This is just a thought that crossed my mind.
Wouldn't it be nice if some of your units being surrounded, let's say, would agree to lay their arms for half of their VP cost?
An option that would add a touch of realism, wouldn't it?
Dmitriy
That would be interesting. Then if you're, say the SS, or the the Japanese, you could shoot them anyway? :) I like it!!
Dave
(09-13-2010, 12:02 PM)Scud Wrote: [ -> ]Then if you're, say the SS, or the the Japanese, you could shoot them anyway? :) I like it!!
And if you're American or Russian?
LOL
I don't know about realistic but it is a tactical decision that denies your opponent full points.
(09-13-2010, 01:20 PM)junk2drive Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know about realistic but it is a tactical decision that denies your opponent full points.
Well, I mean it happening by agreement of both sides. There were situations when attacking side made an offer. Surrounded side may not agree. But if it does, it will save your SPs too, and more important will save you an extra time to move towards VPs you need to capture... Depends on situation of course.
I do not like the idea.
Taking the full points is the reward of better play?
A surrendered unit is captured - surrounded and overrun is captured. There is no difference?
I do not see capitulation as a benefit for both sides. Only for the one side.
I would not allow my opponent to do that as much as I do not allow my opponents to exit combat units to keep them from being killed or captured.
To add it for "realism" will only complicate the simple system we already have? And, I honestly believe it is not all that more real.
HSL
(09-13-2010, 07:43 PM)Herr Straßen Läufer Wrote: [ -> ]I do not see capitulation as a benefit
And what about saved lives?
s
:smoke:
Dmitriy
(09-13-2010, 09:46 PM)Skryabin Wrote: [ -> ] (09-13-2010, 07:43 PM)Herr Straßen Läufer Wrote: [ -> ]I do not see capitulation as a benefit
And what about saved lives? s
:smoke:
Dmitriy
In war? :conf:
It's about killing or capturing the enemy? :kill:
At least that is what they say? :whis:
HSL
No you should not award half SPs for voluntarily surrendering.
A loss of one of your SPs is a loss of one of your SPs. That SP is lost to you for the current battle, whether killed wounded or captured.
Also somthing to keep in mind. A loss of 1 Infantry SP does not mean all 5 guys were killed. It could mean 1 badly wounded guy and the other 4 take him to the aid station.
It is an abstract representation of the removal of 5 men (1SP) from the battlefield.
Thanx!
Hawk
(09-13-2010, 09:46 PM)Skryabin Wrote: [ -> ] (09-13-2010, 07:43 PM)Herr Straßen Läufer Wrote: [ -> ]I do not see capitulation as a benefit
And what about saved lives? s
:smoke:
Dmitriy
How did that work for the 91,000 Germans who surrendered at Staingrad?
Poorly for all but 5,000.
How did that work for the 75,000 who were captured at Bataan?
Poorly for about 20,000.
Surrendering to the enemy did not mean you saved your life.
Thanx!
Hawk
(09-16-2010, 11:48 AM)Hawk Kriegsman Wrote: [ -> ]Also somthing to keep in mind. A loss a 1 Infantry SP means all 5 guys were killed. It could mean 1 badly wounded guy and the other 4 take him to the aid station.
This is interesting. I've never thought about that.
Quote:Surrendering to the enemy did not mean you saved your life.
Well, (digging in :cool2: ) sometimes live is all about hope. What did it mean then?
Dmitriy