A case for Delayed Disruption aiding attacker

[ComradeP]

Well, the Moscow '42 might just be a somewhat unique or at the least uncommon case due to the gap in quality between the opposing sides. The Soviets have only 1 or 2 B quality divisions IIRC.

raizer's idea of the Germans being able to attack and disrupt Soviet units one by one is true, and it's also sort of the only thing that will keep the Germans from being grinded into a pulp through assaults initially. I'm still quite sceptical about the German chances of holding out against repeated assaults to the extent that they'll withdraw at a historical pace without that making their later defensive positions untenable.

In my opinion, a rule like Delayed Disruption Reporting mostly hinders the side that relies on superior unit quality and/or an advantage in firepower. The Soviets will have to Urra! their way across the map in any case, it's going to be bloody and it isn't going to be subtle. Their units are slow in any case. German units rarely disrupt (even though I'm seeing wildly variable results for attacks against units in bunkers, more so than against units in regular terrain). The Germans will have to use their artillery to inflict as much damage as possible whilst trying to keep their losses at an acceptable level, which is where knowing exactly when a unit is disrupted comes in as a big aid.

At the moment, I can't think of a longer game where Delayed Disruption Reporting when the attacker is at least 2 quality levels below the defender and has less mobility than the defender due to the defender having more motorized units or the terrain imposing serious movement penalties due to weather or terrain type hinders the attacker more than the defender, because the attacker will have to assault his way through the defender's line in any case. Due to the differences in quality and the chance to disrupt the opposing side, it will allow the defender to sort of "min/max" his defensive setup.