I think delayed disruption is a must have in all tiller games now
(11-04-2012, 06:05 AM)raizer Wrote: [ -> ]I think delayed disruption is a must have in all tiller games now
I don't know about that; it affects scenario balance pretty significantly
(11-04-2012, 06:05 AM)raizer Wrote: [ -> ]I think delayed disruption is a must have in all tiller games now
Not in F 14: There the offense needs all the help it can get!
(11-04-2012, 06:05 AM)raizer Wrote: [ -> ]I think delayed disruption is a must have in all tiller games now
My opinion is that this rule may have a dramatic effect on scenarios with less than 20 turns, as scenarios become longer i think the effect would be less pronounced.
As none of the scenarios from the older titles were tested with this rule available it is tough to be sure?
However jonnymacbrown is correct, i would never consider using the rule in F14.
(11-04-2012, 06:05 AM)raizer Wrote: [ -> ]I think delayed disruption is a must have in all tiller games now
It is definitely a pro-defender modification, and since the PzC/MC game system favorizes the attacker/phazing player by default, it might be appropriate as standard, but I personally see it as much more of a balancing measure to use between players of uneven skill or to balance a scenario slanted in favor of the attacker. It also playes no favorites, since the defender migth be trying to hold a key hex, by disupting adjacent attackers, yet this optional rule means, that he will be unable to judge the effect of his fire.
Personally, I think for PzC and MC campaigns it is a great rule, but for short scenarios (<20 turns) it may throw it out of balance since the attacker may not have enough time to determine the situation compared to how the scenario was originally balanced.
However, like I said, I think it is perfect for long PzC/MC campaigns where there is plenty of time available, and it applies to both sides equally (defender may want to do counter attacks, and/or it does make it difficult for defender to pick an attack to pieces). :)
(11-05-2012, 12:07 PM)Volcano Man Wrote: [ -> ]Personally, I think for PzC and MC campaigns it is a great rule, but for short scenarios (<20 turns) it may throw it out of balance since the attacker may not have enough time to determine the situation compared to how the scenario was originally balanced.
However, like I said, I think it is perfect for long PzC/MC campaigns where there is plenty of time available, and it applies to both sides equally (defender may want to do counter attacks, and/or it does make it difficult for defender to pick an attack to pieces). :)
who plays short games?
Yah of course in anything less than 30 or so turns, where an attacker has to go all out, you couldn't really use it...but in long games, its a must. Esp in the France 40 campaign game. Wow that would be nice:whis:
Delayed Disruption Recognition has a place in Panzer Campaigns/Modern Campaigns. Due to unit density, camoflage, etc it is not easy to recognize a disordered status of enemy units. France '14 (before extensive entrenchments), ACW, and Nappy titles units would show their disored status readily.
(11-05-2012, 12:07 PM)Volcano Man Wrote: [ -> ]Personally, I think for PzC and MC campaigns it is a great rule, but for short scenarios (<20 turns) it may throw it out of balance since the attacker may not have enough time to determine the situation compared to how the scenario was originally balanced.
However, like I said, I think it is perfect for long PzC/MC campaigns where there is plenty of time available, and it applies to both sides equally (defender may want to do counter attacks, and/or it does make it difficult for defender to pick an attack to pieces). :)
Yup, my thoughts exactly.......
