Open General Forums

Heavier, certainly more difficult to implement, maybe even impossible, but I still put it out here since it's something I'm tripping over quite often:

Is it possible to increase the unit limits in OG?

I'm talking about the 400 units, and also the 15 leaders.
The reason to do so would be the (not so) new 3k and (even worse) XXL maps: You can't really cover them with only 200 units, given you need to divide this number by infantry, artillery, AAs, ATs, tanks, fighters, various bombers, and so on. Then you need to fortify strategic points, set up reserves for counterattacks, set up waves of future reinforcements, and so on.

Note the 400 units limit is the most pressing. The 15 leaders is just a pet peeve of mine, I think 15 is a little stingy for a 100+ units core army. You actually get them all in the first 2-3 scenarios, and that's that then. And if you got one you don't like/use, well, sucks to be you.

As I wrote elsewhere, "OG has outgrown its ancestor. With huge maps and the corresponding big armies (no way you can handle an XXL map with 20 units!) those limits should be increased correspondingly. What was plentiful for 1997 PGII is not nearly enough for 2023 OG."

I'll put this here too, just for the record:


Could we have a healer perk for airplanes? Much like the existing one, but healing airplanes?

I'm thinking about a second checkbox in Open Suite, like the existing one to heal ground/sea units, but this time to heal airplanes. It would work exactly like the existing healer perk, except this one only targets adjacent units with "Air" movement. (Also only for fortifications and ground/sea transports*.)


* If the game is capable of detecting a plane inside an airplane carrier as being "adjacent" to a repair-capable transport. Else you'd need to add carriers to the list.

For details see thread viewtopic.php?f=6&t=920.

none wrote: ↑2023-08-17 10:21, Thursday Heavier, certainly more difficult to implement, maybe even impossible, but I still put it out here since it's something I'm tripping over quite often:

Is it possible to increase the unit limits in OG?

I'm talking about the 400 units, and also the 15 leaders.
The reason to do so would be the (not so) new 3k and (even worse) XXL maps: You can't really cover them with only 200 units, given you need to divide this number by infantry, artillery, AAs, ATs, tanks, fighters, various bombers, and so on. Then you need to fortify strategic points, set up reserves for counterattacks, set up waves of future reinforcements, and so on.

Note the 400 units limit is the most pressing. The 15 leaders is just a pet peeve of mine, I think 15 is a little stingy for a 100+ units core army. You actually get them all in the first 2-3 scenarios, and that's that then. And if you got one you don't like/use, well, sucks to be you.

As I wrote elsewhere, "OG has outgrown its ancestor. With huge maps and the corresponding big armies (no way you can handle an XXL map with 20 units!) those limits should be increased correspondingly. What was plentiful for 1997 PGII is not nearly enough for 2023 OG."

I can see the argument but on the other side it becomes very tedious to move so many units. In randowes Atomic campaign it sometimes takes some hours to make one reasonable move.

hoza wrote: ↑2023-08-17 13:02, Thursday I can see the argument but on the other side it becomes very tedious to move so many units. In randowes Atomic campaign it sometimes takes some hours to make one reasonable move.

Does that mean that it take hours to move one unit? That is just yout style of play i guess

A higher limit does not mean that it will be maxed out. And i am far from the current limit. In the mentioned campaign the biggest scenarios, where the AI can buy units, have around 250 units.

I think the discussion should be split from the list thread

randowe wrote: ↑2023-08-17 14:09, Thursday

hoza wrote: ↑2023-08-17 13:02, Thursday I can see the argument but on the other side it becomes very tedious to move so many units. In randowes Atomic campaign it sometimes takes some hours to make one reasonable move.

Does that mean that it take hours to move one unit? That is just yout style of play i guess

Of course not. I meant turn and if you play with combat support and support units and aircraft which fire at neighboring hexes planning takes some time.

hoza wrote: ↑2023-08-17 13:02, ThursdayI can see the argument but on the other side it becomes very tedious to move so many units. In randowes Atomic campaign it sometimes takes some hours to make one reasonable move.

Sure, it takes a long time, but then OG is not a "casual game" you play while waiting for your tea water to boil...
I routinely make (mid- to end-campaign) scenarios you need a good hour for a turn, and there are 20-30 of them. Playing OG is an investment, but that's what I like about it, if I want to just kill some time I play a game of Solitaire on my phone. (YMMV and all that)

But let's not pollute the official "Wish list summary" thread with OT talk.

I am moving here those posts related as reasons maybe controversial.

As I wrote elsewhere, "OG has outgrown its ancestor. With huge maps and the corresponding big armies (no way you can handle an XXL map with 20 units!) those limits should be increased correspondingly. What was plentiful for 1997 PGII is not nearly enough for 2023 OG."

Then here comes thew difficult question: how many total units are you thinking ?

Currently the total number is divided by the number of players, so if 2 players each one can have 800 units and if 4 players, each one can have only 200

Maybe it could be a bit different:

1. the total total number of units for all players. As units array is static no more than this value can be reached.
   Doubtless hardcoded, as the array of units is statically allocated.
2. Max number of units that each player can have. So designers could set a different units limit for each player.
   This value should be set at design time for each player.

Just an idea to start discussion.


Edited: Fixed max number of units to 800

LuisGuzman wrote: ↑2023-08-22 11:32, Tuesday Then here comes thew difficult question: how many total units are you thinking ?

Well, I'd be tempted to say "as many as possible, even if people never/rarely use them all". I mean, today's computers have enough memory to handle that, don't they? (Genuine question, no clue)

The fact is that 400 is too few for XXL (or even 3k) maps: Given the AI is dumb and can't optimize its resources, you need to give it a lot of those. And then there are the counterattacks, and the reinforcements, and all that. If you want to avoid a boring and tedious "clean one VH after the other, while the AI sits there and waits" type scenario, you need lots of AI units.
It varies between a ratio of 1:2 (small, early scenarios) up to 1:5 (late, big scenarios). Which means that for a player army of 100 (core + aux) you need to place at least 500 AI units!...

Now if I had to say a number, I would say that (at least) 100 more units per side would be good (although this is probably an entry in the "famous last words" list... Someone will eventually make an XXXL map, and we'll need even more units... ).

LuisGuzman wrote: ↑2023-08-22 11:32, Tuesday Currently the total number is divided by the number of players, so if 2 players each one can have 200 units and if 4 players, each one can have only 100

Is that a typo? Here you said the total limit is 800. And indeed, in the 3k Stalingrad map I've just finished testing OG apparently accepted the ~350 AI units I had placed.

LuisGuzman wrote: ↑2023-08-22 11:32, Tuesday

1. the total total number of units for all players. As units array is static no more than this value can be reached.
   Doubtless hardcoded, as the array of units is statically allocated.
2. Max number of units that each player can have. So designers could set a different units limit for each player.
   This value should be set at design time for each player.

#2 might be dangerous, if I understood what you mean: The total amount is fixed, but can be dynamically distributed among players, isn't it? The problem with that is, I know how much prestige I hand out during the campaign, but I don't control what the player will buy with it. Could be a single expensive unit or a dozen cheap ones... So I can't cut it too close. While I control AI numbers to the unit, I need to leave a security margin of at least 10-50 units for the player side.

#1 (fixed amounts both sides) sounds much safer, but the amount has to be high enough so you can fit the AI side into it.

So, it all boils down to the question: How much can you raise it (without making older computers explode)?

none wrote: ↑2023-08-23 10:04, Wednesday Is that a typo?ode)?

my mistake, real number is 800 (200 x 4 players or 400 x 2 player)

A case where 400 units was definitely too few: I finished some days ago making an UK invasion scenario using randowe's excellent XXL "Channel" map (#50001).

Now back in WWII the Channel was full of sea mine fields, and my sea mines being units (submarine class), I hit very quickly the 400 limit*!
I had to make some difficult and painful decisions to keep some challenge during the crossing, and still have at least some welcoming committee on the (very long) shores.
Let's just say that, due to the 400 limit, south-west England won't defended as it should be. Shocking!


* Somebody might ask why don't I use the Open Suite mines. Their big problem (besides the fact I don't know if they also work in water) is that they are visible, which IMHO totally defeats the purpose. The possibility of mines should force the adversary to tiptoe instead of charging, and if they are visible from afar they become just a minor obstacle to get around.
TL;DR: Mines should be invisible, especially sea mines.