1.06 differences

[Flaviusx]

Yeah, as things presently stand, static mode is an Axis only tool. Not only can the Soviet not afford it from an AP standpoint, but it hardly seems to lower Soviet attrition losses -- the best way for the Sovs to limit these is to defend in depth.

[saintsup]

ORIGINAL: delatbabel

ORIGINAL: saintsup

I always found strange that 'static' mode is never used in campaign game whereas you can see for exemple in the 42 campaign starting point that this mode was intended in the initial design to simulate the fact that you cannot put the whole front in offensive mode due to logistical reasons.

It would be more historical for players to put units into static mode, especially the Soviets who were often short of trucks and historically did strip them from units, but it's unaffordable in terms of APs. If you put a mech corps into static mode it costs more than double the amount of APs to reactivate it from static mode as it does to build a new one. So it's completely not worth it, especially in a game where APs are the Soviet's main limiting factor.

A useful static mode (for exemple by increasing it's advantages) should obviously come with a lowering of AP needed to reactivate. However I think that this new equilibrium could better simulate the chanelling of logistics to one part of the front needed for major offensives. It's a lot more simpler than a revamp of the logistical system, although in doesn't correct the root of the problem.