Re: Panzer Corps 2.0 - how it could look...
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:54 am
Yup, agreed to all. Would be interesting.
In thinking this new unit through, I'm wondering something. It seems that for every unit available to a player, there is usually a unit available to the opponent that counters it head-to-head. Let's just say that a Marine unit would not have an amphibious penalty. Then offshore naval bombards the attacked hex into submission, the Marine attacks and either drives back or surrenders the defender. I guess that stugIII artillery backing up the hex would be a good counter (expensive though), but if the bombardment suppresses the hex, then the unit surrenders or retreats and the Marine lands.
It's been awhile since I played Sealion. A unit landing in a vacant hex then gets to fire, right? That would make a two hex attack undefendable if the attacker has enough offshore artillery. Marine 1 drives the defender from the hex, Marine 2 lands and attacks. Like I said earlier, we would need a defender type to counter the possibly nasty new Marine counter. Then again, if you make the unit expensive enough, maybe it would be "historical" to have such a unit.
Along those lines, it would be interesting to change harbor ownership rules. Make it so that if you last possessed the harbor, you could de-bark a unit when the transport moves into it. To make a bit of a penalty, you could say that the transport would need 1 movement point or more left in order to de-bark on that turn. The only real advantage this would have would be that a unit desperately needed for defense could be de-barked right then. Kinda neat. A unit in one harbor could em-bark, move 4 hexes, then de-bark in another owned harbor. Whatcha think?
In thinking this new unit through, I'm wondering something. It seems that for every unit available to a player, there is usually a unit available to the opponent that counters it head-to-head. Let's just say that a Marine unit would not have an amphibious penalty. Then offshore naval bombards the attacked hex into submission, the Marine attacks and either drives back or surrenders the defender. I guess that stugIII artillery backing up the hex would be a good counter (expensive though), but if the bombardment suppresses the hex, then the unit surrenders or retreats and the Marine lands.
It's been awhile since I played Sealion. A unit landing in a vacant hex then gets to fire, right? That would make a two hex attack undefendable if the attacker has enough offshore artillery. Marine 1 drives the defender from the hex, Marine 2 lands and attacks. Like I said earlier, we would need a defender type to counter the possibly nasty new Marine counter. Then again, if you make the unit expensive enough, maybe it would be "historical" to have such a unit.
Along those lines, it would be interesting to change harbor ownership rules. Make it so that if you last possessed the harbor, you could de-bark a unit when the transport moves into it. To make a bit of a penalty, you could say that the transport would need 1 movement point or more left in order to de-bark on that turn. The only real advantage this would have would be that a unit desperately needed for defense could be de-barked right then. Kinda neat. A unit in one harbor could em-bark, move 4 hexes, then de-bark in another owned harbor. Whatcha think?