There was this expansion kit we had to Classic A+A back in the day that had land mine units (1 IPC ea) you could place on borders of territories you owned… Every inf crossing into the territory across that border had to roll a die, 1 out of 6 was a kill and one mine was used up. It was like limited AA shots on land units but did wonders for defending France from invasions from Britain, one round we got like 4 out of 10 units amph assaulting killed. Would something like this be acceptable as fortifications?
What ever happened to Oztea’s maps? Shouldn’t he be working on a 3 territory France, now that we know it’s 3? Isn’t that what this thread is about?
@Brain:
If its a French blockhouse you shouldn’t get any shots.
lol!
What if the blockhouse simply increased the units that garrisoned it defense rolls by +1, up to ____ number of units, say 10 for example. It is mandatory that there be at least 1 INF, 1 ART there to activate it.
or…
if the blockhouse could be garrisoned by up to ______ number of units, say, twice the value of the territory, or just 6 or whatever, but they get a preemptive shot at +1 defense but at least 1 INF/ART each again to activate.
has anything like that been thrown around yet? Would mean that the defender would have to have units there to utilize it and would give an attacker second thoughts potentially about attacking, but maybe isn’t too powerful to create a defensive minded game…
Eveywhere I look I see Blockhouse debates. There are lots of tgreat ideas but I am afraid no one can agree on which idea is the best. I gueess its going to come down to what Larry decides to do.
LMFAO!
Well I guess its always been his decision anyway.
Blockhouses are a bad idea…Makes this game too deffense oriented.
As the tides of war are ever changing there will always be one agressor and one defender.
I think the best way to cover blockhouses is to allow them to enhance your units. For instance if you have a blockhouse it’s sole purpose is to protect your infantry and artillery, basically raising their defense from 2 to 3, but each blockhouse can house just like a transport, 2 infantry or 2 artillery or one of each. If you have to buy them then they can be destroyed or at least damaged, lowering their unit capacity to 1 unit protected. This way you would have to buy a lot of blockhouses which would hamper your ability to build offensive units. I say make them cost 6, that seems like a fair price for what they can do for your defense. They take two hits to destroy, but I’m wondering if the units inside should perish with the blockhouse or should they survive? What do you guys think?
I at least like the idea of it raising the defense to a limited amount of pieces. The rest I am not so sure about.
As long as you can destroy them and not reuse them…
All pieces get destroyed I am just not sure about the 2 hits
Well if the pieces get destroyed as well then it would need to take two hits. If it supports two units then it wouldn’t make sense to have two die by getting hit once. But the more I think about it I like the idea of the blockhouse and the units it supports being destroyed all together, but it needs to be two hits.
I didn’t mean that the other pieces get destroyed with it.
I think the simpliest way to model blockhouses would be to make them land AA guns. For each unit attacking, before combat, the blockhouse rolls a die and gets a hit on a 1.
This deters the trading of a territory, (just like an AA gun will), and keeps it simple. You could even make a fort piece of some sort that does the same thing to ships going threw a channel, or bombarding ships. No movement though unlike AA guns.
The problem is the AA gun can hit 10 IPC or 12 IPC units for 6 IPC.
The “land AA gun” is hitting infantry only and it should cost more than an AA gun because it represents alot more than a flak battery. It represents years of building and substantial investment to build. It should potentially be more potent and create psychological fear in the issue of the viability in constantly trading the territory to collect income. The higher cost represents the risk/reward ratio in such an investment that may or not pay off and stave off this trading. To me this is exactly what the allies faced and why in THE REAL WAR they just didn’t invade Europe every 4 months. If the land AA gun hits on a 1, it would prevent frequent landings, while 2 will.
Well said! The balance of historically accurate, vs fun gameplay is balanced that way.
I think we need a blockhouse poll
How do you start those?
Clearly there is a language barrier here. You still have not answered the question, and this has nothing to do with the original topic so let’s just drop it.
Back on topic now. What should be done about France?
