Jump to content

teutonkopf

Members
  • Content Count

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Ok, the notion of keeping it simple makes sense. There is a way to keep it simple, but make it more realistic and give more options to the player. Here is the idea: Only have 4 types of land units: Army Corps Paratroops Marines Paratroops and Marines are your special forces. Marines need to replace the current over generalized amphibious free-for-all nonsense.:mad: A tank corps making an amphibious landing? THAT NEVER HAPPENED.:confused: That never will happen. An Army making and amphibious assault? Please, give me a break. You cannot be serious.:eek: Now, back to reality: M
  2. Attached Battalions can also be transferrable to other units. If two units are not in contact with enemy units, then they can switch their attached battalions with eachother regardless of distance. This requires operational movement MPPs. If two units border enemy units and they border eachother, then they can transfer battalions to eachother. In both cases it does not have to be a 1 for 1 swap. A unit can give another unit its battalion as long as the receiving unit does not already have a battalion of that type, e.g. my infantry unit can give its tank battalion and engineer battali
  3. Attaching brigades and battalions is a good idea. Normally, an infantry unit does not have tanks. However, if you attach a tank battalion to it then that will give the unit 2 strikes. The first strike is the tank battallion spearhead supported by organic artillery (the units arty value) with infantry cover against enemy infantry. This simulates the tanks making a breakthru. The second strike is the infantry follow-up. Now that is a cool simulation of real tactics. This way, you can attach high level heavy tank battalions to infantry units which simulate the german heavy tank battalions.
  4. Here is how you can do combat engineers: allow me to allocate Corps of Engineers points to land units like HQ's, Corps, Armies, Tanks. This will give those units improvements like this: increased attack values against fortifications (abstraction of demolitions) increased ability to defend cities (abstraction of barricades, improved positions, etc.) increased defensive values (abstraction of mines, obstacles, etc.). Again, an actual engineer unit is silly. Combat Engineers or Pioneers do not take up a whole hex and should help a unit occupy a hex, NOT get in the way by taking up the whol
  5. I don't quite understand the need for an engineer unit. They don't make much sense. I should just be able to click on a tile and select to build something on it without needing an engineer unit sitting on it, or any unit for that matter. If the tile does not border an enemy controlled tile then I do not need combat engineers. In reality, civilians did all that work, and the military engineers overseeing the work certainly did not amount to a unit represented on a global map. If you bomb the tile while I'm building on it then it will mess up my construction time. You don't have to destroy
  6. Arty, AT, and AA should also be upgradeable attributes on panzer units. They would be more expensive because they would all have to be mobile armored version, e.g. Hummels for Arty, StuGs for AT, etc. Arty would increase soft attack. AT would increase tank defense. AA would increase air defense. The reason you would have AT for a panzer unit is because it would be cheaper than elite reinforcements or advanced tanks but still be a way to counter enemy armor. This would simulate the germans' shift to higher AT production as they shifted to a defensive war and demands for increased numbers
×
×
  • Create New...