I'm not sure what the reasoning behind the creation of the various defences in-game was but I think there is a real problem with players being able to build trenches or abatis whatever and whenever they like: There would be nothing to stop a defensive minded player from setting a unit to constructing trenches or abatis in every hex it remains stopped in? ...regardless of terrain or the tactical situation.
Abatis & Trenches can be added at scenario creation to represent the significant nature of these features but having the units being able to create them almost randomly is difficult to justify. These games are really a tactical engine and the very long nature of some of them (400+ turns) introduces a whole host of problems like no rail movement, supply levels, replacements and unplanned fog-of-war events, without adding the problems of un-realistic defensive habits.
I see your condition is of *sufficient time*? but for any player in a defensive situation the benefits of creating these features seem to be free of drawbacks? (Physical fatigue not currently represented?).
A further release in this series might see the 1864 Eastern battles where extensive defences are realistic but I think it's always going to be difficult to balance realism and playability by trying to represent too much.
The creation of Breastworks is an attempt to offer a compromise of a difficult subject but I live in horror of a game where my enemy can freely construct Trenches and Abatis like hanging too many baubles on a Christmas Tree?
_________________ Brigadier-General Jim Wilkes.
2nd Brigade, Cavalry Division, XX Corps.
AoC. U.S.A.
|