Matrix Games Forums

Armageddon invasion starts in 2014Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!Command Ops gets a Massive Update!Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41War in the East: Lost Battles is here!Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! Let's Play videoLost Battles Scenario Manual excerpts available!A sneak peek from Allied Corps!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Grand Campaign Germany initial setup.

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Time of Fury >> Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/21/2011 11:32:05 PM   
doomtrader


Posts: 5237
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline 		I just take a look at Greyshaft's thread:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2989958
and I'm wondering would it be wise to increase the strength of French troops in Maginot Line. Current one is based on the historical OOB, but I the Germans aren't.

What do you think about that?
Anyone tried the campaign already and started the game from attacking the French?

_____________________________

All the latest news about Wastelands Games.

Facebook
Post #: 1
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/21/2011 11:36:54 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8329
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		perhaps infantry assaulting ML should be penelized.. afterall it was emense with pre sighted art positions etc.. perhaps its not the troops buut the factors of the fortification..

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 2
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 12:16:38 AM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 2937
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline 		There are strong fortification hexes all along the Maginot. For the Germans to directly assault them should result in heavy attacker losses.

[later]

On the other hand - obvioiusly not. I thought those fortifications were level 9? Did you guys lower that at some point? I remember trying to assault the Maginot and it was ruinous.

Or is there an event that increases the fortification prior to the Spring '40 campaigning season? I saw an event for 'France goes with strengthen fortification' in my multiplayer game.

< Message edited by gwgardner -- 12/22/2011 12:44:30 AM >

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 3
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 12:51:31 AM   
jjdenver

 

Posts: 1210
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline 		yah, probably an assault on the maginot should be very hard, and take heavy losses - however you can accomplish that is good. But Belgium, Luxembourg, and Netherlands should be able to be attacked by Germany - that seems funny that they can't be.

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1735661

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 4
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 1:09:55 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8329
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		what do you mean they cannot be attackedDo u want an aar of our game??

< Message edited by freeboy -- 12/22/2011 1:32:45 AM >

(in reply to jjdenver)
Post #: 5
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 2:02:18 AM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 2937
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline 		I looked at the GC startup, and the Maginot is indeed fortification level 9. That is a -81% reduction on the attack strength, according to the manual. I'm amazed the Germans were able to breakthrough with such apparent ease.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 6
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 2:57:46 AM   
jjdenver

 

Posts: 1210
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy
what do you mean they cannot be attackedDo u want an aar of our game??


Yah interesting in our game Netherlands could be attaacked Freeboy. That is different than what is in the current France First AAR where those countries couldn't be attacked. No idea why it's not possible in his game?


_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1735661

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 7
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 7:56:56 AM   
doomtrader


Posts: 5237
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

I looked at the GC startup, and the Maginot is indeed fortification level 9. That is a -81% reduction on the attack strength, according to the manual. I'm amazed the Germans were able to breakthrough with such apparent ease.



If you properly use your tatcs there, and then armored forces, then it should be pretty easy to break trough, especially that the French units are pretty weak, there.

_____________________________

All the latest news about Wastelands Games.

Facebook

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 8
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 9:45:45 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1458
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline 		The 1940 German attack did break through the Maginot Line extension, but as AFAIK the main Maginot forts were not attacked, however, the Germans dealt quickly with other forts, such as Eban Emael.

I am playing the Fall Gelb scenario now and have managed to capture some of the Maginot hexes starting from the Ardennes, at the exposed flank, and moving down the line. I did need a major assault by concentrating full strength INF Corps with air support. So far I was happy with the way it worked out, it only became easy when sections of the line were isolated and lost supply. This is against the AI, which managed several counter attacks out of the fortified area and reinforced it's positions when it could.

I felt that the game was realistic and I had taken significant losses, there was no quick victory.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 12/22/2011 9:58:12 AM >

_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 9
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 9:55:47 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1458
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline 		I am finding that I am mainly using tank units to assault cities, because they can concentrate strength points, but perhaps armoured units should not be so effective in cities and fortified hexes. I used INF units to handle the Maginot Line (because the tanks were else where), a tank only assault should not have been so effective.

Is there any bonus in combined arms attacks, armoured units, infantry and air attack combined, multiplying the attack odds, because it would be wrong if the game encourages tank only attacks on city and fortified zones.

_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 10
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 11:51:41 AM   
slaytanic

 

Posts: 64
Joined: 12/14/2011
Status: offline
quote:

I am finding that I am mainly using tank units to assault cities, because they can concentrate strength points, but perhaps armoured units should not be so effective in cities and fortified hexes. I used INF units to handle the Maginot Line (because the tanks were else where), a tank only assault should not have been so effective.

Is there any bonus in combined arms attacks, armoured units, infantry and air attack combined, multiplying the attack odds, because it would be wrong if the game encourages tank only attacks on city and fortified zones.


I agree with you and I already asked doomtrader about changing the combat modifiers for tanks attacking forts, cities etc. Currently not possible but hopefully we will at least get a chance to mod it ourselves in the next patch. Right now, the mechanic only takes strength points into account. And tanks have them most.

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 11
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 11:59:52 AM   
doomtrader


Posts: 5237
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline 		Actually the mechanics takes under consideration situation when there is a fight of not-armored against armored units.

_____________________________

All the latest news about Wastelands Games.

Facebook

(in reply to slaytanic)
Post #: 12
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 12/22/2011 12:55:10 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1458
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: doomtrader
Actually the mechanics takes under consideration situation when there is a fight of not-armored against armored units.


So do you think that it can take account of armoured units attacking non-armoured units in fortifications.


_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 13
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 12:01:02 AM   
JLPOWELL


Posts: 371
Joined: 5/5/2011
From: Pacific Time Zone
Status: offline 		Perhaps ML hexes should cause defenders to count as armor if anything tanks will be LESS effective against strong fortifications than infantry (per strength point) The ML was a tank nightmare with anti tank features, both obstacles and effective AT weapons in abundance, and naval strength armor (WAAAY more than a tank...) retractable turrets etc. Had the Germans attacked it head on with tanks they would have bounced off like a bug off a windscreen. The successful German airborne attacks against Belgium and Norway were VERY limited in scope and had a high degree of surprise not likely attainable if they had actually been at war with the target nations for more than a few hours prior to the attacks.

_____________________________

"Don’t you think that if I were wrong, I’d know it?"

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 14
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 12:20:40 AM   
JLPOWELL


Posts: 371
Joined: 5/5/2011
From: Pacific Time Zone
Status: offline 		Just for chuckles I did try the western setup campaign as the AXIS. You can bust thru pretty much anywhere you want against the AI. France is toast in 4-6 weeks (difficulty level is irrelevant as France falls before any units could be delivered). It is basically Germans Gone Wild... (not much different from unpatched GC where Germany can take out France by Xmas after knocking out Poland in 3 turns.

PBEM at least in the GC is not much different I have played 3 PBEM games and France falls like a house of cards on a windy day. I hope the patch stiffens up BeNeLux and France a bit. I expect against a human the western setup would not be much of a challenge for the German and not much fun for the French... no one wants to play the raccoon in the road when the truck comes...

_____________________________

"Don’t you think that if I were wrong, I’d know it?"

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 15
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 6:44:56 AM   
doomtrader


Posts: 5237
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline 		IIRC the Germans did go trough the Maginot Line in 1940. With tanks. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Again, normal level is for unexperienced players.

_____________________________

All the latest news about Wastelands Games.

Facebook

(in reply to JLPOWELL)
Post #: 16
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 8:17:52 AM   
JLPOWELL


Posts: 371
Joined: 5/5/2011
From: Pacific Time Zone
Status: offline 		I played a few turns (Grand Campaign West) at Hard (Axis) vrs Easy (Allies) Axis crushes France. GE Tanks went thru the ML like Blowtorch thru warm butter. (Initial setup French units not all at full strength in the ML is a factor. Another factor is it Airstrikes are waaaaaay to effective against units in forts. As I said difficulty is not a factor as initial forces decide the battle. ML folds like a cheap tent. I don't see this as a real problem as the scenario is pretty much a fantasy scenario anyway.

See situation on turn 5. I think we can predict how this is going to turn out...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by JLPOWELL -- 2/19/2012 8:22:33 AM >

_____________________________

"Don’t you think that if I were wrong, I’d know it?"

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 17
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 8:26:59 AM   
doomtrader


Posts: 5237
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline 		JLPOWELL, I see that you are referring to 1.00 version.
France (and especially ML) is much harder nut to crack in 1.01.

I completely agree that the France was way to easy to be beaten in 1.00, I'm hoping to hear your comments after trying official 1.01 which should be released soon.

_____________________________

All the latest news about Wastelands Games.

Facebook

(in reply to JLPOWELL)
Post #: 18
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 8:43:15 AM   
JLPOWELL


Posts: 371
Joined: 5/5/2011
From: Pacific Time Zone
Status: offline 		IMO you are wrong regarding tanks. Those attacks made on the forts were infantry with usually very heavy artillery support. At surrender most of the (albeit cut off and irrelevant forts)were still holding out. The main line was essentially outflanked no significant frontal assaults were made on the 'main' line and as far as I know no assaults by armor at all. Infantry combat engineers and artillery were pretty much the only way to attack a fortification with significant obstacles and guns. Today with precision guided munitions forts are pretty ineffective but in WW2 it was pretty hard to get a direct hit and a near miss on those concrete and steel monsters was ineffective. Some very large air dropped weapons were developed (by the allies) during the war which were effective against concrete structures (when used in large numbers), but Germany didn't have any equivalent in 1940 (or ever for that matter).

_____________________________

"Don’t you think that if I were wrong, I’d know it?"

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 19
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 8:48:22 AM   
JLPOWELL


Posts: 371
Joined: 5/5/2011
From: Pacific Time Zone
Status: offline 		I completely agree re the patch. The western scenario is still a bit out there IMO, but that's why you have more than one scenario.

Looking forward to the patch and thanks for all your hard work and for listening to all us Monday Morning Quarterbacks.


_____________________________

"Don’t you think that if I were wrong, I’d know it?"

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 20
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 9:01:39 AM   
doomtrader


Posts: 5237
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline 		Also you must remember that the Armored division is not composed with tanks only. IIRC at the beginning of the war it was two regiments of tanks and one regiment of mech infantry, with all the support battalions.

_____________________________

All the latest news about Wastelands Games.

Facebook

(in reply to JLPOWELL)
Post #: 21
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 5:11:51 PM   
JLPOWELL


Posts: 371
Joined: 5/5/2011
From: Pacific Time Zone
Status: offline 		I get that but.... Tanks are toys you leave at home when doing certain things infantry does better. So the big armor advantage adjustment should not apply. IMO that advantage should not apply for river crossings assaults into MTN or City hexes or on amphibious assaults. For that matter armor formations should get a huge negative adjustment and take significant damage if used for a landing. And of course the counterpoint is there is a lot of operational flexibility not modeled in the game. Combat engineers, logistical expenditures and preparation made for large assaults artillery (ammo stockpiling for a prepared large assault) tank battalions attached to infantry etc . I agree with the design decisions not to bog the game down with that level of detail.
That said ToF overrates the tank formations particularly Corps and more particularly German formations early in the war. Their strength lies in mobility both speed and ability to move in proximity to enemy formations (move thru ZOC) not raw power. IMO armor should have more maneuver capability and less power. One easy way to do this would be to require fewer AP for armor attacks less for movement thru ZOC and just more AP's I believe it takes two AP's for an attack so reducing that would have a pretty significant effect. The reverse is that an armored corps should only be marginally better than an infantry corps and in certain terrain (City Mtn Fort river crossings) the infantry unit would be as strong or stronger. Another thing to consider is an armor unit with mobile defense would be harder to move past so perhaps the ZOC of an armored or mech unit ZOC would be harder to move thru. Giving armor (and mech) units less power and more AP's could be counterbalanced by increased maintenance costs (perhaps except for US and USSR who had lots of POL) and having supply bite into armor/mech AP's more. Lack of supply and or mud will stop an armor unit (no enemy required) where as an infantry formation should always be able to push forward (or back) a hex.

_____________________________

"Don’t you think that if I were wrong, I’d know it?"

(in reply to doomtrader)
Post #: 22
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 5:31:26 PM   
JLPOWELL


Posts: 371
Joined: 5/5/2011
From: Pacific Time Zone
Status: offline 		Another thing occurs to me.
What is really not modeled is the near impossibility of keeping an armor formation at full strength. Just moving degrades tanks. Simple movement causes significant mechanical breakdown without even encountering an enemy. Perhaps loss of 1% for each AP spent could model this. This was actually a weakness of Germany compared to both USSR and USA. In particular the US Army was and continues to be a logistically superior force capable of keeping front line units at high effectiveness (War games tend to vastly underestimate this factor). In the US Support and logistics units make up a larger proportion of the force and yet the total effect is more bang not less. US war winning doctrine is not more bang for the buck but MORE BANG and MORE BUCKS with DELIVERY included.

_____________________________

"Don’t you think that if I were wrong, I’d know it?"

(in reply to JLPOWELL)
Post #: 23
RE: Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. - 2/19/2012 9:05:59 PM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 1993
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JLPOWELL
Just moving degrades tanks. Simple movement causes significant mechanical breakdown without even encountering an enemy. Perhaps loss of 1% for each AP spent could model this.

This is probably quite realistic and could be easily implemented. However combat losses kills experienced troops but fixing flat tires and replacing tank treads doesn't, so you would need two separate adjustments for reinforcements:
* fixing losses from AP expenditure doesn't reduce experience.
* fixing losses from combat does reduce experience.




_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to JLPOWELL)
Post #: 24
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Time of Fury >> Grand Campaign Germany initial setup. Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.508