 |
|
The problem is not the assault rule - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Campaign Series (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=8) +--- Thread: The problem is not the assault rule (/showthread.php?tid=48777) |
RE: The problem is not the assault rule - umbro - 01-08-2009 Chuck: I think that the general ideas being presented on artillery spotting do not require new units (though some have been mentioned) but rather a more realistic handling of current battlefield omniscience. umbro RE: The problem is not the assault rule - FM WarB - 01-08-2009 umbro, Exactly, and I don't claim to have all the answers. As change may be in the wind, I thought I'd chime in. Warren RE: The problem is not the assault rule - K K Rossokolski - 01-08-2009 This thread has been around for quite a while. I refresh memories on my post #25 and a couple associated with it. I too sense a change in the wind. RE: The problem is not the assault rule - Chuck10mtn - 01-09-2009 I only mention it because, that once we start to mess around with the way the the game is played or how the game mechanics work we end up with 2 catagories of gamers. The we like the new change ( extreme assult ) and those we think it has changed the way we play the game ( new assult rules too extreme ) . People have played with the arty rules as they are since the game started. Back when the 1st east Front on campaign mode froze up before you could finish it. Ok the change won't be a new counter so does that mean all the xtras that I mentioned couldn't be done without counters,up to the President showing up in a plane. Lets continue to update the graphics make the counters look better and you could even add the blood running from the tank after it explodes, but lets leave the game as it is for now. Soon we will add, modify and update to a point that all the scenarios that are in the data base are obsoleite. Chuck RE: The problem is not the assault rule - K K Rossokolski - 01-09-2009 Chuck10mtn Wrote:Soon we will add, modify and update to a point that all the scenarios that are in the data base are obsoleite.Very good point. I think many of the extant scenarios will have suffered that fate already, certainly those containing trucks...a substantial majority, I suggest. Perhaps some time might be devoted to fixing some "improvements" such as the joke airfield bombers* and the :censored: imbecile bathtub "navy". I personally would be more than happy to place a lifetime's professional practical experience in these fields at the disposal of the appropriate agency to to try and get done something right about these pathetic fiascoes. *Not a bomber as much as a fixed non-flying anti-gravity long range bomb projector. RE: The problem is not the assault rule - FM WarB - 01-09-2009 From this morning's Blitz welcome screen: "Prejudice against innovation is a typical characteristic of an officer corp which has grown up in a well tried and proven system. - Rommel " Timely, or what? How many versions of HPS Operatinal series have been sold, and how many optional rules do they have? RE: The problem is not the assault rule - Steelrain60 - 01-12-2009 I have been playing CS since 1998 and have LOVED the game since then. However, that does not mean I want the game to remain static. There are aspects of the game that I would love to see improved. Universal spotting for artillery by all combat units is definitely one of them. I agree, however, that adding new 'spotting' units is not the best answer. Like Montgomery, I like a tidy battlefield. Modifications to allow only certain units such as commanders, first platoons and HQs gets my vote. The idea of having platoons only able spot for their arty (ie spotting for the organic company mortars) is a great idea as well. RE: The problem is not the assault rule - The Rattler - 01-12-2009 Maybe those experienced in the naval/air aspect can hook up with Jason Petho and thrash out some ideas....i do like air and sea units in the game but the game engine was not really designed to incorporate these which is where the problem arises. RE: The problem is not the assault rule - K K Rossokolski - 01-13-2009 the rattler Wrote:Maybe those experienced in the naval/air aspect can hook up with Jason Petho and thrash out some ideas....i do like air and sea units in the game but the game engine was not really designed to incorporate these which is where the problem arises. My offer is already on the table...see #55 above. RE: The problem is not the assault rule - Von Earlmann - 01-14-2009 FM WarB Wrote:From this morning's Blitz welcome screen: I'm not sure what your point is here but, I suspect Rommel was being critical and not comlimetary of the tried and proven system since he was one of the innovators of armored warfare and had to have been talking about the infantry oriented trench warfare system...........but maybe I'm wrong about that. |
){kind=link}