The Competition & Teaser Thread

[jimcrowley]

We have removed supply changes in a scenario for all units other than artillery. Units can be setup as low ammo or low fuel at the beginning of a scenario by the designer and they will roll to recover during play.

The rationale is that in periods of a day or less units would be carrying enough ammunition or fuel to handle combat conditions. Some of this was driven around the justification of units not going low ammo when isolated.

Artillery on the other hand could run out of ammunition more quickly and that has the potential to become unavailable at various times. This reflects both the size of the ammunition and the more finite size of supplies.

As mentioned this may still change, but it's not an issue in the battle covered as there were few if any documented supply shortages.

Finally, a word on supply sources. They are in the game primarily to determine supply of artillery ammunition as well as determine isolation. Being isolated will still drop a unit one morale class. This is viewed as the 'psychological' effect of being cut off. The removal of low ammo when isolated ensure that it isn't a drop of two morale levels.

David

I'm trying to get my head around the implications of no 'low ammo'

My worry is that platoon level units can be 'scattered' around the map - essentially out of command - and, unless isolated, will receive no penalties. Could this not lead to unrealistic deployments.

Also, even if isolated, units will still not suffer low ammo? In PzC, if memory serves, the turn after being surrounded, i.e. 2hrs, isolation kicked in, with all the attending negatives. An isolated unit, if it fired, would incur a low ammo penalty.

Potentially, a platoon sized unit not in command and surrounded, could last, ammo wise, for 40 turns (max size of provided scenarios) or 20 hrs. Hmm...really not sure about that.

I'm just concerned that this may contribute to a greater lack of emphasis on C&C. Perhaps there was no mention of ammo shortages in this battle because both sides were on top of their organisational game, so to speak.

I would always favour something that makes life a little more difficult for the player if it more closely corresponds to the realities that C&C imposed on commanders. I know it is a fine line between game and simulation but, especially if you are aiming at historical accuracy, edging closer to simulation is preferable IMO.

Just my two penny worth.