tempest
Posts: 18
Joined: 5/19/2002
From: Sacramento
Status: offline
|
I request that SSG consider adding the following to the DBWW2 system as optional rules (similar to UV) to increase realism per the players preference:
1. Add a readiness attribute to units consisting of some combination of fatigue and morale:
Fatigue: A unit moving, attacking(or defending) and/or entrenching turn after turn with no rest cannot happen in reality; the human body(and psyche) requires rest or its performance will suffer for the lack. The need for a fatigue attribute hit home when, attacking both sides of a shoulder, I had two similiar attribute armor units, one a 7 and one an 8 attack strength, swap places on the north/south sides of the shoulder, each moving their full movement, to get the attack odds to the next level. Also illustrative is the practice of putting a unit in one end of a 12 hex line and popping a unit out the other, with all the units in between moving over 1 and reentrenching. I was rewarded for these actions from a game standpoint but it would never happen in reality. Troops are fatigued just from dealing with harsh battlefield conditions; the commanders would figure the risk of added cost of wear and tear on the men and machines (let alone the tendency for things to go wrong) vs the reward of the above actions and say no.
Morale: Losing battles(taking more losses than the enemy) and retreats decrease morale, winning battles(inflicting more losses than the enemy) increases morale, and ,win or lose, combat losses decrease morale.
The current unit capabilities could be those of 100% readiness units(rested and confident) with a drop in combat strength, movement capability and, per 2 below, chance of successully carrying out a "bullet
expenditure" order(detachment or entrench) as readiness declines.
A second use of morale could be a combat shift perhaps if the average morale of the attacker vs defender was over some threshold. The attackers knowledge of the defenders morale should only be approximate and the actual achievement of the shift wouldn’t be known until combat commenced, hampering the attackers ability to precisely shape combat odds.
2. Make entrenchments and detachments a calculated affair:
Entrenchments and detachments are currently 100% certain; a 4 step elite unit and a 1 step substandard unit have an equal certain chance of fashioning an entrenched position or leaving an effective delaying force. Make success in these efforts a function of unit capabilities(# of steps, status(elite,etc), readiness and supply) and enemy zoc strength. Being in an enemy zoc will not be helpful for either effort. The success/failure could be shown immediately or, better, per 3 below.
For entrenchments, should a unit fail to create an entrenchment on turn one, give it a substantial bonus for continuing on turn two.
For detachments, make the outcome of the detachment effect (movement point penalty + # of combat shifts) a variable based on unit capability that would be initially unknown to either player. The detaching player would discover the result during the Orders Completion Phase(see 3 below) and the enemy player would see only a ? for movement point penalty/combat shifts, or , better, no symbol at all until he actually enters the hex.
3. Include an Orders Completion Phase:
When a player is done with his Operations Phase(movement, combat, issuing entrench/detachment/bridge blowing orders(and see 4 below)), he would then be shown the results of his entrench/detachment/bridge blowing orders before sending the turn to his opponent. Also not revealed until then would be fatigue acquired.
4. Allow choice of expending air interdiction points immediately, per the current system, or assigning them to counter enemy air interdiction on his following turn:
The effect could range from negating to degrading(i.e. the normal 4 OP penalty per hex would drop to 0-4) an enemy air interdiction.
5. If using readiness(see 1) make the exact actual enemy strength defending unknown until the attack:
The attacker could either commit 48 points to a shown 12 point defender to be sure of the 4 to 1 odds or commit 44 points figuring the defender, having seen some wear and tear, would only defend as an 11.
6. Have the percentage of a units OP point expenditure(movement) in a turn influence fatigue and orders completion success:
A unit moving 20% of its OP point would have less of a chance of gaining fatigue and more of a chance of completing an entrenchment/detachment then one moving 80%.
An illustrative players turn using these rules:
I select a unit and am shown not only OP points for a potential move hex but also the percentages of chance of acquiring fatigue or successfully entrenching/detachment/bridge blowing in that hex. The fatigued, demoralized infantry unit selected would have a decreased OP point allowance, combat strength and chance of orders completion due to lower readiness. I complete the Operations Phase and am shown fatigue acquired and orders completed prior to sending it off to my opponent(this would make for some fretful waits to see how the opponent capitalized on failed efforts).
The current system, while a lot of fun from a game standpoint, has a chess-like feel to it; it needs the human element considered to be a great wargame.
Tempest
|
Printable Version
Optional rules request - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread