13-03-2003 00:25									#1
	What Military Positions? Remove this text

In the current structure of the government as defined by FMK, there are 6 military commanders who will be appointed by the Marshal, the 6 intial fronts. However others have proposed seperate positions for being in charge of partisans, the NKVD, and the navy. What do you think?

	13-03-2003 00:36									#2
	Support Apolyton

I reckon that the Marshall ought to control all three of them. It seems a bit pointless to delegate such small roles out to one person a piece.

	13-03-2003 00:39									#3
	Inflate your Upload Space

It makes it a lot harder if the marshal controls the NKVD and partisan units instead of the front commanders, if the two wanted to use the irregular troops as part of a coordinated attack they would have to be constantly trading the save game, which would take forever. I almost voted no, but instead voted to leave it up to the marshal, which means he can try it, and if he hates it he can fire the little leaders and hand control over to the front commanders at will

	13-03-2003 00:44									#4
	Inflate your Upload Space

the three fronts it is very weird,
I think that a few of them can't be hold
i vote no
with three fronts we have enough, every military comander will control the units built in his cities ad will control his cities completely

this way the game will be more dinamic and funny,
too many comanders too many troubles

	13-03-2003 00:51									#5
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

How about delegating control of the partisans, navy and NKVD to a separate commander, as opposed to the marshall?

	13-03-2003 01:31									#6
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I say let the marshal use the partisans (they never acted in coordination with the armed forces anyway).

The navy should imho be up to the front commander controlling the front the naval units are in.

And having one person only controlling the few NKVD units on the map seems a bit silly

	13-03-2003 01:43									#7
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

The way we have run our armies in the Civ2DG is to have a single SMC who recommends unit placements, so that the president knows where to move the units.

Given the size of the map, I think that we should have 3 fronts, North, Central and South, a triumvirate if you will.

Partisans should fall under the control of the military commander of the front in which they occupy, as should the naval units.

Why split the task of the navy from the rest of the military?

	13-03-2003 01:47									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I think the original 6 front dividement is good.
Changing back to only 3 fronts seems to little for this big map imho.

	13-03-2003 01:53									#9
	Support Apolyton

I agree with the initial ideal of 6 Fronts. This can change with time, as it did in reality with perhaps new Fronts opening up as the strategic situation changes

	13-03-2003 02:01									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

6 fronts seems good.

	13-03-2003 02:34									#11
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Henrik Changing back to only 3 fronts seems to little for this big map imho.

not to mention fewer positions for people to be in.

	13-03-2003 02:51									#12
	Get a bigger avatar today!

it would be nicer to have enough people to vote and 6 comanders,
but look at how many people voted, only 8!!
and at the comunity we are only 9
it is going to be very difficult to be more than 10 people posting regularly at the forum

	13-03-2003 02:52									#13
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The Marshall should decide!
This is the era of Stalin afterall.
6 Fronts for the army seems right for this scenario. I think th marshal should have control of the partisans NKVD units and mabe the navy: this is more historicaly accurate, the NKVD never took orders from military commanders. However the Marshal should be totaly free to deligate/assign them to front commanders: if they want to use them in a co-ordinated offensive or whatever.

	13-03-2003 03:50									#14
	Got spare money?

Of course, I saw it this way initially, so I do like the 6 front idea. I'll take some screenies in a minute to illustrate. NKVD... I suppose the Marshal could move them, but really thay arent very numerous and they are killer on defense. I would prefer Front commanders get control of them as they will really need them.

I am generally able to, when playing in SP mode, to initiate an attack on Warsaw from the Pryapt with Partisans well before the 'Uprising' events. If not before, I genrally capture said city during the uprising at the very latest. I would'nt mind the Marshal having a go at that, or whatever. Genrally the area of highest concentration for partisans is the Pryapt marshses, so the commander closest to them would have control over most partisan activity if the Marshal can't be bother to play them.

-FMK.

	13-03-2003 05:08									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

let the marshal setup that if he wants, he can waste his own time

	13-03-2003 06:32									#16
	Suffering from ads?

I go for six fronts!

	13-03-2003 21:28									#17
	Tired of ads?

6 Fronts sounds good to me!

	13-03-2003 23:50									#18
	Remove this text

quote: it would be nicer to have enough people to vote and 6 comanders, but look at how many people voted, only 8!! and at the comunity we are only 9 it is going to be very difficult to be more than 10 people posting regularly at the forum

For this reason we should cut back on the number of fronts. Give people more to do, but they will have to do it well.

	14-03-2003 01:22									#19
	Got spare money?

Keep the six fronts, we have 20+ registered members.

	14-03-2003 02:24									#20
	Increase the size of your Attachments

6 fronts... hopefully there wont't be too much bureacracy. In any case the Marshal can sack them later on...