ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Yeah I never liked canned time frames of games. A battle could last days not minutes or it could last minutes not days. It should be that way that the player never really knows when the battle is over until one surrenders or one withdraws or like the victory meter....I'd like to have seen even that be a turn on/off feature so the fow of not knowing when the battle is going to be over is there. Nobody looked at watches and said, ok at 2pm this battle is over.![]()
I have a different view of the time frame for battles than yours.
A small unit I don't think can fight for days. They are very limited in at least two resources; ammunition and endurance.
Combat is tiring. Firing at anyone uses up your ammunition quickly.
A small unit in intense combat could be "used up" in a very short time. Small unit actions didn't last for days. An hour is a long time with full adrenaline and running ducking and dodging.
That's my take on it.
Not to mention the fact that higher headquarters isn't going to give you a week to take that crossroads. You only have artillery support for so long, you are expected to own that crossroads so you can then support an attack on your left flank....etc....etc...etc....
So, a short time frame is at times absolutely accurate. Other times there is more time. I think the short battle times far outweigh the times when the commander had all the time he wanted for the battle.
That's my $.02 on the time issue.
Good Hunting.
MR