Quote:Hello SAS,
Yes I'm ready and eager to join in, I've been bashing away at the AI for weeks now and am getting better all the time. I have years of miniatures experience behind me so am not a complete tactical novice. Also I'm not working due to ill health so have all the time in the world to tackle turns.
Cheers,
Iain
OK, I can agree on that, but you can enter only when first round of battles is over. Start reading public part of campaign subforums, I will assign you to one of the sides on days.
Quote:Not for just inhumane reasons at all.
I just don't think it belongs in a tactical battle in scope of this game.
Maybe a strategic game where you have divisional formations to wipe out with no effects on your own,but a unit based battle(realisticaly would ever they be used?) and just way too close in, and how would one implement those things?.
First of all, this campaign is made on specific basis, this means units are descaled, tank division becomes tank brigade/regiment and so on and so on. So, theoretically we command all the forces and it is only us who make any decision on the front, only with STAVKA and SHAPE over our heads.
Notice, because you have access to NATO subforums, that cost of singular use of chemical and nuclear weapon is equal or greater than bringing in medium-equipped unit on a battlefield. This means that option CANNOT be overused. Furthermore, mentioned STAVKA/SHAPE and block your usage fearing of escalation. And finally, such weaponry will delay or destroy only a part of a formation, it will not wipe out entire provinces, their population and armies. This option is to make life of one side easier, not changing the course of everything. So In my opinion, if you fear WMDs will ruin the game, I can assure you it is NOT going to be like it. Especially, as GM, I will apply logical limits to have it running properly.
And finally, political reaction will be included. If one decides for heavy WMDs usage, one shall remain without freshly commited troops or trust from high level leadership.