|
RE: Question on Strongholds
I think it all boils down to what strongholds are intended to represent. The current rules model something that allows greater stacking without the stacking penalty but at the expense of not being able to move and being subject to being eliminated if it fails a rally when demoralized. And this I have no doubt adequately models something on the battlefield and maybe perfectly the effect AP was trying to represent.
But consider these two cases:
An INF unit is in an open hex and not dug in. A stronghold is in another open hex. They both receive massive bombardment. Both eventually become demoralized and then both eventually fail their rally attempt. The INF unit flees the scene, and lives to tell the tale the stronghold is eliminated. This implies that one is safer being in the open during a bombardment than being in a concrete bunker. That seems to me to be a bit counter intuitive.
Thus I don't see how in PG one would represent the historical advantages of being surrounded by thick concrete verses being in the open during bombardments using strongholds. One would think that they should at least offer a negative column shift against bombardment, say a -2 like entrenchments.
|
