bigger stack just inside the view range,

two, what if you are strategically attacking two places with two different stacks as to have them fight on multiple fronts,

three, why would the limit just be ten, if you are so frustrated about a 60 stack then make the limit 30 or something like that, as "meat shields" are part of strategy to make a stack much harder to kill.

idk squirrel. I kinda like the stack limit idea. I’m not sure about some of the others. I especially like to have two army’s converge at once upon the same opponent.

You also have to remember that a lot of people who play this game won’t take the time to learn all that much change? Especially all at once.

Delmarva pirate-ripping, running and hiding.
Walking contradiction, partly truth and partly fiction, taking every wrong direction on his lonely way back home.

Take D-Day landings as an example. UK, American and Canadian "Armies" landed on 6 fronts. They did not all land on a single beach, overwhelm it and then just roll down the coast capturing the rest of the beaches. The area dictated how many units could land in one location at a time.

There are limited roads. Limited infrastructure to move units. There are no historical accounts of million troops showing up in city and doing some choreographed line dance as they move through each other unhindered.

Stalingrad is an example of a particularly large buildup. Now consider the withdraw of the German forces from the city during the retreat. Many of the horses they were using to move their artillery pieces were outside the city because of needing to be fed and no animal feed being available in the city. So the retreat was greatly slowed down by only being able to move out limited numbers of troops at a time.

Pan-Asian units do see farther, and yet they also move faster so would clear the area faster as well.

As for multiple stacks or units crossing paths, Only 10 units in any stack combination can move within view range of each other with the fastest ones moving first and slower ones waiting. That's the MAIN POINT of limiting how many units can be involved in an engagement at any one time.

As for people not being smart enough to figure it out... well, may I suggest they go back to finger painting and leave mommy's credit card alone?

General Maximus Decimus Meridius - "Are you not entertained?"

Lol, i still dont really like the idea, personally, but i understand that it would be more realistic to actual warfare. I feel that it would make the game even slower and stop new players from actually playing because it is taking forever because all their stacks have to wait for each other which would be confusing to people who don't know warfare very well.

Ah !...

An added bonus I didn't think of... it would slow down the game.

Nice !

General Maximus Decimus Meridius - "Are you not entertained?"

To be honest this has never been a problem.

If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there - Georgy Zhukov

While such stacking Of troops in WW2 was rare to non existent that doesn't mean they couldn't do it, just a logistic and strategic nightmare, one could point to the Japanese on the islands as the allied troops got closer to the homeland as the expected result. Overall I think you idea has too many "rules" that may hinder gameplay, although I wouldn't mind a rule that limits stacks to max of 10 each OF TROOP TYPE, so you could have stacks greater than 10 but only 10 of each troop type as an example: 10 inf, 10 at, 10 aa,10 art , ect. ect ect.

To be honest, I don’t think these large stacks are much of the problem, and there are previous threads about how to destroy these superstacks. These complicated game mechanics are bound to end up in chaos and disappointment among all the players playing Call of war.

Unless the enemy is a golder, just go around it, while they’re marching send AC/LT to capture the territory back. If they’re near the coast, bomb it with battleships. While they’re marching towards a city use a stack of AT/Infantry that’s just as large in a bunker to crush that big stack. After day 24 you are going to have nukes, so…

There are many options and using 30+ unit mega stacks aren’t a valid tactic at all, not even against AI.

Ingame name: Providence 031
Playthroughs might be coming. I will try my best to not get killed :) but if I do, pls forgive me :S .
Playthroughs have to wait, could be making one soon, or not. If not wait till next year.
Have a good game :)

rdy2rocknroll wrote:

While such stacking Of troops in WW2 was rare to non existent that doesn't mean they couldn't do it, just a logistic and strategic nightmare, one could point to the Japanese on the islands as the allied troops got closer to the homeland as the expected result.
That's exactly the point. There were troop build-ups, but the only large scale movement of troops I can think of that actually happened over a short period of time would be D-Day. Which in effect was 4 different Armies landing in 4 different territories that happen to be adjacent to each other. In effect 4 smaller operations in the same area. And that's the key, organizing huge numbers of units in the same location... a logistics nightmare, that's why it did not happen.
General Maximus Decimus Meridius - "Are you not entertained?"

dude, this would make a problem for airplanes

its much better to have say 50 planes attacking a large stack than 5 stacks of 10 airplanes

MEAT SHIELD, but i agree, planes die much too easily to non aa units.

Unless you use them in stacks of more than 20, after that they are unstoppable. Just use ranged to take out AA.

Ingame name: Providence 031
Playthroughs might be coming. I will try my best to not get killed :) but if I do, pls forgive me :S .
Playthroughs have to wait, could be making one soon, or not. If not wait till next year.
Have a good game :)

dude if i have a 20-30 plane stack (once i even had 68 when i solo won Japan HWW) no AA can stop it

100%

Ingame name: Providence 031
Playthroughs might be coming. I will try my best to not get killed :) but if I do, pls forgive me :S .
Playthroughs have to wait, could be making one soon, or not. If not wait till next year.
Have a good game :)

One kid i saw had 151 lvl. 3 interceptors patrolling around one area.

Send tons of AA into the patrol circle and watch them die like flies.

Ingame name: Providence 031
Playthroughs might be coming. I will try my best to not get killed :) but if I do, pls forgive me :S .
Playthroughs have to wait, could be making one soon, or not. If not wait till next year.
Have a good game :)

Electrio wrote:

One kid i saw had 151 lvl. 3 interceptors patrolling around one area.
yeah i think i saw a similar post of 151 ints

Providence 031 wrote:

Send tons of AA into the patrol circle and watch them die like flies.
i've never been or seen a player who makes AA

I know, it's just an example. There are tons of other ways as well.

Ingame name: Providence 031
Playthroughs might be coming. I will try my best to not get killed :) but if I do, pls forgive me :S .
Playthroughs have to wait, could be making one soon, or not. If not wait till next year.
Have a good game :)

Nobodyx2 wrote:

Electrio wrote:

One kid i saw had 151 lvl. 3 interceptors patrolling around one area.
yeah i think i saw a similar post of 151 ints
that was me who posted that lol

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

Back to Suggestions
Quick Launch