MrSpkr Posted November 24, 2003 Share Posted November 24, 2003 Originally posted by GreenAsJade: I was mostly interested to see the multi-turrets do their stuff, without really spoiling the scenario for when I get an opponent. So - I took the allies and just hit "go" and "play" all the time. It appeared I was gonna whip the AI Axis just doing this! I got past where I get the first reinforcements, and a group of Panzers appeared and all got popped off... I was starting to get interested in seeing if I could win using the "do nothing" tactic, but it was past midnight, so this test is still waiting there for someone... That is what I did, all the way to the end. The only intervention I had was occasionally targeting the FO (the only Allied unit that will not take opportunity fire. Major Allied Victory -- lost four tanks and a halftrack; destroyed all but five German tanks. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted November 24, 2003 Share Posted November 24, 2003 Originally posted by Shep: I've review Fruhlingswind at the Depot. Someone else chime in now too. http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=002706#000000 I've started a thread in the Scenario Forum re: the rating system at the Depot; Id' really like to see this fixed. Given the comments here about Frühlingswind, I think a new system might better encapsulate some of the comments here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterX Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 That is what I did, all the way to the end. The only intervention I had was occasionally targeting the FO (the only Allied unit that will not take opportunity fire. I think this is pretty transparently a player-vs-Allied AI scenario even if not designated as such. There are only a handful of- artfully crafted- scenarios out there where the computer will be a threat on offense. This is true in BO and BB, as well. You already knew that, deep down, right? That said, given that we'll be living with this thing for another couple of weeks, I request, no I demand, that Rune release an amended version with proper setup zones. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 If he does, he ought to correct some spelling mistakes. The most jarring one is the map label that misspells 'Sbeitla'. It's an 'l', Rune, not a 'k'. I noticed a couple of misspelled words in the Allied briefing too, but 'Sbeitla' is the biggie. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: If he does, he ought to correct some spelling mistakes. The most jarring one is the map label that misspells 'Sbeitla'. It's an 'l', Rune, not a 'k'. I noticed a couple of misspelled words in the Allied briefing too, but 'Sbeitla' is the biggie. Michael I caught a couple of very, very minor ones in the Line of Defence briefing also when I was retyping it for CMBO the other night. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 The editors overall did a good job. I am sure things were missed here and there, but overall they did rather well and have my thanks. Demand a fix? Sure...I have an open date of 2037. Hold your breath till then. As for the testers not catching gamey play, you cannot protect a scenario after the player has seen it from everything they could possibally do. If you can't make a gentlemen's agreement, find someone else to play. For GreenasJade. The battle was marked semi-historical for a good reason, in the real battle the Americans were not aware the Germans were advancing untill the Grants began to explode as the crews were having breakfast. We cannot de-crew tanks, but it was the reason I put in the historical outcome. Also, I get more requests for knowing what happened then just about any other thing. If you don't want to know, don't read it. Last, the briefing was correct. The Americans did not know the Germans were on the way. There is a scenario on the CD where the Allied commander was given the order to "Go up there a pull a Stonewall Jackson" and that was it. Briefings should be a mix between accurate and not so accurate information, depending on what really happened. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterX Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Demand a fix? Sure...I have an open date of 2037. Hey! I spent good money on this demo! You scenarists are a tetchy bunch. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Let's see now...we want to simulate a surprise attack on the Americans even though the American player knows an attack is coming. Hmmm.... 1)Start the American tanks as reinforcements arriving on turn 1 and/or 2. Alternatively, lock the American armor in positions near the road they are supposed to be defending. 2)Start the German armor at setup. 3)Make the non-armor Americans less than fit, or simply start them tired. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Hmm guess I never made a scenario before. The germans lead with the scouts, and hit them early. So rules out the reinforcement for the grants, kinda hard to catch them by suirprise if they aren't on the map. Germans led with scouts as I said, so much for starting with tanks on board, and since the tanks are green, making them fatiqued or anything else would make them useless. Wanted to have the Americans a chance at winning. Since it is a demo, and people would want to play different ways and different strategies, there was no way I was going to lock a unit. Maybe someone wanted to play as Germans with a wide awake Allied defense. Not going to restrict play on a demo. It is a DEMO scenario guys, something to show you the cool things comming. I had restrictions I had to work with to fit it in with another scenario and keep the number of vehicles down, then size down, and still keep it fun. Second guess me all day long, but the majority of feedback has been positive, enjoying the demo for what it is. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Originally posted by rune: ... I get more requests for knowing what happened then just about any other thing. If you don't want to know, don't read it. ...I like the idea of an "Aftermath" briefing, but FOW issues are obviously a problem. One possible solution is, when writing it, to press return enough times so that it flicks over onto a new page when reading it in-game, and put a hefty warning in there. It would have to be in the side specific briefings, otherwise you would have to scroll past it while reviewing the briefings in-game. Of course, there would be nothing other than your own self-discipline to prevent you reading it, but it might be better than nothing. Regards JonS [ November 25, 2003, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: JonS ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ligur Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 The first time out as the Axis I got massacred as my Panzers were unable to score but a single kill before getting wiped out, one by one, in long range combat. Most of my shots missed, while the Ami green crews showed excellent gunnery skills and usually knocked out a visible PZIII on the first shot. I was amazed. As I made sure I had more guns pointing their way than they my way every time I engaged I didn't imagine such a poor result. Having learned from this, I concentrated all my Panzers on the left flank and used my artillery to knock out the Ami halftracks and guns. My armored cars just zipped around creating dust clouds and drawing shots here and there. I used a ridge and a smoke screen to close in the small house on the left flank, and popped up with 12 PZIII's simultaneously. I was facing two Ami Grants with my tanks, both under 200 meters, during the first minute. 1 to 6 odds, sounds good. Guess what? I wasn't even able to hit them despite firing stationary. The Amis threw in two more Grants the next turn, one more the turn after that, and slaughtered my veteran crews while my own gunners were unable to hit anything. Some ricochets were my only reward during the first minutes of the fight. They shot a LOT but to no effect. I threw the remaining two PZIII's from the third platoon in the fray, started hitting the lumbering Ami tanks more often and was eventually able to knock them out (one took 6 clean close range penetrations before coming to a halt and even shot once after the last of the six penetrations to kill one my my tanks; another one took well over 10 hits to all sides before the crew decided to bail) but had only the last two PZIII's survive the fight, and now had to face the fresh Shermans from 500+ meters... Having been unable to hit from that range previously I didn't bother and surrendered. Someone posted the Grants were a piece of cake from close range, in my case they clearly were anything but. Bad luck I guess, well, such is war. And wargames. EDIT: I tried again, loading from the position just when I was crossing the ridge to the Ami right flank (with the single small house and flag) and about to open fire with 12 panzers. Won 80/20, with only 3 PZIII casualties. I didn't do anything differently as far as I can tell. Took 65 POWs and 170+ Amis listed as casualties to about 30 of mine. Who knows. [ November 25, 2003, 06:37 PM: Message edited by: Ligur ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terence Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 When incoherent alone won't do the job, you need surly and incoherent. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluf Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 SPOILER | | | | | | | | | | | I took Axis for this one because I like the looks of the panzerIIIM. Preliminary eye level check of the ground revealed the central ravine. I sent all but two platoons of infantry up this ravine as they arrived. First went two recon platoons and two armoured cars. The other two armoured cars I used to shoot-scoot in the center, but they both took turret casualties right away. The three half-tracks tried it on the right and I lost one. These losses did reveal the presence of Grants and several light AT guns. I placed 105mm FO, 81mm FO and a heavy mg in the central rocky patch on the ridge. The 81mm fired at the positions in the vicinity of the church yard, while my recon infantry with armoured car support emerged at the far end of the ravine and engaged infantry and AT positions in front of the oasis. An armoured car moved toward the church but was knocked out by a side shot and rolled up on top of the berm. The other took a turret casualty and hide in the ravine. I sent one platoon of PnzIIIs up the ravine with the above mentioned infantry, one platoon with their infantry passengers to the right, and one to the left. I planned (and executed) a 105mm smoke program in the center of the map to mask the Grants followed by a fast tank assault on the right with infantry follow up, while the PnzIIIs on the left tried going hull down to distract the Grants while the central PnzIIIs got into position to pop up along the berm in front of the church. I lost one PnzIII on the left to long range Sherman tank fire comming from the vicinity of the oasis. I had to then use shoot/scoot with the remainder of that platoon. As the 105mm smoke arrived the attack on the right went in with a tank charge right up to the enemy foxhole area and succeeded in tying up the defences well enough to allow the infantry to work there way in and overrun the area with the aid of the 2 remaining halftracks. The infantry emerging from the ravine also contributed flanking fire on these positions. But M4s cleverly ducking in and out of the palm trees ahead started plinking this tank platoon, and I eventually lost 3 PnzIIIs to them. As the infantry positions on the right were overrun the central attack was ready to go in, although one PnzIII was bogged back in the ravine. The 4 remaining tanks took hull-down positions on the berm across the front of the church area and their sudden appearance caused great confusion amongst the Grants. The PnzIIIs on the left now came to hull down positions so that the Grants were caught in a cross-fire, and were all destroyed within 2 minutes, along with a halftrack. Several of my panzers sustained crew casualties. Two burning vehicles set massive brush fires in the US positions. Next, while the central and right panzers played cat-mouse duels with some Shermans emerging from the palm trees near the church rear, the panzers on the left charged down to take up positions along the berm fronting the flag on the left. The two Shermans near the church succumbed to massed fire, while knocking out one of my panzers. Meanwhile I had been preparing a central infantry advance based on the berm near the church. Two heavy mgs were established there now, and I began moving platoons forward as the left and central tank platoons closed in on the stone walls. On the left I charged the four tanks forward and split the platoon, turning two left to engage the infantry positions from close range at the left flag, and the other two turned right to flank the churchyard and penetrate into the stone walled area. The enemy infantry on the left were unlucky with their bazooka, and withdrew or surrendered within 4 minutes or so, leaving this flag in my hands. In the center the flanking armour attack combined with intense pressure from the front caved in the positions near the church and as my infantry got in amongst the gravestones and assaulted the church building the enemy who hadn't withdrawn were taken prisoner. Finally, as the infantry closed in on the church the central PnzIII platoon (4 tanks) crossed the front of the church and attacked through the palm tree grove to deal with the remainder of the sherman platoon which was still engaged with the two remaining tanks of my right hand platoon. My haste here cost me my platoon leader as his tank came suddenly upon a retreating sherman, who won the draw on him at close range. This sherman was quickly taken out by the wingman, and a last sherman withdrew off the map before anyone could get away a round. The enemy surrendered at this point. The win level was at 74%, with my losses being an armoured car and halftrack (plus casualties in 3 others), and 5 PnzIIIs (not counting the bogged tank) plus casualties in 3 other tanks. Infantry casualties were about 34. The enemy lost all but one vehicle (the sherman, with a damaged gun), their AT guns and mortars, about 60 prisoners and over 100 infantry casualties. The final position looked grim, with three big brush fires burning and the black plumes of several brewed up tanks hanging over the crater-pocked battlefield. A very intense and sobering engagement. It appears that the Sherman has a small advantage over the PanzerIIIM, and the match-up was very interesting. Since this is my first AAR I hope you will forgive the clumsy writing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ligur Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Originally posted by Terence: When incoherent alone won't do the job, you need surly and incoherent. Thanks for the tip. Include "frigging" and "bummer" with some "goddamn hell" supported by "bloody incompetent ****nugget" at least once in every sentence of my incoherent AAR rant. I think my already suffering brain misfired a synapse or two after the touted veteran übergermans were taken out by outnumbered US tanks so easily. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Originally posted by rune: It is a DEMO scenario guys, something to show you the cool things comming.And that's how I've always taken them. I'm not one to play a demo to death. In fact, it's kind of unusual for me to play one all the way through. I much prefer designing my own battles. I guess that's why I wasn't grieved over the BB demos. I thought the Kursk one was really kind of cool and I never got around to playing the Yelnia one. Like you say, Rune, it's just a way of becoming familar with the mechanics and "other cool stuff". Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shep Posted November 26, 2003 Author Share Posted November 26, 2003 "...it's just a way of becoming familar with the mechanics and "other cool stuff" And this thread is just a warmup, basic training for the real scenarios. But it's been a really good trainup so far. Plenty of good AARs, and some cogent analysis. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ligur Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Hey rune, as usual your scenario was good, forgot to say that. I think it was a good show. I remember us talking about building terrain somewhere in the past and you've improved on that department j/k your scenarios have always been great, especially when CM:BB finally started supporting your style of making maps that are a bit on the vast side more often then not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 You ain't seen nothing yet. There is one scenario historical on the CD that is massive in size and scale. Warning in the briefing it takes a lot of time to process per turn, don't attempt it unless you have a fast computer. Sunday of the Dead features New Zealanders, South Africans, and the British vs the Germans at Sidi Rezegh. The map is huge, and massive forces that were at the battle. Made some smaller ones too. My son has 2 on the CD, and both are rather well made. Not bad for a 14 year old. The designers did wonders with the scenarios, and we even got Wild Bill back! My thanks go to all who made scenarios for the CD, you will recognize the names, you have seen their work before. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Originally posted by rune: Made some smaller ones too. My son has 2 on the CD, and both are rather well made. Not bad for a 14 year old.Nepotism! :eek: Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Want me to adopt ya? Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Would you support me in the style to which I'd like to become accustomed? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Since yopu are Famine, sure, I could starve ya to death. No, death is Andreas...well, I could starve ya anyway. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max BrauHaus Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Re: Placing historical outcome in the Scenario briefings I am all for this with the current structure. However, when CM2 comes out, I'd like to see scenarios designers have the option of adding a AAR briefing, if you will, that would display along with the AAR results screen. This would be the perfect place to include the historical outcome, and you could compare your results to the historical. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publius Cornelius Patton Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 The last time I played this scenario, I played as the Allies, with 200% more forces than usual. My main strategy was to put two M3 platoons on the high ridge on the left, and keep the two-three halftracks on the left in the orchard. The Grants on the high ridge wqas a very good choice. They kept the German halftracks and the armored cars at bay, even the Panzers kept behind the ridges. When I got the Shermans, I moved them across the left, where they massacred the Panzers, then across the map to the right, where they finished off the Shermans. Result: Major Allied Victory Axis Men OK: 84 Casualties: 229 KIA: 69 Captured: 52 Vehicles Destroyed: 22 Final Score: 24% Allies Men OK: 687 Casualties: 50 KIA: 10 Guns Destroyed: 2 Vehicles Destroyed: 9 Final Score: 76% MVP of the Battle: Sgt. Wolfgang and his M4A1 Sherman 25 infantry casualties caused 1 infantry captured 3 Panzer IIIMs killed 1 PSW 222 killed God bless, Publius Cornelius Patton 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 26, 2003 Share Posted November 26, 2003 Originally posted by rune: Since yopu are Famine, sure, I could starve ya to death. No, death is Andreas...well, I could starve ya anyway. Since you have been working hard churning out scenarios, I will forgive you for being so out of touch. First of all, Berli is Death. Andreas is War. Secondly, Famine always eats well. It is others whom I starve. Famine [ November 26, 2003, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Michael Emrys ] 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.