Dog Soldier Wrote:I think the idea of a D morale engineer handing its equipment to an A morale engineer is not valid. My understanding of such low morale engineers are they are not well equipped at all.
And I must respectfully disagree Brian. The morale of a unit (IMO) represents that units performance based upon historical record, and not it's TO&E. An Engineer unit morale of A is the TO&E equivalent of an engineer unit morale of D. It's the unit's esprit that is different, not it's tools. I understand there can be exceptions for ad hoc units occasionally, but on an exception basis only. I am pretty sure that at least in the US Armies in WW2 TO&E for units were standardized and one battalion was the same as another, yet in the game you will still find them rated everything from A morale to at least D morale. But regardless of my opinion on that, the engineer ability in the game is abstract. If unit A can build a bridge with said equipment than unit B could too. And if some Engineers only have "Axes and Saws" to build bridges with, they should be able to build more than one bridge, but I'll stop myself from going down that rabbit hole.
I'm the biggest proponent there is of "rationalizing" game functions to accept the limitations of units; and I readily accept that some things won't get programmed because "the juice ain't worth the squeeze" but in purely logical - non-game - terms, the idea that an Engineering unit can't have it's bridging equipment passed over to another unit hurts my head. There are uncounted cases of units handing over equipment to other units in WW2. So I accept that we can't do it in the game, but to tell me it makes no sense, sorry but I don't buy that.
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
