Assault Rules...Outcome

[K K Rossokolski]

The Important Posts section contains a massive and passionate thread on the new assault rules. I have avoided this, because I have nothing to contribute, and even if I did would not wish to be bombed by the airfield-limited non-flying bombers, or shot down by the cross-country airborne non-submarine torpedo.

But I do ask if any concensus has been reached, and if so, what is the way ahead?

[Tide1]

Yup I understand what your saying ;) a new update will be out by 2010-2012

[Von Earlmann]

I'm not sure the assault rule is all bad.......but the variable visibility is a bomb......giving me fits trying to run a campaign.

Earl

[Huib Versloot]

The new situation is:

The assault glitches and some unintended things in 1.03 are fixed, this makes them slightly less difficult for the attacker, but I would not say they are "toned down". People who use assaults to win time and gain speed and to collect points with large captures with minimal recources, better use the old 1.02 rules by unchecking the option.

Variable visibilty is optional and available for those who like it.

I like the new assault rules and I hate armor facing and variable visibility so my optional rules would look like this:

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Yup I understand what your saying ;) a new update will be out by 2010-2012

2 years to fix the broken assault system?
2 years to make variable visibility optional?

Unacceptable! :angry:

Ed

[Von Earlmann]

The new situation is:

People who use assaults to win time and gain speed and to collect points with large captures with minimal recources, better use the old 1.02 rules by unchecking the option.

Huib,
I think this is well said...and also captures all that was wrong with the old rule..............wish I had thot of it

[Hawk Kriegsman]

The new situation is:

The assault glitches and some unintended things in 1.03 are fixed, this makes them slightly less difficult for the attacker, but I would not say they are "toned down". People who use assaults to win time and gain speed and to collect points with large captures with minimal recources, better use the old 1.02 rules by unchecking the option.

Variable visibilty is optional and available for those who like it.

I like the new assault rules and I hate armor facing and variable visibility so my optional rules would look like this:

Very nice Huib,

Any word on when this will be made available?

Thanx!

[Hawk Kriegsman]

Yup I understand what your saying ;) a new update will be out by 2010-2012

2 years to fix the broken assault system?
2 years to make variable visibility optional?

Unacceptable! :angry:

Ed

I think Gary was kidding Ed.

Thanx!

[Huib Versloot]

Very nice Huib,

Any word on when this will be made available?

Thanx!

No I have no idea but I expect within a couple of weeks or even less.
We tested these new rules and they passed, but as with any change we also have to check if everything else is still working as it should. That takes time.
Jason might be able to be more specific on a target release date.

[dgk196]

Good to hear 'Huib'! Right now, my game sits on my system unused. I look forward to this 'fix'.

Just a thought, maybe something like this could be used for all 'variable' effects changes, such as 'assault' situations..........

I think everyone is familiar with the 'set advantage slider'. You know the one with the axis on one 'end' and the allies on the other? Why not incorporate such a 'device' for 'assaults', 'visibility'. So the assault 'slider' would have say 'attacker' on one end and 'defender' on the other. Then everybody could set the 'advantage' as they saw fit!

The one size fits all approach always confused me. Everyone's abilities to conduct a given operation is always the same as each others? I would think the Russian, mass charges might fall into the 'slider' to the defenders side category. Oh yeah, you have to have a 'slider' for each side.

Any 'variable' would benefit from being able to 'detail' various aspects of the game. Say 'artillery' response time and effectiveness!?

The point being, there are other ways to introduce changes into the game and yet retain the ability of players to keep their 'version'. Not everything in 1.03 is in the 'contention' category. New unit types for instance. Maybe such things should always be brought out separately, so they don't get 'tied into' the operation revision aspects.

Dennis