 |
|
Question on tactics: Assault, assault and assault - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Campaign Series (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=8) +--- Thread: Question on tactics: Assault, assault and assault (/showthread.php?tid=43110) |
RE: Question on tactics: Assault, assault and assault - majog - 12-01-2007 How we digress.... from assaults to 1/2 tracks. What's next armor values? Need for engineers to be able to lay mines and build bridges? Claymores in DGVN? LOL I love it. RE: Question on tactics: Assault, assault and assault - Herr Straße Laufer - 12-02-2007 Hi Jorge, We did digress but, in a relevant way? If half tracks were worth more points the players might be less willing to run them around and assault with them? :rolleyes: Though any artificial means within the game engine to inhibit units would begin to draw away from the overall pleasure derived from the game? (It's why I liked the original Squad Leader and hated the "advanced" variety.)  Since you brought it up, engineers cannot lay an effective minefield or build a bridge within six minutes. Why anyone wants to see that happen in this game scale is beyond me. :chin: I think that is why there are pontoon bridges available for scenario designers to use. :cool: I do not have DG/VN loaded but, I think that historically claymores were not exclusive to engineers? For CS the game developers gave VolksGren units a higher hard attack ability due to the proliferation of "fausts" that they were given and German rifle platoons have a higher fire value due to the Mg that they were based around. At this scale claymores could be factored in to defensive values of a unit? ;) Let's keep the discussion going and not mind any digressions or branches?  
RE: Question on tactics: Assault, assault and assault - Mike Abberton - 12-02-2007 RedDevil Wrote:the random-ness is a powerful change however, many regulars would have to reinvest in their tactics to adapt to such a calamity :) I think it would bring the level of the field down to the lucky bastards pool but in all respects.. what's a game without luck :stir: RD, I agree that it would be a major change. They might be able to limit it somewhat if they made something like 65%-75% of the assaults work just about like the current system, but the rest could have varying degrees of success compared to the current system. That would keep it a viable tactic, but maybe make players a little more cautious about putting the surround units in harm's way. |
){kind=link}