Ardennes 1944 v3.0

[r6kunz]

15Dec- The eve of the darkest of Decembers: "Ruth! Ruth! Ruth! We March!"

Ardennes 1944

this is the third iteration of the scenario; I would very much appreciate hearing feedback...

Rob K

"Dedicated to the Allied and German soldiers who fought, bled, froze and died for their countries." by Trevor N.DuPuy, Hitler's Last Gamble.

[Oberst_Klink]

Doc!

Although I put TOAW III 'on ice' because of the never-ending story regarding 3.5, I shall ask some of my trusted PBEM mates to have a go at it. Funny though, you released Ardennes '44 3.0 on the 16th December, the day the offensive started Perhaps with TOAW 3.5 I am able to finally publish my revised Kharkov '43 on the 1st February 2013; 70 years after the real deal happened.

Klink, Oberst

[r6kunz]

Herr Oberst,
Looking forward to Kharkov '43.
Yes, there is something about revisiting a battle on the anniversary date...I plan to play out the Ardennes Offensive on a day by day basis, following the historic routes of the German divisions.
cheers
Rob

[Oberst_Klink]

Hallo Doktor,

well, it's on ice, but playable as German vs. Soviet Elmer. I emailed you the pre-beta release; including a modified .EQP. file. If you find a PBEM partner; it's worth playing it, I promise. ATM I am busy with the campaign around your 'area' in WitP AE.

Kink, Oberst

[governato]

Rob, this is great! I am watching the POs play. I like that it's not another 'monster' scenario. This can actually be played past turn 2..
the PO tends to run its units to the ground, which makes it difficult to test the scenario balance...but it is definitely great for debugging.
I have sent you an email with the description of my new upcoming scenario. Man it's a lot of work...

[governato]

Couple of quick comments:

- I like the scale and unit density!

- I'd not add support squads to high level HQs, Support squads only change the supply efficiency for the units in the same formation as the HQ, and they have non attached.
Personally if I was playing the Germans I'd just disband them and redistribute the supply squads...and if I was the Allies I'd just bomb them HQs so that they suck in all the supply squads replacements meant for the other HQs... Rather I'd turn those HQs into Supply UNITS and perhaps lower the overall supply for the Germans by a point or two for balance.

- Engineering and Entrenchment rates seem high, there were a lot of hexes with entrenchement levels of 100% after just a few days. That makes it too easy for the denfender
and I doubt that units would have been able to build concrete bunkers so fast . My guess is that Eng=70 and Entr=35 'd be good and will avoid the 'Fortified+Ignore Losses'
unbalance were small units resist way too long and (worse) burn too much time in a turn.

[r6kunz]

governato
Thanks for your comments and suggestions. I will continue to look at the engineering/entrenchments. I would say, however, my current playtest results (German vs PO), even with the present settings, the German Fifth Panzer Army has a relatively easy go of it the first few days, crossing the Our and Clerf Rivers. I have tinkered with increasing the proficiency/supply/readiness levels of the US 110 Inf Rgt, increasing the difficulty of the terrain, and bridging for the Germans.

Even so, the Germans can clear the Clerf River a day ahead of historic, and in my present play test, the Aufklarung Abteilung of 116.Pz Div has cleared Gouvy, and the those of 2.Pz and Lehr Divisions are poised to attack TF Rose at Longvilly as dawn breaks on the 18th. Stay tuned for further progress reports.

Recall Peiper, "Damn those engineers".

Keep me posted on how it goes for you.
Cheers,
Rob

[r6kunz]

Here is a link to a Review/AAR of Ardennes v1.3, that is perhaps the most complete AAR I have come across.

http://s393514814.mialojamiento.es/foro ... 5#msg47015

It is in Spanish, but is well- illlustrated and easily followed.

cheers

[sPzAbt653]

That is a detailed AAR. I'm glad its in Spanish, that way I can't read it (don't have that much time to spend on it).

Google Translate still needs some work. An example translation : Thank you for Fulcrum point, I will go and pearls and are fulfilling moment you mention phases.

[X(]

[Falcon1]

I downloaded the file in this thread and over wrote the scenario that came with TOAW3, and now the game will not recognize the scenario.

Are we sure that this is the 3.4 version 3 and not the version made for the unofficial patch? I noticed that the SCE file in this zip has a date stamp of Dec 2013, and the original post is dated 2012.

I have just installed the new 2015 patch to the game.

[Oberst_Klink]

ORIGINAL: Falcon1

I downloaded the file in this thread and over wrote the scenario that came with TOAW3, and now the game will not recognize the scenario.

Are we sure that this is the 3.4 version 3 and not the version made for the unofficial patch? I noticed that the SCE file in this zip has a date stamp of Dec 2013, and the original post is dated 2012.

I have just installed the new 2015 patch to the game.

Could be possible that 'The Doc' made the update with 3XBb.exe. I'll drop him a line to send me the lastest Beta.

Klink, Oberst

[Falcon1]

According to the scenario list that I have, version 3.0 of this scenario is for the normal 3.4 game.
Version 1 point something is included with the game, that's why I was trying to update.

The title of this thread says version 3.0. There is another thread labeled as 5.0 for the unofficial patch.
Are you saying that the files may have gotten mixed up, as I suspected?

Is there anyone who can provide the 3.0 version from 2012 that was made for TOAW 3.4?

[r6kunz]

Thanks for your interest in Ardennes 1944- it has always been a work in progress. The most current version is v5.0:

It is compatible with the new patch...

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/tfzk6z07palw ... 5PYLa?dl=0