Chuck10mtn Wrote:Oh my GOD, here we go again.Who started this thread he should be court marshaled. I know that the xtreme assult isn't perfect but it is a far cry better than the old automatic surround, disrupt, capture. As someone earlier said I think that when you have one group rushing to assult another a lot more losses should be taken on both sides. If the losses were greater for the attacker win or lose it wouldn't be such a big offensive stratagy. I have a hard time seeing how the game takes longer, its still only X number of turns. I believe the exteme assult is closer to reality than the old assult rules were. Just my opinion on the subject.
Chuck
Cuck,
I am not saying that I want to remain with version 1.02 assault disrupt and overrun. And, some do find that just as realistic "within the scale and concept of the game" as others who see version 1.04 as "realistic".
I think 1.04 can balance an unbalanced scenario. But, that makes the point that the Extreme Assault rule changes the game dramatically.
If, like me, a player thinks that Extreme Assault slows the game down and is unrealistic, why do we have to accept it?
What about making a simple formula to create a "mild" option. Something inbetween?
I'm sure that the code exists and could be easily plugged into an update. Hell, it could even be offered as a "mod" if they wanted to.
Forcing the use of Extreme Assault is not the way to go. But, it seems that it is the way they want to go?
I'm glad someone brought this up and so many others are making their opinions public.
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
