Panzer76

It is a known problem. Doesnt happen too often though.

Fiaros, are u afraid that Ive laid mines? Dont worry, you have bigger trouble coming up than that...

Your welcome.

Yeah, but would be even more handy if we could get a clicable OOB up on the screen.

Done. Hope it helps!

Recon?! Do as I do with them in a current PBEM, attack with them. Cought the opponents infantery with his trousers down. The chaos that ensued was more valuable for me than casualties inflicted. Valuable minutes lost for him, gained for me

As been discussed before, sometimes the arty will fall way of target even with LOS, and re-adjusting it will not help. This bug has been difficult to replicate. Well, it just happend to me again, so if BTS want the savegames, where should I send the?

You had to use a curved trajectory weapon, like mortars or howitzers to do this, not your normal AT og tank gun.

As with all slow firing soviet AFVs, shoot and scoot is your friend. Also use you numerical supority by massing you AFV in one or two places. The 152mm makes short work out of the ATG once they are spotted. Try using the 152mm in overwatch, and push your troops up the middle. But you can very well also put a sqd or two up the left flank, helsp with spotting etc. Tigers? Flank 'em!

Just as it is clear, I have no problem with a difficult scenario, hey, I prefer them. I get more enjoyment out of a though fight than a walk over. I do not, however, get enjoyment out of losing the battle before it's begun, and there is nothing I can do with it. (start under fire, start with Panzers in mud etc)

Doesnt feel right that a low velocity weapon has approx the same hit % as the high velocity waepon.

Nevermind, seems it's a good idea to read the instructions before asking stupid questions..

Thanks! But when I open the files all the charts are blank! I'm using Office XP. Anybody else having this problem?

Hi, I seem to recall that somebody had gone through the trouble and written all the unit data (gun, armour etc) into a Excel chart. If this is true, can any of you gents or ladies (yeah, right) point me in the right direction?

Hmmm.. I thought you couldnt embark FO's on vehicles.

How about you padlock a german unit in view of the russian side form the start. Would encourage the AI to start with a prep bombardment where the unit is located.

Try Jaegermeister as Allies, that will show you what Shoot and Scoot is good for.

Moon, could you clarify?

I dont want to point out specific scenarios, I dont feel thats fair towards the designer. I just raised some issues *I* had with some scanarios, and felt that people would mostly agree with me.

What? "Panzer76's rules"?! Did you start under fire in this scenario? Did you lose half your forces before you made contact with the enemy and there was nothing you could do about it? No, so I suggest you read what I actually wrote instead of putting words in my mouth!

Sure, I have lotsa time on my hands now, my mail adress is in the profile. I'll be away this weekend, but after that Im ready for go. Ok, I see your point, that there is *some* people that may enjoy such a scenario, I cant imagine why, but ok. My comments were about what *most* players would think was bad design. I think we can agree about that?

Me thinks that it's free for all Anyway, Im a bit uncertain if that issue has been fixed, or if it's the "seek hull down" ending up with no LOS to target thats been fixed, or both.

Hurrah!!!!! But is both issues fixed? 1) The AFVs that you give "seek hull down" command to, and stop before they have LOS. 2) AFVs that just shoot in the ground in front of them.

But Rune, so it may be realistic, but do you make a realistic soviet breakthrough battle? Where is the fun in a battle where the Soviets outnumber you 10 to 1 or more? And the same applies to my above example, where is the fun in playing a battle where the battle *is over* by turn 3 (!) because the scenario designer thought he would make a realstic example of how easy it is for your vehicles to bog down! If there was SOMETHING the player could do about it, like keeping on the roads etc., then yes, I can understand your argumentation, because then the player had a CHOICE in risking the AFVs by driving in the mud. But when the player has NO choice, then it's just a boring example of how easy it is to bog and neither players will find much enjoyment in the game, because the attacking players vehicles are immobilized in the setup zone.

I understand that it is realistic that they get bogged. My problem with this scenario in particular is that it WAS NOT possible to start with the vehicles in a "safe" place. And if the scenario designer thinks that players will think it's fun to lose around half their HTs and AFV before the battle, and there is NOTHING they can do with it.... Another thing is that it is entirely random how many vehicles you would lose to the mud in this fashion. In one game one of the players could lose all or most of them, and the battle would be over befroe it started and the player couldnt to ANYTHING about it. No skill, just luck. In another game none or few would be bogged. Just to clearify again, Im talking about vehicles, that START in mud, by the desgin of the scenario, and the player can NOT place them in any safe locations in the start. This is just bad scenario design! (IMO)