Static Units: Discuss!

User avatar
loosebruce
Master Sergeant
Posts: 170
Joined: Fri 17 Aug 2012 16:42
Contact:

Static Units: Discuss!

Postby loosebruce » Tue 4 Sep 2012 13:18

Hi all,

This is a thread to discuss how well or bad static units would work in W:AB

Static units?

Are units that are incapable of self mobility (cannot move by themselves) and require deployment before a battle. There is technically already one static unit in Wargame European Escalation which is the FOB which can only be placed during setup stage.

Examples?

AAA (Anti Aircraft Artillery)


Would be slightly cheaper than mobile AA , which would make them great as a deterrent against Heli spam etc and also would stop someone calling in a carpet bombing of the enemy spawn point.

NATO - Rapier Missile ADS
Image

USSR - ZU-23

Image



Artillery


Cheaper than mobile arty , maybe slightly weaker also but better accuracy and cool down periods.

NATO - L118 Light Gun

Image

USSR - D30 Howitzer

Image




Bunkers


Would act like cover but improve the hitpoints of vehicles occupying them.

Image


Radar / Early Warning Systems


Any AA vehicles within the area get an accuracy boost, (yes I know this picture is from another game).

Image




Other Stuff


Mine fields, FARPS , Motor Pools, Comms HQ etc.


As I mentioned earlier , static units would be great deterrents against rushers and would also make last stands , sieges more fun.

However I am aware that spamming of static units could posssibly result in a stalemate near the end of a game.

So please discuss...
Image

Tigga
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue 5 Jul 2011 02:46
Contact:

Re: Static Units: Discuss!

Postby Tigga » Tue 4 Sep 2012 14:42

I'm very much against minefields in this game, but apart from that I'd be in favour generally. It's usually wise to put some AA around your FOB/home sector if you plan on keeping it, as people tend to target it and your force tends to be quite far away, however I always long for something cheaper!

I think it'd be tricky to make them overpowered, as the areas with static units tend not to be areas you need to take for victory, and they're very vulnerable to arty fire once spotted.

User avatar
praslovan
Major-General
Posts: 3939
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011 21:56
Location: Slav inhabited Alps
Contact:

Re: Static Units: Discuss!

Postby praslovan » Tue 4 Sep 2012 15:56

[EUG]MadMat wrote:
tanksforpeace wrote:to be able to build things such as bunkers, treches, barbed wire, mines, anti tank obstacles, ect.

We're aiming at a WW3 game, not WW1. ;)

Pretty much concludes discussion about those two. Well don't rule minefields totally out... maybe they can happen. And if we have urban warfare... maybe inf can make barricades and stuff.

But yeah maybe static AA or arty... that can be towed by APCs (so they don't lie around useless) when you want to relocate them.

But I think that whole point of the game that Eugen wants to make is being mobile.

User avatar
MARDER
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri 20 Jul 2012 00:42
Contact:

Re: Static Units: Discuss!

Postby MARDER » Tue 4 Sep 2012 16:50

praslovan wrote:
[EUG]MadMat wrote:
tanksforpeace wrote:to be able to build things such as bunkers, treches, barbed wire, mines, anti tank obstacles, ect.

We're aiming at a WW3 game, not WW1. ;)

Pretty much concludes discussion about bunkers.

But yeah maybe static AA or arty... that can be towed by APCs (so they don't lie around useless) when you want to relocate them.

But I think that whole point of the game that Eugen wants to make is being mobile.




Barbwire, mines, anti tank obstacles and other stuff are still used by all nations. Barbwire, anti tank obstacles re extremely effective in urban areas to canalizes and deny a enemy a area. Mines are deployed in seconds in open areas and protect your flanks, front and back. Mines are slowing the enemy advance and give you time to reorgenize. Tranches for infantry and tanks give you protection against arty, and vast numbers of enemy’s. You are very wrong thinking that this kind of devices are a thing of the past and only WW1/2 stuff and that WW3 or modern warfare is only about mobility.
Its the mix that counts.


Only because all nations use vehicles that look the same doesn’t mean the fight all the same way. The US is fighting different France is fighting different UK,Russia,German´s all fight after a other concept.

User avatar
Cygnus
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 948
Joined: Wed 9 Nov 2011 20:19

Re: Static Units: Discuss!

Postby Cygnus » Tue 4 Sep 2012 17:17

I don't see why they would be necessary. The only possible place where they can engage the enemy is at the starting sector, which generally isn't an active area at all.
It would only be good for AA turrets protecting commands at spawn, but why would you buy an immobile turret when you can buy mobile autocannons/missile AA and plop it right next to your CV in a forest.

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Static Units: Discuss!

Postby DeuZerre » Tue 4 Sep 2012 17:46

"Fixed" emplacements (Like a supply truck driving with the canon behind, then deploying it), may be ok (but probably not the rapier, not that transportable, though WEE already did a lot of abstraction in terms of deployment time).

But bunkers that you deploy yourself: Nope. Do not want: WEE (and wab) are about forces engaging, not one digging in for the other to smash on.

Barbed wire, mines, tank traps... All of these require time out of the scope of the game.
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
D-M
Posts: 8794
Joined: Sat 23 Jul 2011 11:10
Contact:

Re: Static Units: Discuss!

Postby D-M » Tue 4 Sep 2012 18:09

Maybe in some super special awesome fun game mode ?
Image

Tigga
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue 5 Jul 2011 02:46
Contact:

Re: Static Units: Discuss!

Postby Tigga » Tue 4 Sep 2012 18:11

Cygnus wrote:It would only be good for AA turrets protecting commands at spawn, but why would you buy an immobile turret when you can buy mobile autocannons/missile AA and plop it right next to your CV in a forest.

Do I want something with an engine to sit there probably doing nothing, or do I want a cheaper something without an engine to sit there probably doing nothing. It'll be unlikely such a unit will want to move, so why not save money and have a unit which can't move?

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Static Units: Discuss!

Postby DeuZerre » Tue 4 Sep 2012 18:23

Tigga wrote:Do I want something with an engine to sit there probably doing nothing, or do I want a cheaper something without an engine to sit there probably doing nothing. It'll be unlikely such a unit will want to move, so why not save money and have a unit which can't move?

Artillery? :lol:
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

Tigga
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue 5 Jul 2011 02:46
Contact:

Re: Static Units: Discuss!

Postby Tigga » Tue 4 Sep 2012 18:25

DeuZerre wrote:
Tigga wrote:Do I want something with an engine to sit there probably doing nothing, or do I want a cheaper something without an engine to sit there probably doing nothing. It'll be unlikely such a unit will want to move, so why not save money and have a unit which can't move?

Artillery? :lol:

Let it come! If I can get a roland 2 type missile for 40 pts instead of 60 I'll risk a bit of artillery. I'll be in cover anyway.

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests