The Tedium of Assualts

[plloyd1010]

I've always assumed that means a +1 or +2 column shift (as opposed to +1 or 2 Fire Value or +1 or 2 to the die roll). Is that how everyone else reads it?

Interesting: it might also be taken as an addition to the higher side's die roll since the term "column modifier" was not used (possibly implied) in the article. Btw, I'm only offering this an an option, not trying to interpret what APL was likely implying.

Dave Murray wrote the variant. If someone knows how to get hold, maybe they can ask what he was thinking.

How the hell do you guys remember this stuff?

We can either remember this, or something we would rather forget anyway.
Or just get some more beer.

[Poor Yorek]

I assumed it was column shifts because that is how all mods to combat are done in the game.

Well, not all since AT fire mods are to die rolls, but certainly DF/BF/assault combat mods are since the tables are truncated in terms of die roll results - i.e. no 13+ as in the AT table.

I just offered the die-roll interpretation - though perhaps "option" would be a better choice of terms - for the reasons stated above; it is almost the same as the col-modifier approach, but just a bit "softer" for those who might prefer that.

[Matt W]

BTW, note that having the +1 be a die roll modification could not work in the 4th ed. as the assault table is built with a 2d6 resolution much like bombardment and direct fire.

[Blackcloud6]

BTW, note that having the +1 be a die roll modification could not work in the 4th ed. as the assault table is built with a 2d6 resolution much like bombardment and direct fire.

Yep, good point.

[Poor Yorek]

BTW, note that having the +1 be a die roll modification could not work in the 4th ed. as the assault table is built with a 2d6 resolution much like bombardment and direct fire.

Yep, good point.

Quite so! Didn't think about that as I've continued to use the 3rd ed. assault table. Have never been happy with the low-end of that, but like the 4th ed. assault table even less so I've not used it.

Will be interesting to hear of any follow-up with folks using this "assault advantage" scheme with either edition. I think I'll try it with my current scenario ... when I can get back to it

[graydo]

I'm just the new lad but what about upping the penalty for concentrating forces? Instead of +1 for stacking three units how about +1 for stacking two units and +2 for stacking three. Penalizing concentration in modern warfare is sound application.

[Blackcloud6]

I'm just the new lad but what about upping the penalty for concentrating forces? Instead of +1 for stacking three units how about +1 for stacking two units and +2 for stacking three. Penalizing concentration in modern warfare is sound application.

That will make it even more difficult for the attacker as he must concentrate forces in order to have a chance at being successful in the assault.

[graydo]

I'm just the new lad but what about upping the penalty for concentrating forces? Instead of +1 for stacking three units how about +1 for stacking two units and +2 for stacking three. Penalizing concentration in modern warfare is sound application.

That will make it even more difficult for the attacker as he must concentrate forces in order to have a chance at being successful in the assault.

Well the rookie didn't think of that but it would make softening up more effective, wouldn't it?

[Blackcloud6]

Well the rookie didn't think of that but it would make softening up more effective, wouldn't it?

No, because usually the defender is spread out. What will happen is the attacker will be sitting in the hex adjacent, with at least two units per hex (as he has to get a lot of troops ready to assault) to the defender and take fire and it will be +3 columns each time and it is more likely the attacker will get softened up before the defender.

[graydo]

Oh well, a brilliant plan nipped in the bud.

Well the rookie didn't think of that but it would make softening up more effective, wouldn't it?

No, because usually the defender is spread out. What will happen is the attacker will be sitting in the hex adjacent, with at least two units per hex (as he has to get a lot of troops ready to assault) to the defender and take fire and it will be +3 columns each time and it is more likely the attacker will get softened up before the defender.