Wargame with Base/Resources

[ch3cooh]

Hey Eugen, maybe you can take it into consideration for your next title.

Current time frame for example.

[Sigirdiwarth]

Please don't, basebuilding and resource gathering is extremely boring.

[Bullfrog]

At most, some fortifications and stationary assets. Noting more.

Actually, stationary assets are a must IMO... many minors and deck types could be more competitive if they had them.

[kvnrthr]

Hey Eugen, maybe you can take it into consideration for your next title.

Current time frame for example.

Resource gathering? Is this the Napoleonic era, should our troops be foraging for resources?

Bases and stationary/low mobility assets would be interesting though. Stationary ATGM/AA/MG positions and towed artillery would make things more interesting. And I would be happy if we finally get bridging assets. Would give engineers something to actually build rather than have them run around with flamethrowers

But making buildings from scratch is not so great... at best, let infantry dig themselves in forests and give them a slight damage reductions. I'm not sure how fast those positions and tank hull-down locations take to prepare IRL though.

[Fade2Gray]

Hey Eugen, maybe you can take it into consideration for your next title.

Current time frame for example.

Resource gathering? Is this the Napoleonic era, should our troops be foraging for resources?

Booze, it is a time honored tradition, soldiers will always figure out some way to get their hands on booze.

[LightMonk]

No

[Mike]

Maybe some static defenses. It would be good for the campaign and role playing with other players. Definitely not base building though

[kvnrthr]

Maybe some static defenses. It would be good for the campaign and role playing with other players. Definitely not base building though

Towed Hawks would be quite interesting, as would towed soviet 100 mm AT guns firing Bastion missiles. Although artillery would have to be reworked, since as it is now a single missile contrail spotted will invite retribution in 10 seconds... artillery reacts far too fast and will smash any static units.

It would be quite interesting to see units have to prepare a position before being able to fire though. For example, units like air defense and artillery. Right now they can move immediately after firing, but IRL the time to displace from a position and prepare to fire from a new position is much tougher. The speed of movement makes counterbattery fire useless in games, but if you introduce a delay and a cost for moving from a position it will make artillery batteries far more vulnerable.

Air defense needs to set up as well, some more than others... we could introduce a difference in effectiveness for AA that is set up (i.e. representing all the associated radars prepared and connected to launchers) vs AA just firing without preparation (i.e. using its own radar, if available. Otherwise it should not fire without preparation.) So air defense is not a simple matter of attack move with your forces, but so it can also be advantageous to actually set up your artillery in prepared positions. Of course proper mobile systems like the Tunguska and Gepard should still be very effective when accompanying forces throughout the whole attack and moving.

Incidentally, if we do get long-hoped for scenario modes, the options for hull down fighting positions would be very interesting as well.They're not something you can build during battle easily, but it would be interesting if you can place them like FOBs before a scenario battle in certain forward locations for a defender. Would work well if turret/hull values were separated, along with a boost in stealth and size decrease. Infantry trenches would help too.

[BTR]

As others said, quick deployable static positions maybe, but the rest is just a no.

[Vulcan 607]

Yes for light static sand bags earth ramparts and pillboxes. The main problem is how to make use of them do you have weapons teams like the ags17 team or does it have a set weapon pre deployed.