Steve Jackson Games Forums - View Single Post

acroyear · 03-10-2018, 04:28 AM

When a unit is in a retreat, blowing up the bridges behind them is a common tactic for safety.

So instead of "no bridge destruction", try a rule where the defender loses a VP if they (and only the defenders) destroy a small bridge, and 3 if they destroy a big one. The incentive should be to not do it, but if it keeps a 3-6 VP tank alive by breaking up an attacking GEV formation on the road, it may be worth it.

Play with those points a bit to see where the balance lies given the high point value of escapes for one of the teams, to reflect that the strategic commander doesn't want the bridges destroyed, but the tactical decision may make it necessary.

The attacker gains nothing for destroying bridges (that's not the goal). Only the defender can lose for what they destroy.

03-10-2018, 04:28 AM	#3
acroyear Join Date: May 2015 Location: Northern, VA	Re: Ogrezine: Rearguard Action - bridge alternative When a unit is in a retreat, blowing up the bridges behind them is a common tactic for safety. So instead of "no bridge destruction", try a rule where the defender loses a VP if they (and only the defenders) destroy a small bridge, and 3 if they destroy a big one. The incentive should be to not do it, but if it keeps a 3-6 VP tank alive by breaking up an attacking GEV formation on the road, it may be worth it. Play with those points a bit to see where the balance lies given the high point value of escapes for one of the teams, to reflect that the strategic commander doesn't want the bridges destroyed, but the tactical decision may make it necessary. The attacker gains nothing for destroying bridges (that's not the goal). Only the defender can lose for what they destroy.