HQ: Rule Change Consideration

Thread Modes

HQ: Rule Change Consideration

10-10-2006, 10:22 AM,

Dave68124 Offline

Skaff

Posts: 38
Joined: Jun 2001

RE:��HQ: Rule Change Consideration

CptCav Wrote:I would like to see the penalty for losing a HQ be the disruption of all units assigned. Furthermore, they could not become undisrupted until a replacement HQ came on to the map.

In the case of a superior HQ being eliminated, I would have all subordinate HQ's be hit with a OUT OF COMMAND penalty until a replacement HQ showed up.

Regards,
CptCav

PS, I like what I am reading on the new command rules change being implemented.

I would agree with the penalties, but I would disagree with having to come on from the map edge (if I am reading it correctly). The maps are so large it could be even a bigger burden to get the HQ back in range, plus code logistics of putting a HQ on the map edge v. in with another unit as it occurs now. On top of that and at least in modern terms, there was always a back-up HQ or 'jump TOC' or 'Advance TOC' that was set up just in case Arty found the main TOC.