ORIGINAL: JocMeister
ORIGINAL: witpqs
If it hadn´t been a river crossing and I closed the hexsides using HQ units and whatever. No one would object?
Strictly to answer your question and not to belabor the point, my own comment had nothing to do with it being a river crossing.
It's really between you and your opponent. [8D]
In the situation where I closed the escape for his superstack moving a BDE to flip the hexside you wouldn´t have? If not. Why? A specific amount of AV to close the side? Or is it the "manipulating" of the hexsides you don´t like?
Not trying to start an argument or anything. I´m genuinely curious. [:)]
The only comment I made was in response to your mention of an EAB. I think it was Moose who posed the example of 100 AV BDE.
I suppose I would feel the same about an HQ as about an EAB. But the fact is that the game engine does not allow the detailed resolution to deal with combat at the scale of blocking movement between hexes. When I say that I mean, for example, a force of 5x divisions wants to move and a Bn is in the way. I say "in the way" in the sense that it is (in this example) the only unit that crossed that hex side. There is no way for the (or part of the) 5x divisions to attack through the Bn and move on. Of course, if the Bn is the only enemy in hex then it can be done. But if the Bn entered through the left hex side and 10x divisions entered through the right hex side, the Bn gets to be defended by the 10x division!
Now, that is just a limitation of the granularity - the level of detail - of the game engine. How players deal with that is strictly up to them. I have zero - and I mean zero - problem with whatever they decide in their game. If I were playing a game with Moose as 'no HR' (which is darn close to my own preference) I would be fine with doing that with an HQ (or EAB) and not feel the least ire if he did that. I would also feel free to do it. In other games against other opponents I would not do it.
My original comment was in the spirit of what I think I have come to understand about this game between you and your opponent, seeing the various complaints you've made to each other about this or that. I believe it is strictly between the two of you; there is no technically, ethically, or morally objective way that is best. The only ethical issue would be if a player was violating the trust of his/her opponent, which is a whole different thing of course.
BTW, there have been plenty of historical examples of small forces holding off larger forces either temporarily or until the larger force gave up and did something else. The stand of the 300 is the most famous example.
