Sfox28 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 The new mission called the Hamlet.....should instead be called "The Fortresss"! This one is a made up scenario that reeks of being just one of the average TOW battles that are made up by the scenario or TOW battlemakers (Campaign or just a Battle). Let's see, you have to go into a town where there are about 6 or 7 Pak 40's waiting for you with perfect positioning, about a million panzerchecks and MG's. Plenty of Infantry, 2 AA batteries to shoot down your 3 air attack forces and Gee...only 2 Panzers that must be occupied by elite crews! To assault this "Hamlet" you have about 4 light "Chaffeys" (lite tanks) 3 or 4 greyhounds (armored cars) a half-track, jeep and about 4 platoons of Infantry. In short...it's a no-brainer.....LOOSER! Just like most of the other battles in the TOW single player game. Thank God it's just a game cause if it wern't you'd be fired as the CO of any of the units your in charge of for going into battle against this force with the meager units that you have. Wouldn't have happened in the real WWII! LOL! You could be the Germans in the early years (playing almost any battle) and of course you'd be out-gunned and have to go through waves and waves of enemy AFV's. Or you could be any of the Allies in the later war years, when your supposed to have the advantage in numbers everywhere, and yet it seems the Germans will have 6 King Tigers 4 regular Tigers several Panthers and not to mention a host of PzIV's to go along with hordes of Infantry that seem to come out of the woodwork at exactally the right time! Now I'm really rolling on the floor laughing out loud! NOT! I know that the designers want to make the AI and the game tough enough to have you really fight to win but this is not realistic or historical. It's more like hysterical...typo...is meant to sound correct! LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoppelhopser Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Welcome to the club . I understand the design process which has to be challenging for the player, etc pp. But some missions gave me loud laughs, too Back to Kalypsopatchwaitingness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfox28 Posted February 28, 2008 Author Share Posted February 28, 2008 Absofrigginloutly! I don't mind tough missions but most of them do not make any Historical sense. But I still love the game.....LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneaksie Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Er... "The Hamlet" is fan-made mission, don't bash our mission designers for it:) BTW it's nice) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyman56 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Its a brilliant mission i did it one try and thought is was very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfox28 Posted February 28, 2008 Author Share Posted February 28, 2008 Geeeeze...guys arn't we a little senseative! All I was saying is that it's just like all the other TOW battle missions that seem to be in the game. It's a wonder that almost anyone says anything about the game the way this forum shapes up sometime. If you want to argue Historical...I'll go after you with all the expertise I have otherwise It's a friggin comment! And since I think I still live in an America the the WWII vets fought for ( and our European friends also fought and died for) I think I have the right to talk about this subject so let's not get our panties in a bunch eh? As far as I'm concearned anyone who does a mission with this game DOES A GOOD JOB! If you've read any of my other posts...I just hate it when the battles are a bit far from the truth. It just gets me when, say, it's 1944/45 you've got a few tanks (say 4 T-34's two of which maybe 85's)...& it's eastern europe's liberation time...Historically, masses of Soviet Armor and men and you end up going against 6...yes count them, 6 King Tigers 2 regular Tigers at least 2 panthers a few PzIV's and a couple of TD's or Assault guns. Let's not even mention the Pak40's. Then when you get your butt kicked, your triggered AI gives you 2 IS2's and a couple more throw-in T34's at least 2 of which are older model 34's...GEE THANK YOU GOD! If your lucky enough to get through that you will be counter-attacked by 3 panthers at least 2 or 3 Tigers a PzIV or 2 and of course another TD or Assault gun. What's Historical about that? It sounds more like Hystrical. I could bring up more scenario's but I haven't that much gas left in MY tank...I'm sure you will thank me for that. ROFLOL! Remember, "This is a friggin COMMENT on the game". I love the game. But I'm going with what Mushead is doing.....going MP with him. I've made a few missions myself, I just don't think they are right for posting and uploading yet. Mahalo...to those who understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyman56 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Well i agrre that historical battles are nice BUT ToW can not FULLY simulate historical battles/units because it: a. Doesn't contain all units needed. b. Except for about 2 people noone ha been able to make a map that looks like the real thing. I am at the moment trying to make a historical mission but i am afraid it cant be. Go back 60/70 years and thats as Historical as can be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikki Mond Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Originally posted by Sfox28: The new mission called the Hamlet.....should instead be called "The Fortresss"! This one is a made up scenario that reeks of being just one of the average TOW battles that are made up by the scenario or TOW battlemakers (Campaign or just a Battle). Let's see, you have to go into a town where there are about 6 or 7 Pak 40's waiting for you with perfect positioning, about a million panzerchecks and MG's. Plenty of Infantry, 2 AA batteries to shoot down your 3 air attack forces and Gee...only 2 Panzers that must be occupied by elite crews! To assault this "Hamlet" you have about 4 light "Chaffeys" (lite tanks) 3 or 4 greyhounds (armored cars) a half-track, jeep and about 4 platoons of Infantry. In short...it's a no-brainer.....LOOSER! Just like most of the other battles in the TOW single player game. Thank God it's just a game cause if it wern't you'd be fired as the CO of any of the units your in charge of for going into battle against this force with the meager units that you have. Wouldn't have happened in the real WWII! LOL! You could be the Germans in the early years (playing almost any battle) and of course you'd be out-gunned and have to go through waves and waves of enemy AFV's. Or you could be any of the Allies in the later war years, when your supposed to have the advantage in numbers everywhere, and yet it seems the Germans will have 6 King Tigers 4 regular Tigers several Panthers and not to mention a host of PzIV's to go along with hordes of Infantry that seem to come out of the woodwork at exactally the right time! Now I'm really rolling on the floor laughing out loud! NOT! I know that the designers want to make the AI and the game tough enough to have you really fight to win but this is not realistic or historical. It's more like hysterical...typo...is meant to sound correct! LOL! You found that hard? A little foot recon goes a long way. Its a pretty big map, you could have moved your force around the hill and went in the back door. You have a couple wolverines too. Medium difficulty. Not historical you say. You don't think the Germans could pull together 5 paks (50mm+75mm) and 3 tanks (jpz IV MK 1V Mk III) 2 Flak trucks and 3 squads of infantry on their west wall in 1945? Thats all you faced. Frankly it doesn't bother me you didn't like the scenario, most people in reality won't. I just find hard to believe you found it that difficult. Either this is due to the complexity settings or you charged along the high ground straight down the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reichenberg Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 First off all I have not played this certain scenario yet - therefore I can not comment on it specifically. Just a general comment about "such" force compositions. When you think of an advance like the Russians or Western Allies in 44/45 or the Germans early in the war, there always was a point where the first recon or combat units stumbled across an enemy that had battlefield superiority in a certain situation. Therefore I am all with Nikki Monds comment about the force composition. These situations are from my point of view the interesting ones for a game like ToW (and CM that had very similar situations).....there would be nothing more boring than advancing with 15 T34/85 and 12 infantry platoons towards a German frontline held by 4 worn out infantry platoons and one assault gun. (What would probably be correct for 90% of all historical cases.) But now I think one of the short comings of ToW mission design comes onto play - as mentioned by Sfox28: In a situation with way superior defending forces the attacking force would most likely withdraw, wait for additional forces and try to attack with at least a chance of success. In ToW we are forced to "waste" our first wave of troops to switch the according trigger to get additional forces - and that is outright stupid, bad and frustrating. As somebody who has no experience whatsoever with modding ToW I want to ask all the modders out there: Is it possible to have a trigger that gives you additional forces once your own force saw the majority of the defending force e.g. 4 out of 6 King Tigers?? With a trigger like this missions could be way more historicly accurate and scouting could be on a way more useful level in ToW..... Uwe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfox28 Posted February 29, 2008 Author Share Posted February 29, 2008 "Is it possible to have a trigger that gives you additional forces once your own force saw the majority of the defending force e.g. 4 out of 6 King Tigers??" Not that I've seen. Some of you folks are missing the point...and it just isn't worth the time to get into a verbal squabble about it... So think whatever the hell you want...end of story! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfox28 Posted February 29, 2008 Author Share Posted February 29, 2008 I just noticed this paragraph from Reichenberg: "But now I think one of the short comings of ToW mission design comes onto play - as mentioned by Sfox28: In a situation with way superior defending forces the attacking force would most likely withdraw, wait for additional forces and try to attack with at least a chance of success. In ToW we are forced to "waste" our first wave of troops to switch the according trigger to get additional forces....." This is what I'm talking about when we talk Historical, or what would you have done if you were the CO of a recon group that ran into a situation like this. But to many, it dosen't matter how logical a situation would call for some common sense. It dosen't matter. MP for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnasher Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 "Is it possible to have a trigger that gives you additional forces once your own force saw the majority of the defending force e.g. 4 out of 6 King Tigers??" Sure it would take some clever scripting, but it's certainly possible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reichenberg Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Not that I could be of any help when it comes to scripting such a trigger, but I think such a trigger would be incredible for missions with a very (let's say) asymetric force availability with you starting only with some scout cars and light infantry but during the mission heavier equipement is necessary. You can start and use your reconnaissance units in a realistic way and not for fighting superior forces. Your goal is to push through light defences, if possible, but wait for reinforcements once you come along stronger enemies - And at the end it is your choice to decide when to attack.... Now it is not Thanks for your answer! Maybe Sneaksie can comment if it is possible to have such a trigger (easier to script) in the add-on?? It would be a decent work-around a short coming of ToW. Uwe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikki Mond Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Triggers for reinforcements are not handled well as stated, rewarding a player for wasting his troops. This just hid a force imbalance issue. I steer away from them now. Having reinforcements triggered based on spotting sure can be done. But really I think a strategic element is what would make sense. Thats your historical. If you move that recon force too far on a strategic map, well the 3D battle would make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnasher Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Im currently in the process of ironing out bugs on a British Normandy campaign. The design priniciples I've used are :- No fixed user units, you choose your force from a large pool. Random enemy unit generation. Not entirely random but each enemy 'force' has 3-4 flavours which are added. This means that the enemy isn't always where you expect them & that thier OOB varies. Surrender & retreat conditions Hopefully this will make for some different gameplay (At least from the testing I've done I think so anyway.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfox28 Posted February 29, 2008 Author Share Posted February 29, 2008 Gnasher, great stuff your working on. It really sounds like that is the real way a recon unit would handle the situation (Reichenberg also excellent comments and recomendations). Hey, were all here just trying to make a great game even greater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts