Assault Rule opinion poll

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Once again. If you are tired of my defense of the old rules please do not read further.

Alert Alert Alert Do not read below this point or complain that you did afterwards.
****************************************

Therese nothing wrong with the new assault rules..move on!

First off, Sir, there are major problems with the new close assault rules.

Secondly, do not stifle the voices of those who disagree with your assessments on the subject, or that of the "corporate line" that is being forced upon us.

The new assault rules allow for more cheesy play than the old rules did. If you cannot see that or have not experienced it yet, that is not my problem. If you wish to cut and paste every defense of the new close assault rules then you will be answered along with them.

"The assaults rules work fine if you get an armor an engineer/infantry to work together just like you properly should..."

Total Bovine Excreta by whomever claims this to be true. It is absolutely not true. I have had situations where multiple units of infantry, engineers, and armor were used over multiple turns to capture one strength point enemy units that were surrounded, out of supply, disrupted, and assaulted by multiple units from multiple hexes.
It happened in games on more than one occassion.
Recently I had to resort to just shooting the unit to death instead of assaulting it.

Many turns and Action Points were wasted. I was told that I should not have been so foolish to use so many units to take out an enemy that should have been by-passed. Right!
Oh, the realism in either action? :rolleyes:
I will no more allow an enemy to remain in my rear area, near victory hexes or artillery parks, as I am moving forward, than I would allow the enemy to drive up and take them when I am defending.
And, with the knowlege of the "realistic" artillery spotting rules there is even more reason to "take out a unit" than simply by-pass them?

"I think scenarios designed using TS version EF 1.03 and WF Gold and RS Gold might be more affected..that being said. Were not talking about adding 5-10 turns to those scenarios..maybe 1-3 turns max if any...so its easier if people just evolve and adjust their tactics."

More BS. We were told that the scenarios were not effected. Now you are talking about the scenarios being changed to help with the new assault rules. *shakes head* Truly this is a display of the fact that the new close assault rules do have a major impact on the scenarios.
This is not about adjusting tactics. This about changing the game that everyone played for 8 years?
That is the truth of it.

"If you dont like it play 1.02 till the close assault rule bugs are fixed, theres a few people still out there with it.

and Move on..get over it!

Osiris "

I'm sorry that a bunch of players (or just a few) did have trouble with the surround and assault that players used. It sure did not seem to be a major topic of conversation on the forum since I've been at the Blitz. If you could not learn to prevent surround and overrun you "lost". Now you have to remake games to fit the new rules? And, the new rules do not allow for more "realism". They just add new "cheese" that we will start hearing complaints about?

Please, do not come onto these forums and tell us to "shut up and move along." I certainly will not do that.
This game has been fundamentally changed by the new Close Assault rules. In my opinion for the worse.
I was willing to compromise to find a "realistic" solution between the old and the new. But, your comments amount to telling us that you poured crap on our food and you now want us to ignore the smell and eat hearty?

If the new assault rules work so well, and the two new rules of Variable Visibility and Close Assault are bringing the "realism" that everyone was crying for ... for soooooo long, then why is Matrix scrambling to fix what they did? Not just the bugs, but, by toning them down and making them optional.
Why did they scramble to fix the visibility rule when it first came out in the unofficial version 1.03?

If you think the AI is now so tough when using the close assault rules, then you can choose that rule when you play the AI in the future. Playing against a human will only bring on more cheesy play and cries later for fixing the new rules.

These new rules were to bring in "realism". They failed. Matrix and the crew are fixing the problems. If I hear otherwise, then I may just walk away and let you have your new "realistic" rules that seem to help the AI.

And, for what it is worth, I welcome all comments and ideas. I wish everyone would.