|
GB68 -> RE: Patch 01 ... Patch 02 ... Patch 03 ... (12/15/2009 1:10:38 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: vaned74
Is the effect of forts on arty, air, or naval bombardment being looked at for inclusion in the hotfix? Actually giving the defending troops some protections against bombardment for being in a fortification would make a big difference in the survivability of defending troops.
Also, note that even though we all talk about Japanese bombardments of Chinese troops being overeffective, this works both ways. Try putting 5 US arty units on heavily fortified hex (level 6) like Iwo with 30,000 defending Japanese troops and see what happens after 10 days of bombardment. You'll find the Japanese defense pretty well destroyed. The net result is land combat is way too favorable to the attacker at this time.
Obviously fort effects and supply consumption are coding issues, but, on the effects in land combat and the massive casualties, has anyone thought to simply reduce the anti-soft values by say 25% across the board?
Is anti-soft the governing parameter for bombardment effects or is "effect" the parameter that matters and "anti-soft" only used for fire combat in deliberate or shock attacks?
I agree that the artillery effect seems to large.......
But to use the example of Iwo Jima in reality, a tiny islet, battered into the next century by weeks of air and naval bombardment, yet, IRL it still took the US 6 weeks to clear the island.
OK, maybe you could say effective resistance was defeated within 1 or 2 weeks, but it goes to show that battle results cannot always be effectively resolved in a turn resolution!
|
|
|
|
