• Blitz Shadow Player
  • Caius
  • redboot
  • Rules
  • Chain of Command
  • Members
  • Supported Ladders & Games
  • Downloads


The Combined Arms Penalty
04-09-2021, 05:56 AM,
#25
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty
Obviously the manual needs some improvement. Here is what I would propose;



Unsupported Armour Penalty



When vehicles assault attack into non-Clear hexes, they may suffer from a lack of infantry support. If there is at least as much attacking supporting infantry as there is defending infantry, then no Unsupported Armour Penalty occurs. For attacking infantry to be considered supporting, it must be stacked with attacking vehicles and only that portion within 10 times the number of vehicles is considered.



This means that for each attacking hex, if that hex has both infantry and vehicles, the number of attacking infantry and the number of attacking vehicles times 10 are compared and the lower of these two figures represents the supporting infantry for that hex. So, if there are 10 men and 2 tanks in the hex the number of supporting infantry would be 10. But if there were 100 men and 2 tanks the number of supporting infantry would be 20. If a hex has only infantry attacking or only vehicles attacking, it has no supporting infantry.



The number of supporting infantry form each attacking hex are added to together to give the total supporting infantry. If this total exceeds the total defending infantry, then no Unsupported Armour Penalty applies. Otherwise, the number of supporting infantry is subtracted from the number of defending infantry to determine the deficit. This figure is divided by 10 (rounded up) to give the number of vehicles that are not supported. These unsupported vehicles have their assault values halved. 




Is that clearer? Any suggestions? Apart from how to spell 'armour'! Smile
Quote this message in a reply


Messages In This Thread
The Combined Arms Penalty - by Fog of War - 04-08-2021, 12:35 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-08-2021, 05:58 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Xerxes77 - 04-08-2021, 08:06 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-08-2021, 08:44 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Sir John Cope - 04-08-2021, 10:30 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-08-2021, 11:12 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Ricky B - 04-08-2021, 12:28 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-08-2021, 01:00 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Ricky B - 04-08-2021, 01:08 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Strela - 04-08-2021, 02:08 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-08-2021, 02:14 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Mr Grumpy - 04-09-2021, 05:19 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-08-2021, 02:57 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Xerxes77 - 04-08-2021, 10:20 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by phoenix - 04-08-2021, 04:45 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-08-2021, 06:15 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Plain Ian - 04-08-2021, 10:22 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Xerxes77 - 04-08-2021, 10:29 PM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Plain Ian - 04-09-2021, 01:49 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Xerxes77 - 04-09-2021, 01:56 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Plain Ian - 04-09-2021, 02:13 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Plain Ian - 04-09-2021, 02:47 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-09-2021, 04:56 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Plain Ian - 04-09-2021, 05:48 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-09-2021, 07:28 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-09-2021, 05:56 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Strela - 04-09-2021, 07:07 AM
RE: The Combined Arms Penalty - by Green - 04-09-2021, 07:26 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)