Maastrictian Posted September 19, 2000 Share Posted September 19, 2000 Well, looks like its time for another round of reviews. Given the lack of response last time, I’m guessing that people find reviews more oriented towards the designers POV more useful, so we’ll work on that. All scenarios were downloaded from the Combathq Scenario Depot. As always, all reviews are offered in the spirit of constructive criticism. I welcome feedback. These are presented to help players play the best scenarios and to help designers improve their scenarios. I may inadvertently drop a spoiler, so be warned. First a word on the stars: * No redeeming features ** Flaws that detract from the game. *** A solid scenario. Nothing makes it stand out **** Exceptional. No major flaws, only one or two minor gripes. ***** Perfection. The Destruction of Caen (CrazyCurt) ***1/2 Played as Allies. My first downloaded Operation. I’m generally intimidated by user created Ops as they tend to be Huge and/or involve more than 90 turns. Caen was just right for me, only 75 turns. The map is truly astounding, very appropriate, an enormous amount of destroyed buildings and fires. I thought some of the terrain to the north west of the city was mediocre, but the user doesn’t interact with it much. One thing I especially liked about it was the logical progression of reinforcements. Starting with recon units, moving to infantry and tanks and finally including specialized vehicles. On the German side, I thought the battle was a bit tank heavy, not enough bunkers and pillboxes. IIRC the battle of Caen was a very static one and I find it hard to believe that tanks survived the bombing or made their way up through the city. On the other hand, the prevalence of AAA on the German side was very appropriate. 3 Bridges (Chris Dufresne) *** Played as Allies. The first of four (sorry, not three) bridge type battles I played. I generally prefer a more historical scenario, but this one was a lot of fun. I felt the premise, that an allied company would have to take three separate bridges in a 45 minute time period, to be a little weak. However, the steep terrain combined with dense urban areas makes this a very interesting scenario both strategically and tactically. There are a number of different strategies that the both sides can rely on and that was where the scenario really shined. I think this would make an excellent PBEM, both blind and not. Bloody Bridge (Panzer Man) *1/2 Played as Allies. First, my niggling complaint: The assault boats are fun… but why bother? Why not just start that platoon on the far side of the river so that the user can play as both sides? Second, the whole map was off center. The important area, the bridge, was tucked in one corner so the Germans had no rear area to speak of. Third, the “spotting hill” by the Allied starting area. Hills with good fields of fire are often good to put arty spotters on etc. It is possible to incorporate such structures well into the landscape (see 3 Bridges) and to incorporate them badly. This one was, unfortunately, the later. It was too steep and too circular. Try incorporating it into a ridge line. Fourth (and most importantly) the SS were set up badly on the wrong side of the river in an easily flankable position. It was easy to DF them while staying out of sight of their support on the other side of the river. They also did not have enough support. There was really only one thing capable of reliably killing tanks and it died pretty quickly. The reinforcements came far too late, when I already had a company of troops surrounding the flag and all my tanks in hull down positions behind the stone wall. There is definitely some potential here, but work needs to be done. Who is Gunther (Howard Bjerke) *** Played as Axis. Lets face it, at least half the reason I liked this one is because it is called “Who is Gunther.” Even though that question is never satisfactorily answered, this was still pretty good. My main objection, which is often a problem in the “attacking across a bridge” genre is that the AI just couldn’t deal with the challenge of making the attack. The fact that the German position was pretty perfect helped. The main aide was the terrain masking by elevation seen at the German end of the bridge. The Allies were only able to come at the Germans one at a time and generally they got hosed. The wrecked vehicle now blocked the way for the next Allied tank. Not so good. Some sparse cover close to the bridge would force the Axis to think about whether to employ better cover further back or to deny the enemy use of the cover close to the bridge by occupying it. This one really only needs some tweaks though. Victory in the Vineyards (Terry "groundpounder" Flemming) **** Played as Axis. I gave this one an extra half star for the briefing. A very creative, daring briefing that, while saying almost nothing of the situation, the forces involved etc still works beautifully and gets you involved in the game. The actual game itself is quite good. It avoids the traditional problems of the computer attacking across a bridge by presenting multiple avenues of approach that the computer can use and limiting Axis setup intelligently. Axis AT assets are relatively plentiful, but the Axis has so many routes to cover they are effectively depleted. A very interesting battle, the obvious attack routes are not necessarily the best ones. Indian Fighting (Keith Schur) ***1/2 Played as Allies. A very simple scenario. I almost bumped this one up a notch, but its real limitation is its lack of options. The defender just sits there, setup is the only important thing (mostly). Where as in Victory in the Vineyards (for instance) the defender has to react to enemy thrusts here there is just one flag, there is not much need to react. That being said this is a very interesting historical scenario. It is great to see a reinforced platoon take on 3:1 odds (or possibly higher) and hold out, for a time. The tension is well done, just when you think things are lost, they are not (quite). I wonder if this would be too easy from the German point of view, but that’s just speculation. Withdrawal at La Viet (G.R. "LeBlaque" Mathews) ***1/2 Played as Allies. I guess I like this one because of its quite original concept. Hold off an attack while rotating one force out and replacing it with another. One of the best “exit” type battles I’ve played. My main complaint is that the Allied reinforcements appear in a very exposed position. By extending the map a bit they could have appeared on a reverse slope allowing them to enter the battle in an organized fashion. They also appear late enough that it is a real challenge to get them to the battle before time runs out. Possibly a flaw, possibly a feature, depends on your point of view. Recon Meeting in the Ardennes Bob Cook **1/2 Played as Allies. So this scenario illustrated something to me that I’d never noticed. The Stuart is the Panther of Recon vehicles. It is immune to all German recon vehicles except the PSW/2 and PSW/3. This is because German recon carries the 20mm cannon, great against infantry, but very little penetration. The Stuart’s “thick” hull is impervious. Given the rarity of the Puma and the inaccuracy of the short 75mm at long range this means that Allied recon kicks the but of Axis recon. Who knew? This fact, combined with the fact that the flag was significantly closer to the Allies than the Axis conbined to make this one a bit too easy. There was also a tendency for “special” tanks that I find a bit annoying. Rare vehicles do not need to appear in every scenario, especially one that bills itself as a recon engagement. My final problem was the predictability of German reinforcements based on what Allied units I was given. All the reinforcing medium tanks were 76mm armed. This definitely implies that there was a Panther or better coming. Throwing in at least 50% 75mm tanks would have made is harder for the Allies (which was needed), as well as making the battle more realistic and less predictable. Well that’s about it for reviews. One general gripe. Many people (like me) don’t like playing larger scenarios, they are impatient or simply like to play a faster game. So please, when you post a game to the depot make sure the size rating is accurate. It states at the bottom of the page what each number corresponds too in terms of the size rating (tiny to huge) that CMBO gives it. Record this accurately. There are two recent glaring errors of this type that make me think of this, but really all designers should watch out for this. [shameless plug] I also really like feedback on my battles. I recently uploaded “Epsom – Counterattack!” and “Recon” has been on there for a while. I have not gotten any feedback and would love both positive and negative comments (heck, negative ones are more useful!) [/shameless plug] As always, comments on these reviews are encouraged. --Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michlos Posted September 19, 2000 Share Posted September 19, 2000 Great idea to review them! Could you PLS look at my page and the (so far only) two scenarios of my own that i have up? ------------------ < All gave some, some gave ALL> Owner of MiNa's CMBO Page http://www.combat-mission.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted September 19, 2000 Share Posted September 19, 2000 Maastrichtian, Thanks for the work! I wish I had time to review them myself but it just isnt in the cards. Would you be interested in having your own 'Column' on CMHQ where you review the weeks/months/days scenarios on the Depot? If so then please email me and we can discuss this in private. Thanks! Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! Combat Mission HQ CMHQ-Annex, The Alternative side of Combat Mission CMHQ-Annex Host of the Combat Mission WebRing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Man Posted September 19, 2000 Share Posted September 19, 2000 Thanks for the comments..I am new at this and unfortunately ,although I play test it ,I dont get to hear much from the other gamers.The review at the scenario depot was positive(***),so everyones opinion is subjective.The reason I used the assualt boats was because the Allies never beat me as the Germans..LOL.The AI seemed to have a real problem with the Bridge.I agree you should win as the Americans rather handily.And next time I will leave more space behind the defenders,good point(I'll see if I can widen it).Perhaps I will add more infantry,on the far side of the Bridge.Thanks for the comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted September 19, 2000 Share Posted September 19, 2000 Maastrictian, thanks for the kind and fair review of my scenario, "Indian Fighting". It is a historical, small but intense fight. I would be happy to review your scenario and provide you suggestions. In fact I downloaded it last night. I have a new historical scenario called "Bloody Causeway" that is being playtested by others that is very challenging and will send it your way. -Kieth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted September 19, 2000 Share Posted September 19, 2000 I also recommend the scenarios "Foggy Morning in the Garden" by Matt Herbold and "Assault on the Merville Battery" by Freightman. The "Foggy Moring" scenario is historical-fiction that is a good for a PBEM or against the AI and the "Merville" scenario is good against the AI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted September 20, 2000 Share Posted September 20, 2000 Thanks for your reviews, as usual, you have done an excellent job. Keep it going. I hope you can also review ASL-converted scenaioes some time. Griffin. ------------------ "+" is just the beginning. Expect to see "GriffinCheng76", "GriffinCheng(105)" or "GriffinChengA3E8" more should Forum problems occur again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maastrictian Posted September 20, 2000 Author Share Posted September 20, 2000 Keith: Yea, Foggy Morning was pretty good, see my previous review. Haven't played Merville, I'll check it out. Griffin: I've been looking all over, where is that ASL conversion site? I found it once but didn't download any thing. I then "lost" it. I know its around here somewhere --Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Wilder Posted September 20, 2000 Share Posted September 20, 2000 These reviews are an excellent idea, my friend. I've enjoyed reading them. So far, I think your evaluations have been quite fair. A lot of people are reading these, you can be sure of that. Wild Bill ------------------ Wild Bill Lead Tester Scenario Design Team Combat Mission-Beyond Overlord billw@matrixgames.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groundpounder Posted September 25, 2000 Share Posted September 25, 2000 Maastrictian, Just played "Epsom-Counterattack". What a fun scenario! I played as the Allied force and had some serious pucker factor when confronted by German forces from multiple angles at one time (God, I love when that happens!). This is a great scenario for those slower to medium CPUs. Just the right size map and number of forces. Oh, and for those of you who are thinking, "he's just saying that because Maastrician had kind words for Victory in the Vinyards", you're wrong! This is truly a good scenario, one that I will play again (with diff. settings of course). Keep up the good work! Terry "groundpounder" Flemming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maastrictian Posted September 25, 2000 Author Share Posted September 25, 2000 Glad you liked Epsom. I've been pondering doing further battles based on it, specifically Garvus. Anyone know of any books (besides 6 Armies in Normandy?). I'm glad there was some pucker factor. I deliberately wanted to Allies to feel like some CO higher on the chain of command had given them the short end of the stick. None-the-less, I think its balanced for both sides (with the Germans having a slightly easier time of it against the AI). The Germans are critically short of good old infantry. Considering the close terrain, this sucks (I have to say I'm especially proud of the raised bocage and sunken roads.) --Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Wilder Posted September 25, 2000 Share Posted September 25, 2000 Normandy, 1944, from Osprey and the books by Michael Reynolds on that period may be of help to you. ------------------ Wild Bill Lead Tester Scenario Design Team Combat Mission-Beyond Overlord billw@matrixgames.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts