LukeFF Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Only 50 minutes to complete this mission? Are you kidding me? That's way too little time to complete a mission like this, given the map size and the disposition of the enemy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boche Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Only 50 minutes to complete this mission? Are you kidding me? That's way too little time to complete a mission like this, given the map size and the disposition of the enemy. If you need more time, pop the scenario into the editor and add as much time as you like 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted April 15, 2012 Author Share Posted April 15, 2012 If you need more time, pop the scenario into the editor and add as much time as you like It's a campaign mission in Road to Montebourg. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted April 15, 2012 Author Share Posted April 15, 2012 Oh, and while I'm on the topic, there's the previous mission in this campaign: The Labyrinth. ***Possible Spoilers*** I keep my troops moving but at the same time scout ahead the next hedgerow before sending my squads forward. Drop down some artillery and mortars, and then move forward. All is looking good, casualties are very light. So, what's the problem? I'm given one hour, plus one (yes, one) extra minute of time to complete the objective, which is still about ~400-500 meters away. Clock runs out, and I'm handed a minor defeat. Of course, I already know what's next, which is the mission I wrote about above. Lovely. I play in RT, so what am I supposed to do in missions like this? Move my troops forward in a massive wave in an attempt to beat the clock? This campaign started out being so enjoyable, but these restrictive time limits are making it very frustrating. These two missions should be more like 90 minutes instead of what they are now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bradley Dick Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Someone had a great post about how having time limits in the game helps hide the AI plans being entirely scripted and puts a limitation on the player to make it more challenging. The time limits in Road to Monteburg are tough but they are doable. I had a hell of a time with a few of them. Use the roads. I know they're crawling with ambushes, but they're the only way to move fast. Your superiors need you to haul ass, commander. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boche Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 It's a campaign mission in Road to Montebourg. pardon me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 It depends on what kind of game experience you enjoy. An action-packed "Call of Duty" version or a slower experience in which keeping casualties low and therefore a lot of patience and care is paramount. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 I think it depends on if a person enjoys a challenge, or is looking for a relaxing "experience". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 And of course it depends on what you define as "challenging." Keeping your guys alive, minimizing casualties and ammo expenditure is very challenging especially in campaigns. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bradley Dick Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Yeah, at first I railed against the idea of short time limits but I quickly found them to be an excellent motivator. They remove your ability to do everything perfectly and force you to keep a timetable that you didn't dictate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 That's way too little time to complete a mission like this, given the map size and the disposition of the enemy The map is only 560m x 528m. That's a small map by almost anybody's reckoning. You don't have to wait very long to find the enemy either. And you've got a huge amount of firepower at your disposal as well. Finally, you do have the possibility of up to 10 minutes of extra time. Most of the time, you'll get at least five of those, and other times, you'll strike out and get one or two. But 50 minutes is enough to do this one even if you take your time and play cautiously at the start. The assault on the objective can be done very quickly and violently. Someone had a great post about how having time limits in the game helps hide the AI plans being entirely scripted and puts a limitation on the player to make it more challenging. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=103215 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brindlewolf Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Quite enjoyed this campaign and had no probs with time limits.One aspect of the scenarios i quickly learned,was to keep moving forward.The amount of times i had squads sitting behind bocage,dragging their backsides and then watching them rout as enemy arty rained downed on them from the heavens. A nice aspect of the learning curve,when i first started playing the game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted April 16, 2012 Author Share Posted April 16, 2012 The map is only 560m x 528m. That's a small map by almost anybody's reckoning. You don't have to wait very long to find the enemy either. And you've got a huge amount of firepower at your disposal as well. Finally, you do have the possibility of up to 10 minutes of extra time. Most of the time, you'll get at least five of those, and other times, you'll strike out and get one or two. But 50 minutes is enough to do this one even if you take your time and play cautiously at the start. The assault on the objective can be done very quickly and violently. Alright, I'll give it another try. I think I have a better idea this time around about how to approach the two objectives. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted April 16, 2012 Author Share Posted April 16, 2012 Alright, so I tried a different strategy this time around on Neuville Au Plain, and I scored a Major Victory. Looking back now, I realize my initial strategy was really lousy. All the more reason to spend more time studying the map before pressing that red button. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Good to hear it. You can now progress to the Le Ham series of missions. They're much easier.... But what a shame that we've still got that big, red 'Thumbs Down' symbol at the side of your post. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted April 18, 2012 Author Share Posted April 18, 2012 But what a shame that we've still got that big, red 'Thumbs Down' symbol at the side of your post. Yeah, I'd remove if I could, but the editing feature is locked. Neuville Au Plain is actually a very good mission, now that I think about it. Like I said, now that I think about it more, my initial strategy on the map was really dumb. ***Spoilers*** My first time through, I tried to cross the road, make a right in the plowed field and then move up towards the two objectives. Of course, with this strategy, I was soon taking fire from both flanks, and so there was no way I was gonna make it in the time allowed. The second time through, I went straight for the right-hand objective by blowing a few holes in the hedgerows to allow my infantry a way to get through. Once I was able to get in behind the AT gun I was able to gain control of this objective pretty easily. Casualties overall were pretty light. I only had to push my one reserve platoon of infantry into the battle, because one of the original attacking platoons had burned through most of their ammo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostRider3/3 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Yeah, at first I railed against the idea of short time limits but I quickly found them to be an excellent motivator. They remove your ability to do everything perfectly and force you to keep a timetable that you didn't dictate. I actually like Time limits.. basically you have "A-Time" to get to said position or the entire plan is jacked up. It actually makes sense.. if you cant get to your objective then the enemy gains the upperhand. Its not Checkers..... Its Chess! But on a HUGE scale. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnoldio Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Also, you dont need to win every battle. Do as much as you can in those 50 minutes with minimum casualties and let the game finish and take you to the next scenario. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I play in RT, so what am I supposed to do in missions like this? Move my troops forward in a massive wave in an attempt to beat the clock? Aha! It certainly seems that RT play with "decent sized" forces really does make some scenario time limits a bit tight. Which makes sense if they're "timed" for WeGo play where you can get more done per minute. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wokelly Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Yeah, at first I railed against the idea of short time limits but I quickly found them to be an excellent motivator. They remove your ability to do everything perfectly and force you to keep a timetable that you didn't dictate. I agree. And really time limits are more historical than not. Units were often given a set period of time to take an objective as part of a timetable decided on by High Command. As long as not hitting the time limit does not force you to restart the campaign I have no problem not getting all the points that a total victory would give me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I agree. And really time limits are more historical than not. Units were often given a set period of time to take an objective as part of a timetable decided on by High Command. As long as not hitting the time limit does not force you to restart the campaign I have no problem not getting all the points that a total victory would give me. I think a useful future enhancement to Victory definitions would be some sort of time based way of awarding VPs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.