@froodster:
Just curious, what would a “reverse infantry” be worth to you - a unit that attacked on a 2 but defended on a 1. Also 3 IPCs? for 4 you get a unit that does 2/2 plus boosts your Inf, so it would have to be less than that. However, attacking is better than defending (?) so it should be more than 3.
Okay, maybe that would be a dumb unit.
What about for 2 IPCs - what kind of unit would you expect for that? that could be a neat little twist. Or for 1 IPC. A 1/0 or a 0/1 unit?
What about for a 1/1 unit that could move 2 spaces? Or a “wall” unit - it would not attack or defend, but take one hit to kill and it couldn’t move in combat, and only in NCM with an Inf to pull it along (engineers or whatever).
The wall unit (0-0-0) at a cost of 1 IPC is interesting. Add the requirement that it only can be moved in conjunction with an INF and there can never be more wall units in a space than the IPC value of the space. Also make the wall unit fill a space on a TRAN as if it were ART or ARM.
What you really have is a “two hit” INF unit that is stacking limited for the price of an ART unit. This can represent an INF army that has greater supply support and is better able to handle attrition in combat. The space on the TRAN now represents the additional supplies and manpower this HVY INF unit needs. The stacking requirement really points to the need for a good infrastructure in order for the unit to be effective in combat. All those extra supplies and manpower reserves are only effective if the local road grid can get them where they are needed.
You may need to up the price to 2 IPC for game balance…
Of course, if we really want all this additional complication, we don’t we just play France 1940 by Avalon Hill? :-D