Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense"?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense"?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense"?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense"? - 9/28/2009 11:30:24 AM

killkess

Posts: 34
Joined: 4/28/2009
Status: offline

Hi!

Since im new to this game im sure this was asked hundrets of times before but:

Whats the advantage and disadvantage to set units into defensiv positions if they have points left at the end of the round? Any movement penalty or attacking penalty in the next turn? If not, do you guys always set them at defense?

Thx in advance

Post #: 1

RE: Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense&qu... - 9/28/2009 3:54:59 PM

el cid

Posts: 186
Joined: 1/28/2006
Status: offline

always set them on Defensive if you have movement points left and do not plan to move them further that turn. There is no disadvantages.

(in reply to killkess)

Post #: 2

RE: Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense&qu... - 9/28/2009 6:02:06 PM

killkess

Posts: 34
Joined: 4/28/2009
Status: offline

And whats the idea behind this feature? I mean if theres no disadvantage why its not a automatism?
Someone has another opinion about this topic?

BTW: Thanks for your awnser ;)

(in reply to el cid)

Post #: 3

RE: Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense&qu... - 9/28/2009 7:18:15 PM

noxious

Posts: 177
Joined: 6/13/2008
From: Montreal, Qc, Canuckistan
Status: offline

Because Tactical and Local deployment also need MPs to be effective, allowing them to move during the opponent's turn.
And until you press end turn, there is no way the software can know whether you're done with the unit or not. Putting all units with MPs left to Defense before the turn is over would royally muck things over :)

_____________________________

Be Kind. Everyone is fighting a hard battle.

(in reply to el cid)

Post #: 4

RE: Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense&qu... - 9/28/2009 7:39:32 PM

killkess

Posts: 34
Joined: 4/28/2009
Status: offline

quote:

Putting all units with MPs left to Defense before the turn is over would royally muck things over :)

Before the turn is over sure. But a autamatism would be possible to set every unit with points to defend at the end of the turn when the button is pressed.

If there are only advantages to set units to defend. What would be advantages not to do so? For example are there any rules giving advantages for not using the points for defend? I.E. in second line units which are unlikely to be attacked?

(in reply to noxious)

Post #: 5

RE: Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense&qu... - 9/28/2009 8:51:19 PM

damezzi

Posts: 299
Joined: 7/18/2007
Status: offline

Somewhere in the manual it is stated that units with greater movement allowance in the beginning of the turn (in relation to the enemy) have a better chance to disengage. I don't know if left MPs are considered here. Better chance in VI would be driven by movement allowance too, but I think that left MPs aren't computed. They should, in my opinion.

I always thought that units that kept mobile deployment should get extra MPs the next turn to simulate a fast march when on secure area or when it's worth to take the risk.

(in reply to killkess)

Post #: 6

RE: Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense&qu... - 9/28/2009 8:57:19 PM

el cid

Posts: 186
Joined: 1/28/2006
Status: offline

There are cases where you rather make sure your unit will retreat. In this case do not put them on defense. Or perhaps you do not want to entrench a given hex, that later your oponent might use.

Also some artillery units you might not want to set them up in defense if you do not want them wasting amunition during the enemy turn.

And as noxious said, the are other posible deployments as tactical or local defense.

But this that you bring up has been asked for before, so you might have a point. But today is upto the player to choose, if you automate it, then the player does not have that option.

(in reply to damezzi)

Post #: 7

RE: Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense&qu... - 9/28/2009 9:31:57 PM

Curtis Lemay

Posts: 12969
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: killkess

quote:

Putting all units with MPs left to Defense before the turn is over would royally muck things over :)

Before the turn is over sure. But a autamatism would be possible to set every unit with points to defend at the end of the turn when the button is pressed.

If there are only advantages to set units to defend. What would be advantages not to do so? For example are there any rules giving advantages for not using the points for defend? I.E. in second line units which are unlikely to be attacked?

But if your turn ends early then your opponent gets the jump on you. You should be caught with your pants down (in mobile deployment).

Now, as it currently stands, units that are already in D or E deployment will automatically continue to dig in provided the turn ends normally. Extending that to units in Mobile deployment is what you're suggesting. The game doesn't assume that you want to entrench if you aren't already in an entrenched mode. There have already been a few reasons given why you wouldn't. I'll add the need to rest an artillery unit to that list (oops, that was already on there).

< Message edited by Curtis Lemay -- 9/28/2009 9:36:27 PM >

(in reply to killkess)

Post #: 8

RE: Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense&qu... - 9/29/2009 12:15:41 PM

Hyding

Posts: 226
Joined: 2/8/2008
Status: offline

There are also many occasions when you are only temporarily going to be in an area and you do not want to leave a lot of ready made fortifications for the enemy.

I've had this consideration cross my mind in several scenarios but the best example is probably Curt's Campaign for South Vietnam. As the Free World Allies I will be fortifying cities and key terrain but I avoid raising the fortification levels in other areas as much as possible. Viet Cong units will be popping up all over the place. When they are eliminated there are usually other missions in other areas for the units that destroyed them. If I have to return later to chase down new VC units (and you usually do). Those VC units will be even better entrenched than the last time if I left them a lot of fortified areas. Even when I entrench with my mobile units I try to relocate them often to prevent the introduction of fortified areas in places I don't plan on permanently garrisoning.

< Message edited by Narses -- 9/29/2009 12:19:08 PM >

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)

Post #: 9

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Disadvantage from setting units to "Defense"?

Page: [1]