Curtis Lemay
Posts: 12969
Joined: 9/17/2004 From: Houston, TX Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zaratoughda There are other cases where hex-sides are more appropriate than hexes. I am thinking some of the area in Holland but I am sure there are natural situations as well. Would be nice if a game allowed both, with separate stacking limitations for the hex-side situations. I would think of Holland as a prime case for river hexes (and I’ve got some experience with that subject – see France 1944). What with all the polder, vast numbers of minor canals, and the Rhine delta, rivers hardly function as boundary-only there. The entire area they’re in is impacted. The right situation for river hexsides would be where the river area just had a straight river, and nothing else – no meandering, no ox-bow lakes, not even tributaries. In other words, no transverse features. It’s kind of like light. What is light? A particle or a wave? Well, it turns out, it’s both! Similarly, what is a river? Is it a boundary or an area? In a much the same fashion, it has features of both. In many cases, river hexsides are just too simplistic – especially at the operational level. quote:
As far as the meandering of rivers, can visualize that happenning on either side of the hex-side. But the impact of meandering is to add a transverse defensive benefit. Think of a trench system. If attackers manage to penetrate into the trenches, can they then flank the entire trench? Not if it’s been properly designed. Well-designed trench works are prepared against flanking via cross trenches and zigzags in their layout. These trench lines laid perpendicular to the main line of trenches protect the trench system against transverse (flanking) attacks. (That’s why entrenchments aren’t hexside features in TOAW). Meanders, etc. can do the same for defenders along the river. The defenders benefit defensively against flanking attacks from using the bend in the river/ox bow lake/tributary/etc. as a barrier. TOAW’s river hexes have that transverse defense factor. River hexsides would not. quote:
In the real world situation, units were virtually never (if there was any chance of combat) half on one side of a river half on the other. IMO, one side of the river or the other. You’re thinking of pre-combat conditions. Once the battle begins, the front lines will become mixed. From then, each square inch is contested and no quarter is given. That’s at any scale. Certainly 50km stretches of river aren’t cleared simultaneously. But neither are 2.5km stretches. The defenders will only be entirely on one side of a whole river line when they throw in the towel and fall back to a new defensive position – provided it’s along a river. And, that’s assuming the defense began along a river line to begin with. It’s rarely the best terrain to form a defense on. And, of course, TOAW scenarios mostly concern themselves with those sorts of battles. Inactive fronts aren’t usually scenario topics. Nevertheless, Case 1 in my post #9 above, would model just such a front. Think of Normandy. The front lines were formed to retain as much ground as possible, with no consideration of best terrain. Rivers were as likely to be bisected by them as between them. It stayed that way till the Germans had to give up. Even then, they didn’t fall back to the Rhine. There was far better defensive terrain west of it. That’s the macro case. But it applies to the micro case too. Think of the penultimate clash in “Saving Private Ryan”. Did they defend behind the river? No. There was a town forward of it (dense urban terrain) that was better. Had they set up behind the river, they would have immediately faced Tigers at point-blank range. The river wasn’t more than 30 feet wide. A Tiger can kill you at 100 times that range. At least in the town they had a chance for an ambush. quote:
Of course, we are not talking TOAW here. If hex-side rivers were but in, all the scenarios would have to be changed.... and that ain't gonna happen. So, we are just talking 'in general', IMO, or a different game. It’s a very high cost change that wouldn’t affect a single existing scenario, regardless of what you think of the value of the change.
|