[WarInEur] Para abuse

[Hansen]

If the coding doesn't allow for a target hex designation, then I would go
for a 'use it or lose it' on the 4th week. Any unit not used on the fourth
week automatically pops up on the reinforcements and can be re-loaded for
use in four weeks.

This makes the 'cab stand' harder to do (more paras have to be in the
rotation to keep them always on tap) and pushes the 'use it or lose it'
market garden type world.

It would seem to me the coding should be pretty easy. A new hex designation
for drop zone marker (perhaps re-using the SB base code or the fort
construction code) provides the target and the addition of a test for
dropping paratroops being that the hex has a drop zone marker. This doesn't
tie specific paras to specific hexes, but would be restrictive enough. Of
course, you would also want to make it something the other side can't see ;}

-----Original Message-----
From: sgminfo [mailto:sgminfo at aol.com] 
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 4:00 PM
To: Hansen
Cc: warineur at mailman.halisp.net
Subject: Re: [WarInEur] Para abuse

Hansen wrote:
> What you propose doesn't eliminated the 'cab rank', it just shortens the
> number of cabs available. If what you need is that 2-5 para ready to drop
> and force a hex, then 2 or 3 paras cycling through the system (pre-jump,
> held ready, back on the board, repeat).
>
> I think the idea of having to pick a hex makes more sense. To give it some
> flexibility, you could let the paras move to an adjacent hex during their
> training, but they would need one week on the target hex. This would give
> you some tactical flexibility (paras to help break the maginot, paras to
> help establish a river crossing, etc) while not being able to train them
up
> and leave them perpetually on call for a drop any where (which makes no
real
> world sense).

I agree, but I am looking backwards at the problem here. The original 
suggestion is my preferred way of managing this. It has a more realistic 
feel. The revisitation here involves less drastic coding, less serious 
shifts in the rules, and requires almost no production changes to the 
boardgame, in the sense of  a simply note that amends the application of 
the existing procedures.

Looking at the issue from various angles often trips someone else into a 
more useful or fruitful vein of thought not hitherto considered...

-|steve|-