A case for Delayed Disruption aiding attacker

[raizer]

As the russians, I am better off if my opponent cannot immediately know if his A/B qual arty is disrupting me as he is shooting me. If by chance he gets good shots at my adjacent units and knows instantly if those adjacent units immediately disrupt, what does that enable him to do? Immediately move on to the next unit in the stack, with the hopes of disrupting them. As the russians, in Moscow42, in the scenarios I have played, I would rather the german defender have to guess if he disrupted those units or not, which prevents him from moving on to the next unit, disrupting those and then me having to hope for a about a 30% chance of a rally on my turn, and that is with no fatigue. I don't need the feedback because, as you have said the german in usually spread out, I am moving a stack adjacent to one maybe 2 units max (the other unit an AT gun under 3 guns) simply to assault next turn.

If you read my post I am talking about the winter scenarios in M42 only-nothing else. Delayed disruption reporting would screw over the germans in bluge 44, where they are pressed for time, on congested roads and all those US Engineers around blowing bridges, it would screw them over in F40 and any of a number of scenarios, but in these few scenarios in M42, with the russian assault tempo so key to achieving anything, due to the 1 hex per turn movement of infantry, I think its not a rule that it is necessarily just an aid to the german defender.

I am just talking about Moscow 42 winter scenarios that I have played- Vaslov heads W and Kaluga-nothing more. Maybe check them out and see what you think. I also said I am testing this currently with Sgt Fury, so it is not something I am arguing is crystal clear yet.