TheBattlefield -> RE: Supply when cut off (7/2/2019 6:45:01 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: El Condoro ...a British corps landed in northern Italy and has been moving from town to town with impunity, completely cut off from its own lines. Unless I were to surround it, this corps makes me feel like Fabius watching Hannibal destroying towns on the Italian peninsula in the Second Punic War! At least Hannibal could pillage the towns for supplies but where is this WW2 corps getting its supply from in hostile territory? Long, short - shouldn't units be penalised more when they are cut off, even if they are near a settlement? I have to agree with Sugar in this matter. You determine a strategy of your opponent perceived as "unrealistic in terms of historical events" and suggest that this should be stopped with a modified game mechanic. Why? Obviously, it is the result of your strategic decisions to leave the Northern Italian cities unguarded, to give up or lose control of air and sea, and not to provide adequate reserves for immediate response. I suspect that even the historic Western Allies, under these circumstances, would have caused chaos in Italy with appropriate force. I am glad that the preservation of the fragile game balance has always taken precedence over a technical avoidance of strategies that explicitly do not suspect the "exploitation" of errors in the unit behavior or supply system.
|
|
|
|