C
coolbreeze
Guest
Hey y'all,
Too often than not, I find that the majority of the defenses I put forth do not use anything besides TRPs from the fortification tab. Fortifications I find are often too costly, too static, and don't come with a gun that actually kills enemy troops. Furthermore, mines, something I would love to play with more, are too expensive and too small in density to actually be a feasible way to deter attacks and block off access points. I want to develop some QB rules/modifications that will incentivize players to use fortifications. Furthermore, it helps create an atmosphere that the defender actually prepared for an attack, and made efforts to create obstacles for the enemy and cover for their men.
Ideally, there would be a force modifier for the defenders in the quick battle selector. We could then create a 10% point increase for defenders, and stipulate that they spend 20% of their points on fortifications. However, since there is no force adjustment for defenders, instead we could decrease the attacker by 10% and again stipulate the defender spend 20% of their points on fortifications. For example, for a large Assault, the defender would have 3,178 points, and would be forced to spend approximately ~640 points on fortifications. This would be enough points to buy 20 mixed mines, or plenty of sandbags, wire, and a few bunkers. The Attacker, originally would have 5,820 points, and would be reduced by 10% in the force adjustment screen. This would leave them with approximately 5,200 points. The original ratio of attacker points to defender points was 1.83. With this new system, the attacker would have 5,200 points, vs the defenders 2,500 points on actual units (not counting the 640 points spent on fortifications). This creates a ratio of 2.08 attacker. The attacker has a better ratio with this system, but is presented with some new and unique problems with having to deal with different types of fortifications.
I would love to hear anyone's thoughts on how fortifications (excluding TRPs) can be used cost effectively in the current QB system now, as well as any tweaks or opinions to my proposed method on emphasizing fortifications for future QBs between players. Finally, send a pm or drop a message if you would like to try out these proposed rules in a QB game.
Too often than not, I find that the majority of the defenses I put forth do not use anything besides TRPs from the fortification tab. Fortifications I find are often too costly, too static, and don't come with a gun that actually kills enemy troops. Furthermore, mines, something I would love to play with more, are too expensive and too small in density to actually be a feasible way to deter attacks and block off access points. I want to develop some QB rules/modifications that will incentivize players to use fortifications. Furthermore, it helps create an atmosphere that the defender actually prepared for an attack, and made efforts to create obstacles for the enemy and cover for their men.
Ideally, there would be a force modifier for the defenders in the quick battle selector. We could then create a 10% point increase for defenders, and stipulate that they spend 20% of their points on fortifications. However, since there is no force adjustment for defenders, instead we could decrease the attacker by 10% and again stipulate the defender spend 20% of their points on fortifications. For example, for a large Assault, the defender would have 3,178 points, and would be forced to spend approximately ~640 points on fortifications. This would be enough points to buy 20 mixed mines, or plenty of sandbags, wire, and a few bunkers. The Attacker, originally would have 5,820 points, and would be reduced by 10% in the force adjustment screen. This would leave them with approximately 5,200 points. The original ratio of attacker points to defender points was 1.83. With this new system, the attacker would have 5,200 points, vs the defenders 2,500 points on actual units (not counting the 640 points spent on fortifications). This creates a ratio of 2.08 attacker. The attacker has a better ratio with this system, but is presented with some new and unique problems with having to deal with different types of fortifications.
I would love to hear anyone's thoughts on how fortifications (excluding TRPs) can be used cost effectively in the current QB system now, as well as any tweaks or opinions to my proposed method on emphasizing fortifications for future QBs between players. Finally, send a pm or drop a message if you would like to try out these proposed rules in a QB game.