(10-21-2020, 11:30 AM)HMCS Rosthern Wrote: To follow up on another chain. In this text uses the terms "vacated" and "abandoned". I think they mean the same thing. If true the text can be updated.
The defensive benefits of a fortification are cut in half whenever:
• A Fortification is vacated.
• When it is occupied by the opposite side, or
• When the defenders lose an assault but are unable to retreat.
Full-strength Fortifications have the fort type displayed in the Terrain Info Box
in ALL CAPS (example: TRENCH). Abandoned forts, or forts occupied by the
opposite side are listed in the Terrain Info Box in upper and lower case
(example Trench). Improved Positions and Trenches that have been
abandoned, can be restored to the existing full-strength status by a unit
successfully "Digging-In" again. Abandoned Bunkers and Pillboxes can never
be restored to full strength once abandoned or captured.
What is meant by this sentence? "Abandoned Bunkers and Pillboxes can never be restored to full strength once abandoned or captured.". If an unoccupied "Bunker" starts the scenario as "vacated", I can occupy it with an engineer (in some scenarios) and build a "BUNKER". That appears to contradict the sentence because it started as "vacated"/"abandoned". If I leave that "BUNKER" it reverts to "Bunker", which is "vacated/abandoned". This rules suggest that you can only change from "Bunker" to "BUNKER" once.
Thank you, this is great. Let me review and double check in game behaviour as well as standardise the language as needed.
We have also seen an issue with ferrying that I am reviewing currently.
Cheers,
David