Alternate victory conditions?
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:32 am
I've wondered whether Dave and the Panther staff had ever considered an alternative method of determining the level of victory for the Nijmegen and Eindhoven scenarios. I understand that, at least for the Eindhoven historical campaign, those units that simply "passed through" are not represented whatsover. The units that are included are those that fought in the area - the airborne plus those elements of 30 Corps that were spared to keep the highway open.
However, I wonder whether Dave etc. had considered representing all units whether they stayed or passed through, but awarding victory points to the Allies only for the units that 'exited' the map (sort of like exiting in Close Combat - but exiting the far side of the map)? In such a system, presumeably the earlier the units are 'passed on' to the next map, the more points would be awarded. Likewise, units that are more fully intact (maximum organization, plus few losses of equipment and personnel) would receive more points.
I know from many of Dave's posts that ideas like this one are more easily conceived than programmed, but one potential advantage of this type of system is that the times and status of units that are passed on the next map would have to tracked. That would have facilitated a campaign mode where you fight the battles from south to north, with your results on one map affecting when and in what state your reinforcements arrive on the next.
Coming versions of HTTR will have less of an element of units passing through to the next battle than this one, so in many ways my interest in this topic is probably academic. However, I am curious as to whether such a system was considered and, if so, what were some of the arguments for and against.
However, I wonder whether Dave etc. had considered representing all units whether they stayed or passed through, but awarding victory points to the Allies only for the units that 'exited' the map (sort of like exiting in Close Combat - but exiting the far side of the map)? In such a system, presumeably the earlier the units are 'passed on' to the next map, the more points would be awarded. Likewise, units that are more fully intact (maximum organization, plus few losses of equipment and personnel) would receive more points.
I know from many of Dave's posts that ideas like this one are more easily conceived than programmed, but one potential advantage of this type of system is that the times and status of units that are passed on the next map would have to tracked. That would have facilitated a campaign mode where you fight the battles from south to north, with your results on one map affecting when and in what state your reinforcements arrive on the next.
Coming versions of HTTR will have less of an element of units passing through to the next battle than this one, so in many ways my interest in this topic is probably academic. However, I am curious as to whether such a system was considered and, if so, what were some of the arguments for and against.