Modified Blitz Rule (Defenders Must Inflict Casualty to Stop Blitz)
-
This is a house rule I've played with on the board game version.
I strongly dislike the meta that develops from the OOB rules where any unit that defender places in the first territory prevents a blitz from being launched to the second. There's really only one optimal way to play defense as a result - spread a screen of 1 Infantry in every front line territory and then stack every other unit you have in one or two of the zones right behind them.
I prefer to make tank attacks more dangerous and unpredictable with the following rule: in order to prevent the attacking player from launching a blitz to a second territory, the defenders in the first territory must inflict at least one casualty on the attacking force. If they succeed, the resistance was meaningful enough to halt the advance right there. If they fail, the tanks blew right through them and proceed to their second target.
Therefore, the current meta of a lone Infantryman only has a 1/3 chance of managing to prevent the blitz attack. You can choose to gamble on those odds, or if you prefer more certainty, you'll have to put more units on your front lines - and you can never quite be 100% sure a breakthrough attack is impossible (though once you've put 4+ units on the front lines, the odds are pretty remote).
I've experimented with two different ways of playing like this. In the first variant, blitz destinations need to be decided and announced in advance, at the same time as you launch your attack on the first territory - and it can't be a territory where your other armies are launching a normal attack (but it can be one that another one of your armies is targeting with its own blitz).
In the second variant, only the first territory being attacked needs to be decided and announced. After all normal attacks have played out and been resolved, you then get to take another combat turn where any of your blitz-eligible units (that won their first battle with no losses) can be used to attack a second territory.
Both seem workable and which one's better comes down to player preference depending on how much you value choice vs. complicating the game. The situation they're designed to prevent is where I'm launching an attack on territories A and B, and I want my tanks from B to blitz into A after they win to help my other army take A. I think that would be a BS move to pull, and it would lead to complications where the different battles have to be played out in a particular order - so neither of these rules allow it. I do, however, consider it legitimate for my armies that were attacking A and B to blitz together into Territory C if they both win without losses, so the rules do allow that.
These rules are pretty easy to adopt when you're playing on the tabletop; the question is, could the TripleA engine potentially support it?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login