Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs

Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe

Message

aesopo -> Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (8/18/2017 6:34:02 PM)
The impact of anti-aircraft/anti-tank techs should be given more weight over mobility tech upgrades for infantry/tanks as they were in WW2. I have chosen to mod infantry/tank upgrades with anti-tank/anti-air and give .5 in attack/defense values. Removed mobility and replaced it with anti-tank. Anti-air have been put into good roles as anti-tank, anti-infantry roles & anti-tank techs have also been put into multiple roles.

James Taylor -> RE: Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (8/18/2017 9:41:42 PM)
I like this modification as it is historically accurate. The way I see it you should build your unit with the integrated mobility from the start if you wish, no need for the upgrade. USA units would probably be the beneficiary of mobility in all purchases, make it inherent in the original cost. Attaching an HQ to the unit would signify the use of the HQ's motor pool and immediately provide that unit with additional mobility for another variation. This could all be country specific in the build Q, perhaps also dependent on the amount of oil MPPs a country possesses, making those resources additionally important.

aesopo -> RE: Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (8/19/2017 2:33:11 PM)
Yes mobility increase should be due to hq attachment.

crispy131313 -> RE: Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (8/19/2017 2:44:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aesopo Yes mobility increase should be due to hq attachment. HQ's already do this in most cases. Attacking units in enemy territory require a HQ to get to supply level 6 or higher, otherwise mobility is reduced.

nnason -> RE: Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (8/19/2017 4:15:34 PM)
Where in Rule book does it say must be in supply of 6 or higher or there is a mobility penalty Thanks,

crispy131313 -> RE: Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (8/19/2017 4:57:01 PM)
I never read the rule book but it seems to be the rule of thumb in my experience

James Taylor -> RE: Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (8/20/2017 12:31:05 AM)
Interestingly, an accurate observation by crispy.

BillRunacre -> RE: Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (8/20/2017 1:09:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: nnason Where in Rule book does it say must be in supply of 6 or higher or there is a mobility penalty Thanks, Hi Noah If you refer to 7.27. SUPPLY AND ACTION POINTS TABLE in the Manual, it shows the effect of differing supply levels on your units' Action Points. Essentially, keep them at 6 or more and they will have full movement, leaving aside factors like weather, terrain, and enemy units. Bill

nnason -> RE: Anti-aircraft/anti-tanks vs mobility techs (8/20/2017 2:03:37 PM)
Darn Manual. To much information and care put into it. :-) Thanks Bill for taking the time to reply.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.203125