Rivers & Capturable Bridges

[xthecatx]

I like 

[Nemisis]

Wrongway, I imagine they would be similar to bases themselves. I would guess the only functional difference would be a reduced number of ack guns, and a tent or designated rally point (say, where the armor battalion stationed at that town is to meet for orders) replacing the VH.


Would be very interesting strategicly. Aircraft can take bases on their own, so you would question their impact on the game. But fighting a large GV battle from across the river, each side trying to force a crossing (hey look, here's where the DD sherman and the DUWK would come in handy).

[jimson]

Especially useful for a special event or in the AvA where a CM could adjust the downtimes so the bridge is out of action only temporarily, and adjust the hardness depending on how hard you want it to be to kill it.

You could simply have destroyable bridges and only enable GV troop transports.

You want to take bases, you gotta defend your bridges.

Instead of bases being the only objective, bridges add a new layer.

It could lead to some good battles over bridges instead of just over bases.

And it's just cool, How many real battles and even war movie scenes had to do with capturing, defending or destoying bridges?

To me it's a natural for a scenario.

[AWwrgwy]

(Image removed from quote.)

Just use the spawns into the "bridge town" the same as you would any other.  It really isnt that much different than those V Bases on (the map I cant remember) that are sitting right next to each other... or think of it instead as a V Base with only 2 hangars that are independent of each other... and more thing required to destroy to take it.  Would it be hard to hold without securing the bases around it?  You bet... but think of the fights it would promote.

But... like I said earlier, the design and number of hangers and such could vary... it is the idea of having a bridge to fight over that is the main point.

Thanks for the visual.

Wrongway, I imagine they would be similar to bases themselves. I would guess the only functional difference would be a reduced number of ack guns, and a tent or designated rally point (say, where the armor battalion stationed at that town is to meet for orders) replacing the VH.


Would be very interesting strategicly. Aircraft can take bases on their own, so you would question their impact on the game. But fighting a large GV battle from across the river, each side trying to force a crossing (hey look, here's where the DD sherman and the DUWK would come in handy).

Sit on the shore and pick off the sitting DUKWs.

 


wrongway

[Nemisis]

Well when you put it that way, yeah, it sounds like a crappy idea. But you must admit that it would be fun. It would probably produce some of the best GV fights in the game.

[STXAce8]

It would be cool if we had small airbases with dirt runways with only fighters enabled. Maybe replace the towns with that on a few bases.

[Nemisis]

The point of having a fighter only base right next to an airbase is what exactly  ?

[Traveler]

The idea does interest me, but making the bridge destroyable would be a bad idea.

HiTech

  How about engineering troops to rebuild the bridge or as is done now , Field Supplies.  It adds to the strategy side for the ground and air game.  Provides additional targets for bombers, provides a need for Tankers to take and hold ground, provides a new area for combat air patrols  and encourages everyone to fight at a natural choak point.

[Nemisis]

Traveler, the problem with this (and all bases, but V-bases in particular) are easily bypassed and left to starve from lack of support (a V base won't get any air support if there are 2 enemy air bases in the way. Also, once the hangers go down, what you see around you is what you have; no more supps, and no more tanks).

That has always been something I would like to see resolved, but I can't think of a way to fix it without objectives and flight restrictions like in a scenario, or without adding massive belts of flack batteries (say, as many guns in the strats all crammed into the same square mile, 2 miles deep) in between the area you want to block off.

[Denholm]

Still support this idea.

[rabbidrabbit]

Some great ideas to promote strategy and good tactics.  Giving people something to fight for gives them purpose and reason to participate.

[DEECONX]

Really digging this idea! Oh man, I just wanna come and stuka a bridge now!

[USRanger]

So this means I will see you all in the AvA as soon as the terrain pictured on page 11 of this thread is accepted by Skuzzy, right?

[Knite]

So this means I will see you all in the AvA as soon as the terrain pictured on page 11 of this thread is accepted by Skuzzy, right?

Hey Ranger,

Just thought of a good way to advertise. When it's coming close to your map being in the cycle, take a few screenshots of what makes the map different from the standard MA maps and create a post "Destructable Bridges, new towns? Check out the AvA! (screenshots)"

Or... something... =)

[USRanger]

Got em ready & waiting.

The terrain is submitted.  I have no idea when/if it will be added to the mix, but I check every day.