Special Rules for WinSP

[Cross]

@ Cross my work on map database has shut down for the forseable future due to RL, will try & get back to at some point but at present cant even say its on the back burner

Not a problem. Same for me, I did about 150 maps but then got disracted with other projects; and even those projects have been sidelined... I'll pick it up again some time in the future.

Thanks for the v-hex info.

It's in the rules but in short, place a minor value flag of both sides into a corner and agree that you are not allowed to capture those.

Thanks Vesku.

It is possible for a bridge to have stategic value in terms of the war but have little tactical value in a particular battle.

This is true. But it's also true that in a SP battle, a hill or bridge can have, or perhaps even should have, tactical value.

cheers,
Cross

[Imp]

Hi,

I couple of remarks on the comments.

1 Coordinated battles.
The idea here is not to have one battle a continuation of the other but to have them played at the same time.
The prime candidate is a battle on map 1 with force A having off-map artillery.
On map 2 force A would have the SAME artillery on the map as he had Off-map in map 1. Force B could then attack the artillery on Map2 any artillery units destroyed on map2 would be taken from service on map1

2 Strategic value of bridges.
It is possible for a bridge to have stategic value in terms of the war but have little tactical value in a particular battle.

EG the bridges taken by paras in the early hours of D day had great strategic value, but would have little value in a single WinSP game.

3VHs taken in the last turn.

---

3 Vhs taken in the last turn.

I think the standard Blitz rules state that such VHs only count 50%

While coordinated battles sounds good in principal it would not work to well due to slowing the game. Both sets of players would have to talk to each other to pass the info & make sure they are playing the same turn.
Chuck in timeframes life etc & this could slow play rate quite a bit IMHO.
Other option is play battle 2 first & have battle 1 players pass turn info to coordinator who mails changes if any back.

A possibly intresting option is a 2 stage battle send in recon or special forces 10 or 15 turns ahead of main force on an assault. Would be a bit boring for defender if attacker got it right & was not spotted.
Could rule his forces stay static apart from a few patrols unless contact is made.

---

[quote='Gibratar' pid='319367' dateline='1270093239']

It is possible for a bridge to have stategic value in terms of the war but have little tactical value in a particular battle.

This is true. But it's also true that in a SP battle, a hill or bridge can have, or perhaps even should have, tactical value.

cheers,
Cross

Agree with Cross here things are more likely to have a strategic & tactical value or tactical value only.

Buildings strongholds etc are more tactical value but most are both.

Control of roads esp bridges crossroads are both as allows follow on forces & supply to operate. This means hills are valuable as control of the road is only achieved if you control all hexes that could attack it.
Also gives you a good vantage point for any attempt to regain control of the road.
Flags as I said are therefore better placed on the good areas to attack the road from like a line of trees nearby or that damned hill. You are probably going to run down the road at some point anyway so perhaps just drop one by the crossroads or bridge but in my view are better placed where you would attack/defend it from.
If you control those by default you will control the road at some point where as the reverse is not true.
The reasoning I think for contested flag rule.