Maybe the Zones of Control can be as follows:

Sabre

quote: Originally posted by Grumbold on 05-10-2001 12:54 PM I am very dubious about this variable ZOC system. ZOC have never been about the ability of a unit to seriously challenge the enemy in a stand up fight where both parties are prepared for battle. It is about the capacity of the enemy to lay ambushes, destroy supplies, mine roads and pull night raids. A tank regiment with all its troops asleep in their tents is just as vulnerable as a Roman cohort to a sneak attack. Just knowing the enemy is "nearby" causes a competent commander to slow down, ensure a significant proportion of the troops are combat ready and alert and send out more scouting patrols or set more night time pickets. Lightly armed guerrillas have shown time and again in this century just how effective they can be against even the best equipped modern troops.

Very good points!
Realistically, there is never such a thinh as ZOC blocking movement. A unit can always attempt to move through the ZOC of another unit. But so doing risks being harrassed, ambushed, cut off with supplies and communications, and showered by missile weapons. So units don't move into enemy's ZOC, not because they cannot do so, but that they know its little better than suicide.

quote: Originally posted by colossus on 05-16-2001 03:41 AMMy recommendation: Units exerting ZOC do not block movement. Instead they may inflict damage to units passing through ZOC. The amount of damage should be realate to its attack, firepower, terrain, etc.

That would certainly help but I think the blocking of movement is more to simulate the fact that a unit that has had to pass that close to an enemy to get through will have its supplies going the same route. The army may march without sustaining any damage but then starve or run out of fuel and munitions afterweard because the lightly protected supply columns are being destroyed behind them. Taking a fixed 10% damage for moving from one ZoC tile directly to another ZoC tile is an interesting idea and certainly better than removing ZoC completely from most units. If should not be calculated on the unit strength because all units are equally vulnerable to loss of supply, morale and cohesion.

But if we want to incorprate ZOC, we have to face the impossible task of allowing a horseman to face a tank. If we allow the horseman's ZOC to stop a tank, the rules will be simple but do not make sense. Conversely, rules allowing for MP differnece, FP, HP and age(modern units vs medieval ones) would be more realistic but inelegant.

quote: Originally posted by colossus on 05-17-2001 11:16 PM But if we want to incorprate ZOC, we have to face the impossible task of allowing a horseman to face a tank. If we allow the horseman's ZOC to stop a tank, the rules will be simple but do not make sense. Conversely, rules allowing for MP differnece, FP, HP and age(modern units vs medieval ones) would be more realistic but inelegant. As a compromise, I suggest ZOC to inflict damage. This is resonably simple and realistic. The amount of damage done should be related to strengths of advancer and defender, as well as corresponding HP and FP. Thus should be similar to combat damage although the combat is not fought to the death.

Dealing damage relative to the combat strengths of the units involved is going against the point of a ZoC. To repeat myself: ZOC have never been about the ability of a unit to seriously challenge the enemy in a stand up fight where both parties are prepared for battle. It is about the capacity of the enemy to lay ambushes, destroy supplies, mine roads and pull night raids. A tank regiment with all its troops asleep in their tents is just as vulnerable as a Roman cohort to a sneak attack. The unit exerting a ZoC could be completely incapable of hurting the attacker under normal conditions. Just knowing the enemy is "nearby" causes a competent commander to slow down, ensure a significant proportion of the troops are combat ready and alert and send out more scouting patrols or set more night time pickets.

Lightly armed guerrillas have shown time and again in this century just how effective they can be against even the best equipped modern troops provided they avoid a pitched battle. That is why I believe that the damage option, which is a nice simple way of replacing a movement blocking ZoC, should be a straight percentage dealt to the moving unit, not factored by the normal combat ratings of the units. If the attacker wanted to fight it should be attacking the defender, not bypassing it within its ZoC.