The point of an "assualt"?

[walpurgis nacht]

From what I can tell, the only difference in an assualt is that the attacker gets a serious increase in spending power, and the defender gets fallback foxholes. This doesn't seem balanced. You can create fallback foxholes by splitting your squads at the beginning anyway. I'm assuming that I'm missing something here. What else is changed?

[ January 12, 2003, 08:04 PM: Message edited by: Walpurgis Night ]

[Björn Eriksson]

I think the defender also gets more points to spend in the Fortifications category and a "deeper" deployment zone.

[Mud]

Bear in mind that choosing different battle types can also be used to handicap, to compensate for

(a) differing skill between players (e.g. forcing the more experienced player to defend against an assault),

or

( very bad conditions. Asking an attacker to do, say, an nighttime attack in deep snow and maximum cold on a large map with only physically unfit infantry might be pretty darn unfair at the usual attack odds. (It might be pretty darn unfair even at assault odds...).

[SgtMuhammed]

It would be unfair even at "overrun" odds.

[Bertram]

As far as I know an assault has the victory flags mostly at the far edge of the map (for the attacker of course), while a probe has the flags more spread out and from about halfway the map.

Bertram

[Olle Petersson]

A recap on what Assault means, compared to the other options:

- Greater point difference (in QBs).

- Defender gets fallback foxholes (in QBs).

- Defender is well fortified (in QBs).

- Attacker needs to penetrate deep into the defense (in QBs).

- Both attacker and defender is willing to spend more ammo and take more casualties before surrendering.

Cheers

Olle

[Eden Smallwood]

...and probably only an Assault will allow defender to dig in his vehicles?

How's this for a nutshell from defender's pov:

Assault: "We're ready."

Attack: "Here they come- quit digging, lock & load!"

Probe: "Hey! Who is that?!?!"

?

Eden