C.Sinclair wrote:
>
> At 03:44 AM 3/5/98 PST, you wrote:
> >Tu as �crit :
> >
> >>
> >>I was under the impression that you would Assault with one >detachment,
> >then
> >>assault with another. So in the example above, Player A charges,
> >>fights a
> >>CC with Player B's first detachment, THEN Player B gets his first
> >>Assault
> >>and charges Player A with his second detachment. At least that's the
> >>way
> >>I've played it.
> >>
> >
> >Your way of playing the Assault Phase is quite interesting but in the
> >"official" rules : player A plays ALL his assaults (then the firefights
> >are played) and after that, player B can make ALL his assaults (and then
> >the firefights are played).
> >
> >But once again, your way is interesting (I think it comes from your
> >Space Marine experience).
> >
> I think it makes for a better tactical game. If there is a threat of
> immediate counter assault/firefight then you have to be careful about just
> charging your close combat monsters into the enemy line. While I accept
> that the standard method (I honestly never interpreted the rules in that
> way) still encourages the use of supporting flanks and a tactical reserve to
> an extent, I feel that the way I've played results in more tactical
> manoeuvering.
> And you're probably right. Didn't read the rules in their entirety (still
> haven't!) when I fist played. The way we ran the Assault phase just gelled
> with me and my regular opponents and we never thought that there was any
> other interpretation. This is the way it generally works in other wargames.
> As an afterthought the method I've used isn't the slave to initiative
> (except for critical assaults) that the actual method appears to be. In the
> rules all the initiative winning players movement, close combat and
> firefights are done before his opponent gets a chance to react. This seems
> to me (all other things being equal) that the initiative winner gets an
> enormous advantage. The way I've played will give an advantage to the
> initiative winner for a crucial (possibly battle-winning) assault phase but
> nowhere near the colossal advantage the rules as they stand seem to.
> I'm open to other people's thoughts on this particular point, as I have
> never played by the rules :-) WRT the Assault phase and so my opinion of the
> advantages of initiative and tactical positioning are almost entirely
> supposition.
As it so happens, while I know what the rules say, I do like the
detachent at a time assault phase concept.
Movement by army, combat by detachments, works for me.
--
Sillyness is the last refuse of the doomed. P. Opus
--
Geek code: GAT d-- s:-- a C+++ UL++ P+ L++ !E- W+++ N++ o K++ w+++ !o
!M-- !V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP t++ 5+ X R+++ tv+ b++++ DI++++ D G++ e+
h---(*)
r+++ y+++(**)
http://www.spellbooksoftware.com
Received on Thu Mar 05 1998 - 15:00:39 UTC