 |
|
Bridges and bridges - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Tiller Operational Campaigns (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=11) +--- Thread: Bridges and bridges (/showthread.php?tid=51259) |
RE: Bridges and bridges - Al - 05-06-2009 steel god Wrote:There is actually a pretty easy (to say anyway) method of handling this if it could be coded. I think this idea was tossed around during one of the several discussions about being able to destroy bridges with airpower. If I remember correctly, the PzC team didn't want to go this route RE: Bridges and bridges - Dirk Gross - 05-07-2009 I think there was also discussion that it's not just a bridge, but the engineers are operating and/or maintaining the bridge. I have no problem with the current system. Changes could easily lead to "gamey" situations. RE: Bridges and bridges - Glenn Saunders - 05-07-2009 Dirk Gross Wrote:I think there was also discussion that it's not just a bridge, but the engineers are operating and/or maintaining the bridge. I have no problem with the current system. Changes could easily lead to "gamey" situations. Exactly. Besides, you can abandon it now - and if you built it with a Btln that can break into Coys, you can leave one coy behind. But I don't see transferring the bridge to another unit as something that will happen. And dropping the bridge as a counter won't work either - as a counter can't occupy a hexside. Glenn RE: Bridges and bridges - Steel God - 05-07-2009 Glenn Saunders Wrote:And dropping the bridge as a counter won't work either - as a counter can't occupy a hexside. Hi Glenn; The Engineer unit that builds a bridge doesn't occupy the hex side either, I was thinking if one counter could be programed to show a bridge over an adjacent hex side, than another, neutral type, counter could also be programmed that way. But you know me Glenn, I'm anything BUT a programmer. ;) Paul RE: Bridges and bridges - MasnarT - 05-08-2009 33vortex Wrote:Bridge engineers are so unpredictable. Dogs are easier to command than these unruly bastards, it seems they just sit around doing nothing! agree .... hanging some of them is the best way to make them act faster RE: Bridges and bridges - Glenn Saunders - 05-08-2009 steel god Wrote:But you know me Glenn, I'm anything BUT a programmer. ;) I guess the basic issue here is we are content with the current implementation of the Bridge Rules. We feel the time it takes to build them is OK. We feel that an Engineered Bridge would require the unit to maintain the bridge and see no need to change this to allow for Engineers to switch who controls a bridge or whay allowing two bridges to occupy a hexside would make th game better. ....if it is not broken .... just why would this change make sense? Where are the examples where the existing rules are not working right? Interesting discussion all the same but I can't see one thing I could use to convince John he should spend time and make chnages to the existing rule(s). Change for change sake doesn't cut it. Glenn RE: Bridges and bridges - Steel God - 05-08-2009 Yes, I know. In fact I was sitting here at work thinking about the thread while doing something else, and I circled myself back around to the starting point of my post and decided it was a silly idea. I mean, could it be done, well yes probably anything can be done, but why? I got to thinking that given that someone has to maintain the bridge, what I was suggesting is really already in the game in the form of a split off company (as was suggested elsewhere). Sometimes I need to say things out loud to realize the juice ain't worth the squeeze. 
RE: Bridges and bridges - The SNAFU - 05-08-2009 Glenn Saunders Wrote:I guess the basic issue here is we are content with the current implementation of the Bridge Rules. We feel the time it takes to build them is OK. Paul, I'm afraid Glenn wasnt on the west bank of the Dnepr while my bridge engineers qualified for pensions trying to build bridges.
RE: Bridges and bridges - Steel God - 05-08-2009 The SNAFU Wrote:Glenn Saunders Wrote:I guess the basic issue here is we are content with the current implementation of the Bridge Rules. We feel the time it takes to build them is OK. LOL, it only feels like a long time when you're under fire. In reality, getting them up in under 12 hours is pretty fast work. ;) RE: Bridges and bridges - Dog Soldier - 05-09-2009 sg, I think the idea of a D morale engineer handing its equipment to an A morale engineer is not valid. My understanding of such low morale engineers are they are not well equipped at all. Maybe just a bunch of guys with axes and saws who could build a rude temporary bridge of a limited span. No heavy equipment like cranes or pre-fabricated bridge modules to tie together. They might be able to maintain the bridge abandoned by the A morale engineers, but certainly not transfer a bridging capability. I think morale does play a part in the bridge attempt die roll, so such a transfer would allow one to build two bridges quickly, (the inherent A morale bridge, then the borrowed D morale bridge.) This would exceed the capability currently allowed to player in the game. Add to that thought the the consideration of bridges being built under fire by an A morale engineer unit versus a D morale engineer since the ability can be transferred as you suggest and you create an unrealistic game situation as to the overall bridging capability for a side in the campaign. Law of unintended consequences. Dog Soldier |
){kind=link}