goodwood Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 What are the game differences between assault and attack, other than a points % increase from attack to assault. (please don't say read the manual I have several times.) and I understand the difference, in real life as well. Are the flag set differently, or is just to create a greater chance for the attacker to win, becayse of the point difference. Are there more subtle differences, in the game pattern I have manage grasp, or really just a name change for attack. I guess what I am saying there isn't much difference, between the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oompa-Loompa Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterNZer Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 As i understand it the flags on an Assault map are much much closer to the back of the map. There are point differences (more favourable for the assaulter), but I am not sure what they are. I think those are the only differences.. PeterNZ ------------------ "Patriotism is the virtue of the viscious" - Oscar Wilde "Don't F*CK with Johnny Cash!" - Chupacabra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Yep, there is a bunch of differences between the two. First off, let me admit that what I will be saying is based on the original (v1.0) design, for which I wrote the manual, and that things might have changed slightly in the following upgrades (I know that the ratios have been changed recently, but am not sure anymore how exactly). An assault is the attempt to storm a well fortified defensive line, supported by bunkers, barbed wire, more artillery than normal and a lot of mines. Therefore, the defender will see the point cost of these "units" go down in an "assault" scenario. The reason why the flags are much more at the far edge of the map (as seen from the attacking point of view) is that in an assault the objective usually is to break through the fortified line, or - in other words - achieve a much deeper penetration than in an "attack" scenario. The point ratio is different (the assaulting side has more points than during the attack), assuming that it will be much more difficult to fight through a line of fortifications than conducting a more regular "attack". And that's really what the "attack" scenario is - a general advance against a defending enemy, which had enough time to dug out foxholes, but wasn't able to establish a true fortified line. "Attack" would most likely be called "hasty attack" in military jambo, while an "assault" would be something a whole division could spends days preparing for. Well, this is certainly not a complete answer, but it might clarify a couple of points, I hope. Martin ------------------ "An hour has 60 minutes, each minute in action has a thousand dangers." - Karl-Heinz Gauch, CO 1st Panzerspähkompanie, 12th SS Panzerdivision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodwood Posted January 31, 2001 Author Share Posted January 31, 2001 An assault is the attempt to storm a well fortified defensive line, supported by bunkers, barbed wire, more artillery than normal and a lot of mines. Therefore, the defender will see the point cost of these "units" go down in an "assault" scenario. Thankyou Martin for the reply, just one point you are suggesting on an assault mines and wire is cheaper to purchase, than an attack? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Yes, mines and wire should be cheaper to buy for the defender of an assault, i.e. they cost less. That might have been changed in recent patches, though - am not at home, so I can't check the game. ------------------ "An hour has 60 minutes, each minute in action has a thousand dangers." - Karl-Heinz Gauch, CO 1st Panzerspähkompanie, 12th SS Panzerdivision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasoncawley@ameritech.net Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Well, it doesn't seem to work that way anymore. The fortification types cost the same, defending in an assault or not. And the point ratios for availability options are the same too (e.g. for German infantry, 100% infantry, 60% support, 20% arty, 20% fortification). Besides the size of the attacking force, the noticeable change from battle type is just the size of the set-up zone. 135 meters on a small map in a meeting engagement, 270 meters in a probe, and more like 350-400 meters (presumably 405 but capped at half the map, it seems) in the attacks and assaults. A bigger defender's set up zone means objectives farther back, more choice of defending terrain for the defender (but still in quite a narrow area e.g. in a probe), a minor delay. The distances involved are pretty trivial compared to the ranges of the weapons, or the distance a unit moves in a couple of minutes. Below "attack", the defender doesn't have much room to set up; other than that, a more lopsided attacking force seems to be the only change. Since the "handicap" levels can change the force sizes anyway, this strikes me as less than optimal. Changed point costs for unit type by engagement type strikes me as a fine idea. I think in assaults the defender's setup zone should go up to about 100 meters from the map edge, or 200 meters at the most, to represent a trench-line like "jump off". No man's land for units in contact got quite small narrow in WW II. In a probe, I'd like to see the defender get to set up at the middle of the board, or at least to have a forward "obstacle and TRP" set up zone that far ahead. Of course, one can do some of these things ad hoc. Like, if the players wanted 800 points of defenders facing an assault, but with heavy obstacles, they could instead pick 1000 points with a 20% handicap for the attacker, but then agree the defender had to "max out" his 200 obstacle points, or whatever the actual figures are for other force types. Or, if you think trucks and halftrack type vehicles should be "cheaper" in a probe, then budget extra points using different levels and the handicap factor, but require e.g. the probe attacker to all be mounted / carried on vehicles. From the way things work now, I think it is probably better to just use "attack" and then fiddle the point ratio with the "handicap" option, than to use "probe" as it exists, because the defender's zone is just too narrow to be like an actual "probe". One man's opinion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts