• Blitz Shadow Player
  • Caius
  • redboot
  • Rules
  • Chain of Command
  • Members
  • Supported Ladders & Games
  • Downloads


MC Changes
02-02-2008, 01:14 PM,
#19
RE: MC Changes
Another way to look at things along the lne of what both Ed and Rick are saying is this.

Consider two hexes - both with West German Inf Btln in them. And both are facing a equal size\strength\Quality attacker.

Hex #1 has a Combined Btln
Hex #2 has the same Btln in three Coys.

If the game treated fire on the coys completely equally then when fire was taken with the same "Die Roll Result" killing "X" men with "Y" BF, if there was no Coy BF then the Btln would really be penalized because the entire unit is fired upon and suffers from the BF. While the hex with the 3 Coys would have two companies in PERFECT shape and one coy with the SAME BF as the BTLN.

This would mean we could and should completely remove combined units from the game because it really would be stupid to combine - right. I mean there would be no good reason the combine and plenty of reason it never combine.

This would lead to MORE counters to move around and it is just not good for the game or the series.

COYs n the Series came about when WIg Graves created the Normany 44 OOB with detail way beyond the original BTLN concept created by Greg Smith. The abilty to split off a COY for the Germans on the East Front was found to be ESSENTIAL when we made Khakov 42 as the game simply would not work for the Germans on defense - weak places in the line formed easily and lead to holes that didn't really happen. And the RUssian player walked through them.

I had a huge discussion with John Tiller on this as recently as when Minsk 42 was created. Here again German COYS were essential and I argued the BF penality made the historical German defense extremely difficult to simulate. John kept an open mind and created the optional rule "Quality Fatigue Modifier" to counter the effect.

So clearly we need coys, we need Coy BF. And while I don't want to discourage debate on the pros and cons of what you might like to see, I just want all to understand this is not something that you will see changed.

So, if you don't want your COYs to have ZOCs - make the Platoons. If you don't want the Coys or Platoons to have added BF try the Optional Qaulity Fatigue Modifier Rule.

This is an extremely flexibly system to work with. It can't do everything but it does do many things and fairly nicely. But it is a game after all and that COYS have ZOC might be a side effect we have to live with just like ONE SIDE MOVES all units and the other side sits and does nothing. Then the other side moves. I mean how realistic is that?

So I would recommend folks try to keep things in perspective. The game just can't do everything.

Glenn
Send this user an email
Quote this message in a reply


Messages In This Thread
MC Changes - by Aaron - 01-31-2008, 06:16 AM
RE: MC Changes - by CptCav - 01-31-2008, 06:45 AM
RE: MC Changes - by Aaron - 01-31-2008, 01:39 PM
RE: MC Changes - by Glenn Saunders - 01-31-2008, 02:44 PM
RE: MC Changes - by Titan - 01-31-2008, 01:58 PM
RE: MC Changes - by Glenn Saunders - 01-31-2008, 02:38 PM
RE: MC Changes - by Volcano Man - 01-31-2008, 04:59 PM
RE: MC Changes - by CptCav - 01-31-2008, 05:14 PM
RE: MC Changes - by Ricky B - 02-01-2008, 02:09 AM
RE: MC Changes - by Aaron - 02-01-2008, 02:14 AM
RE: MC Changes - by Glenn Saunders - 02-01-2008, 12:17 PM
RE: MC Changes - by Volcano Man - 02-01-2008, 03:56 AM
RE: MC Changes - by CptCav - 02-01-2008, 09:26 AM
RE: MC Changes - by westkent5097 - 02-02-2008, 01:58 AM
RE: MC Changes - by Glenn Saunders - 02-02-2008, 02:03 AM
RE: MC Changes - by FLG - 02-02-2008, 02:26 AM
RE: MC Changes - by Ricky B - 02-02-2008, 02:29 AM
RE: MC Changes - by Volcano Man - 02-02-2008, 03:33 AM
RE: MC Changes - by Glenn Saunders - 02-02-2008, 01:14 PM
RE: MC Changes - by Glenn Saunders - 02-02-2008, 01:14 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)