Kuniworth Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Anyone knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exel Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 I sure hope so. It would allow real amphibious invasions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1 Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 I agree. I want something better than pound pound pound pound pound, oh I have a hole now. I also need a better simulation of breakthrough and exploitation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yohan Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 I agree, and not only for invasions, how about paradrops? They might be a tad ugky w/o a retreat option. I would like to see it for regular combat as well but not sure how this would effect play balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted April 14, 2004 Author Share Posted April 14, 2004 Well for me it's more a question of history. Many corps and armies were never totally destroyed just reorganized, reinforced and sent in again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zappsweden Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 The problem with destroyed units is that the basic L0 units cost TWICE as much to build that to reinforce 10 strength points. That big difference make it so profitable to kill off units instead of gaining strategic ground. U get the experience+kill experience+hq experience+the huge MPP it cost the enemy to build a new unit instead of reinforcing. if it cost 50% more to build compared to reinforce instead of the current 100% I owuld be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts