Campaign Die Letzte Hoffnung RELEASED!

[Knaust1]

well...Final result German Tactical victory

I had to fight the last battle with non tanks remaining...Amis did'nt get the town:)

[Field Marshal Blücher]

well...Final result German Tactical victory

I had to fight the last battle with non tanks remaining...Amis did'nt get the town:)

Hah, that's all that matters.

[vonRocko]

Thank you FM Blutcher!

[Field Marshal Blücher]

Thank you FM Blutcher!

You're welcome!

[JyriErik]

I lost all my other tanks due to getting immobilised...I thought they would fix the track in between missions...sadly not. Also Thye are all IV's!! I had one pnather inin the previous mission...thaty was immobilised!!

I only have 230 men aswell...The last mission I lost to many men.

Tough, but not impossible. The three PaK, placed properly can still be VERY deadly. That hedgerow "fort" next to the field by the farther of the bridges can cover the road to the city very well with a couple of PaK and/or Pz IVs, making that route very bloody for the US. There being only two locations (the bridges) from which US vehicles can get to you from does make it a little easier to stop the attack even if you are in a weaker state by the last battle since it allows you to pick off the attackers in ones & twos instead of fives & tens.

Jyri

Jyri

[jbmtintin]

I lost all my other tanks due to getting immobilised...I thought they would fix the track in between missions...sadly not. Also Thye are all IV's!! I had one pnather inin the previous mission...thaty was immobilised!!

I only have 230 men aswell...The last mission I lost to many men.

The same for tanks, all lost because they were immobilised. I hoped they would be back, with the track fixed too... or out the mud. I had only two panzers IV to defend, no Panther anymore... I had a "No winner" end of the party, and that makes me win the campaign.

[jbmtintin]

Tough, but not impossible. The three PaK, placed properly can still be VERY deadly. That hedgerow "fort" next to the field by the farther of the bridges can cover the road to the city very well with a couple of PaK and/or Pz IVs, making that route very bloody for the US. There being only two locations (the bridges) from which US vehicles can get to you from does make it a little easier to stop the attack even if you are in a weaker state by the last battle since it allows you to pick off the attackers in ones & twos instead of fives & tens.

Right. But take care of the artillery, which took care of my Pak posted in front of one bridge, with a Panzer IV. This one blew up after killing five US tanks. Not so bad, but not enough, as my other Panzer was stuck in mud when coming to help. Luckily, I had two remaining privates from two decimated teams with Panzerschrek. They took care of the two Shermans who were into town...

[jbmtintin]

This campaign is a very good one, many thanks Blücher! Maybe I would prefer it with less people, but it is only my feeling...

[TheVulture]

I've just discovered a minor point to take issue with in this campaign - the panther platoon you get consists of panther A mid models - which is the only panther variant that Aris hasn't done a mod for.

Grrr.....

[Erwin]

In the first scenariob I broke a German AT team off and then broke the remainder of the squad into Assault teams. But, for some reason the AT team has a regular inf icon, and one of the assault teams has the AT icon(!).

Anyone else experienced this?

[Field Marshal Blücher]

In the first scenariob I broke a German AT team off and then broke the remainder of the squad into Assault teams. But, for some reason the AT team has a regular inf icon, and one of the assault teams has the AT icon(!).

Anyone else experienced this?

I don't think this is specific to the campaign--I think I've heard other people complain about this in general. I personally don't split my German squads into more than their constituent teams, so I can't say for sure.

Yunnan province is located in China's southwestern border of kunming, the provincial capital. During the warring states period, here is the yunnan tribes living place. Yunnan, namely "clouds south", and the other is the one that is because is located in the "yunling the south of the name.

Hmm . . . I don't recall hearing anything about a Pacific module . . . uhhhhhhh . . .

[Erwin]

"I personally don't split my German squads into more than their constituent teams..."

Not sure what you mean. In this scenario one can split German squads into 3 teams. What those teams are composed of is up to the player. I started with the AT team (which then had a regular inf icon) and then split the remainder of the squad using the Assault split command. One of the Assault teams had the AT icon even though it had no AT.

I had not noticed that phenomenon in any of the games I played before.

[Field Marshal Blücher]

"I personally don't split my German squads into more than their constituent teams..."

Not sure what you mean. In this scenario one can split German squads into 3 teams. What those teams are composed of is up to the player. I started with the AT team (which then had a regular inf icon) and then split the remainder of the squad using the Assault split command. One of the Assault teams had the AT icon even though it had no AT.

I had not noticed that phenomenon in any of the games I played before.

I understand.

My point is that I only really ever use "Split teams"--in other words, I don't use "AT Team" or "Assault Team" commands. That's why I'm saying that I personally have never experienced this problem, but I do know that others have encountered it, and it's not specific to my campaign.

[Statisoris]

There are some bugs with splitting teams. On many occasions I have split up German squads in many ways and wierd things happen with the AT stuff. I have had a four man team split off, armed with nothing but Kar98s (no Panzerfausts either) and their team title will be "Panzerschreck". I have also manually split off AT Panzerschreck teams and their team title will just be "A, B, C team". I think team splitting still needs work.

Although it is fun to screw around with your PBEM opponent, making him think you have a Panzershreck team comming for his tank(s) when in fact it's just four guys with Kar98s :-)

[jbmtintin]

One of the Assault teams had the AT icon even though it had no AT.

It is maybe because by default one of the team is an "Assault Team" and consequently the other one is an "AT Team" even if it has no AT weapon... Just a "theoretical" split, which becomes sort of a bug?

[Erwin]

Not sure that makes any sense jb.

As with most of the CMBN weird phenomena, it's not a big problem, but it's strange and confusing to "reach" for an AT team icon only to find it has no AT capability, and the actual AT team has a regular inf icon and it's hard to locate (in the larger scenarios that I enjoy most).

[jbmtintin]

Not sure that makes any sense jb.

As with most of the CMBN weird phenomena, it's not a big problem, but it's strange and confusing to "reach" for an AT team icon only to find it has no AT capability, and the actual AT team has a regular inf icon and it's hard to locate (in the larger scenarios that I enjoy most).

Yep, it just makes sense to explain a bug, which does not make any sense in itself!

[Erwin]

How dare you call it a bug! It's not a bug, it's a "feature" designed to simulate the fog of war and confusion as experienced in RL.

[Boche]

one question...just downloaded the campaign and started the first mission, how did you manage to get those reinforced German squads?

[Field Marshal Blücher]

one question...just downloaded the campaign and started the first mission, how did you manage to get those reinforced German squads?

Um, those are normal motorized (as opposed to armored) Panzergrenadier squads . . . I think they're the largest of all of the German squad types, so maybe that's what you're thinking of.

[Boche]

Um, those are normal motorized (as opposed to armored) Panzergrenadier squads . . . I think they're the largest of all of the German squad types, so maybe that's what you're thinking of.

oh great! never checked out the motorized units! cheers jajaja

and yeah they just seem quite big.

[Erwin]

Some feedback re this Campaign:

1) Just completed first scenario and enjoying it immensely. I love the decisions one has to make to decide what to do re the 2nd scenario. Well done!

2) Slightly troubled by the Pumas. There were incredibly rare - like Elefants or Sturm Tigers - a failed experiment I guess. I suggest a mention in the briefings or designer notes about how come this KG has been "honored" with a platoon of them.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=365

3) The briefing says there will be no offboard arty support (despite the luxury of having two FO's). I had spotted AT guns and was maneuvering to kill em with direct fire when I was surprised to notice an 81mm mortar became available. I have no idea when it arrived or how long it had been there. Obviously, it made a difference. Please mention reinforcements like this in the briefing.

4) I appreciate the attempt to immerse the player in the moment with the lengthy designer notes/briefings. But, they were too long and actually confused me as I didn't see any additional important info that the briefings had failed to offer. I feel I wasted time rereading the several pages of designer notes hoping to find some key info I had missed, but never found any, plus it didn't make any difference to the battle outcome. As CM is not a roleplaying game, the personalities of the officers really do not matter, and I would cut this stuff out as it's unnnecessary reading.

5) At the end I suffered about 6 KIA and 7 WIA plus an "Other" (kubelwagon) destroyed. The US surrendered with about 5 minutes to go, so I got all the victory points. But, I only got a Tactical Victory - which surprised me. The briefings say that friendly casualties are not a concern. So, am curious what else I could have done better.

6) When the briefing essentially says "casualties don't matter" does that imply 100% replacements? I always play to minimize friendly casualties at almost any cost as all the campaigns I have played so far do not seem to replace casualties in future scenarios.

7) I noticed that you provided an EXIT zone to get rid of "unneeded units." I did not bother although I had a bunch of kubelwagons and trucks sitting around. Does one get points for getting them off the map? A mention in the briefing as to your intentions would have been good.

8) I tested the SPLIT option and found that the DESIGNER NOTES for the 2nd scenario says: "Let's send the whole KG to the North" rather than half of it...

Other than that, great first scenario. Have chosen to keep my KG concentrated vs the town route next.

A question re the game system. I dismounted my two 234/1's and used the crews for recon. One of the crews never got back to their vehicle when the scenario ended. Be warned that this means that dismounted units will NOT appear in the next scenario of a campaign. EDIT: I went back and redid part of the scenario so that the dismounted crew DID get back and remount their vehicle. However, still only one 234/1 appeared in the next scenario. I wonder if the fact that the other 234/1 had lost 2 crew, even tho' still mounted, that is what knocked it out of the campaign.

[ss11955]

Am single player playing Campaigns -since July --on Chapter 3-Le Ham-----------MY QUESTION----------What is and where is REPOSITORY ??????? Thank you. Jim

[Erwin]

Go to Battlefront Home Page and look under DOWNLOADS.

[Field Marshal Blücher]

Some feedback re this Campaign:

1) Just completed first scenario and enjoying it immensely. I love the decisions one has to make to decide what to do re the 2nd scenario. Well done!

Thanks!

2) Slightly troubled by the Pumas. There were incredibly rare - like Elefants or Sturm Tigers - a failed experiment I guess. I suggest a mention in the briefings or designer notes about how come this KG has been "honored" with a platoon of them.

Good point. The Pumas were only added very late in the development cycle, so I forgot about adding a note about their rarity.

3) The briefing says there will be no offboard arty support (despite the luxury of having two FO's). I had spotted AT guns and was maneuvering to kill em with direct fire when I was surprised to notice an 81mm mortar became available. I have no idea when it arrived or how long it had been there. Obviously, it made a difference. Please mention reinforcements like this in the briefing.

Oops, this is also a problem from the development cycle. Originally the mortars were on-map artillery, so the briefing was correct but I failed to change the briefing when I changed the force setup. Hopefully the rest of the campaign is free of this type of thing.

4) I appreciate the attempt to immerse the player in the moment with the lengthy designer notes/briefings. But, they were too long and actually confused me as I didn't see any additional important info that the briefings had failed to offer. I feel I wasted time rereading the several pages of designer notes hoping to find some key info I had missed, but never found any, plus it didn't make any difference to the battle outcome. As CM is not a roleplaying game, the personalities of the officers really do not matter, and I would cut this stuff out as it's unnnecessary reading.

It's only in there because people requested it. Never fear: it is unnecessary reading, so there's no need to read any of the designer's notes in any of the future missions if you don't like it.

5) At the end I suffered about 6 KIA and 7 WIA plus an "Other" destroyed (altho' not sure what that was - see below). The US surrendered with about 5 minutes to go, so I got all the victory points. But, I only got a Tactical Victory - which surprised me. The briefings say that friendly casualties are not a concern. So, am curious what else I could have done better.

That has nothing to do with campaign design and 100% with the way the game works. A Tactical Victory is, I think, the best rating you can get in most of the missions. The way the scoring is set up, don't worry about the first word. "Victory" or "Defeat" is all that matters.

6) When the briefing essentially says "casualties don't matter" does that imply 100% replacements? I always play to minimize friendly casualties at almost any cost as all the campaigns I have played so far do not seem to replace casualties in future scenarios.

No, in fact I think there are 0% replacements. If that was what you read, it was worded incorrectly. What I meant was that casualties do not matter for determining victory or defeat in each mission. It's up to the player to determine what an acceptable level of losses is. Keep up the force preservation, you'll need it!

7) I noticed that you provided an EXIT zone to get rid of "unneeded units." I did not bother although I had a bunch of kubelwagons and trucks sitting around. Does one get points for getting them off the map? A mention in the briefing as to your intentions would have been good.

No points, it's just done to unclutter the map if you want.

Other than that, great first scenario. Have chosen to keep my KG concentrated vs the town route next.

A question re the game system. I dismounted my two 232's and used the crews for recon. One of the crews never got back to their vehicle. Am wondering if that was counted as a KIA "Other" vehicle?? Certainly at the start of the 2nd scenario I only have one 232.

Hmm, no idea here.