At the top of each scenario page, there is a “FORMATIONS” banner listing all units involved in the scenario and the unit's insignia if available. The best examples are in the older games.
At present, the Formation feature is not being maintained. There are a few reasons for this. Gauging the interest in the feature will help prioritize its future.
Question: Do players find the Formation feature useful or interesting?
Answer 1: Yes, but not in an active sense.
Answer 2: Yes, I find active uses for it. (Explain in reply.)
Answer 3: No, not really.
(02-10-2020, 03:14 PM)saracv3 Wrote: [ -> ]At the top of each scenario page, there is a “FORMATIONS” banner listing all units involved in the scenario and the unit's insignia if available. The best examples are in the older games.
At present, the Formation feature is not being maintained. There are a few reasons for this. Gauging the interest in the feature will help prioritize its future.
Question: Do players find the Formation feature useful or interesting?
Answer 1: Yes, but not in an active sense.
Answer 2: Yes, I find active uses for it. (Explain in reply.)
Answer 3: No, not really.
Can I do a 1.5---I have on occasion looked at home spun scenarios and the data is valuable. and maybe you should create a poll?---there's an app for that.....
Thanks for posting the poll, saracv3. I've always wanted to do more with the formations than we have here at PG-HQ. There are an awful lot of them.
(02-10-2020, 09:56 PM)Shad Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for posting the poll, saracv3. I've always wanted to do more with the formations than we have here at PG-HQ. There are an awful lot of them.
I use the formations to improvise battle games or campaign games in older games. I also find it useful if I'm reading a unit history and want to see if engagements are covered in PG.
Quite awhile back, my cousin and I played through The Path of the Ivy Division: The Adventures of Harry and David. It was a series of scenarios based on the U.S. 4th Infantry Division's appearances, taking the most current scenarios in the case of duplicates. Harry and David were C&C creations, along with a couple of Germans, for continuity between scenarios. With the list, Harry and David fought their way out of Normandy, bagged SS troopers in the Falaise Pocket, broke the Siegfried Line, and deflated the Bulge. Both were wounded at some point, one of them severely. One finished as a captain, the other as a major.
I voted for #2. I think there is an informational use for the page and its stems, and well, it’s just plain cool. If we didn’t have Formations as a tool we wouldn’t have the associative analytics that it brings by compiling various units records in scenario plays. Of course, history is revised here. One of the great uses for the page is to find out if units fulfilled their historical records. Peter is doing exactly that by playing the 4th Division campaign. He says it takes a serious geek to this informatics for its own sake. Yup.
And I find the visualization of the Formations list to be especially colorful because of the look of the page. The addition of insignias is particularly nice. I realize, however, that all of this is a significant amount of work. It may be dropped in favor of other neat projects like our upcoming tournament. Or at least pushed back a bit.