Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

(game started) World War III - East vs West: Game III

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Opponents Wanted >> (game started) World War III - East vs West: Game III Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
(game started) World War III - East vs West: Game III - 9/15/2008 6:58:34 PM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
There was to many players that wanted to play game II so we start recruiting for a third game,

The scenario can be seen in the World War III -project thread and can be downloaded from the scenariobank

This is a scenario in testing. However we have played it one time already and there doesnt seem to be any gamebreaking bugs. Players who particiopate shoule be communicative, able to play their turn in 48 hrs (or less) and willing to discuss the scenario on the forum and/or participate in a common AAR.

The playable regimes are:

NATO - OPEN
USSR - OPEN
PDRC - OPEN
USA - (taken by GrumpyMel)

I will also be in the game.

< Message edited by Grymme -- 9/26/2008 7:02:37 PM >
Post #: 1
(open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/19/2008 9:29:34 AM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
Bumping this thread. Is there any more interested players?

(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 2
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/19/2008 12:39:58 PM   
Appren


Posts: 170
Joined: 6/5/2008
Status: offline
I could do USSR I guess, not tried this scenario yet.

(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 3
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/19/2008 12:51:09 PM   
RufusTFirefly

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 8/29/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
In case you find absolutely noone, I would join. Dont have anything to do in WAW-game, because Japan is not yet involved. And now that I know how to use the AWACs ... (can avoid all the mistakes in this game I do in the other WW3 game).

But, guys, I would only join if there are no other interested players. Which would be a pity. I can tell you from my first steps in the already running WW3-game that it is an intersting scenario and it is fun to play. Great work that Grymme did here.

< Message edited by RufusTFirefly -- 9/19/2008 3:41:06 PM >

(in reply to Appren)
Post #: 4
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/19/2008 1:46:18 PM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
Hi

Ill put up Appren as USSR. Rufus: I will wait a couple of days. And if no one else shows interest i will put you up as PDRC/NATO. So if no one is interested you will have the choice between NATO & PDRC (i think people underestimate how fun it will be to play the last one.)

I will play the one that is chosen last.

So far we have...

NATO - OPEN
USSR - Appren
PDRC - OPEN
USA - Grumpymel.



(in reply to RufusTFirefly)
Post #: 5
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/20/2008 11:37:16 AM   
RufusTFirefly

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 8/29/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
@Grymme:
Yes, that is just what I thought. Maybe some players get interested when reading AAR of second WW3 game. Have continued the AAR.

(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 6
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/24/2008 9:26:53 PM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
I am bumbing this thread a last time.

My plan is that if no one else shows interest we will start the game (with Rufus) on friday. I will set it of as NATO. After that i am going to Greece for a couple of days. But i would be back in time for the game to reach me.

So you could send me your email in the meantime.

(in reply to RufusTFirefly)
Post #: 7
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/25/2008 6:55:14 PM   
RufusTFirefly

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 8/29/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
Watch out Appren, NATO sends its master spy Grymme to the balkan.

If you see someone there with a large trenchcoat, wearing a hat and sunglasses, looking cool with his cigarette in one hand and a glas of of whiskey in the other, this is not a tourist on holidays , it is Grymme (so here is a picture of him like he looks when he is on duty: ). Be aware of the little spy camera in his sunglasses. It makes a silent click each time he twinkles his eyes.

Maybe you manage to catch him at the border between Greece and Bulgaria before he can spot out Warshaw Pact units there.

(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 8
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/26/2008 7:02:49 PM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
:)

The game is on with the following players.

NATO - Grymme
USSR - Apren
PDRC - Rufusthefirefly
USA -Grumpymel

First turn sent to Apren.

Highlights of NATO first turn.

- Skirmishes in Northern Finland.
- NATO airstrikes & heavy armoured action clears roads to Berlin. Only light elements enter the city though.
- Airstrike takes out bridge close to Kaliningrad
-  North of Budapest an infantrycorps & an engineer corps heavily damaged by NATO armours.
- In bulgaria USSR infantrycorps, border brigades & artillery corps wiped out. NATO doesnt enter Varna.
- AWACS recon entire black sea & Caucasus area. 1 AWACS shot down over Poland.
- West African & South africa joins NATO. Namibia & Zimbabwe join USSR.





(in reply to RufusTFirefly)
Post #: 9
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/26/2008 11:20:53 PM   
Appren


Posts: 170
Joined: 6/5/2008
Status: offline
USSR commanders are caught unprepared, but at least Berlin was captured.

(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 10
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/27/2008 9:28:39 PM   
RufusTFirefly

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 8/29/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
Turn China done and file send to grumpymel (USA). Only some unit movements and some airstrikes on US army group in Korea. No land battles so far.

(in reply to Appren)
Post #: 11
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 9/30/2008 6:23:36 AM   
GrumpyMel

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
USA Turn 1 Done and on to NATO.


A few Naval engagements this turn. Soviet submarine fleets off Florida and Somalia are sunk with all hands. 2 Chinese submarine fleets off of Korea also engaged and heavly damaged. Other then that just some minor bombardments, nothing terribly exciting.


Putting together an AAR but I won't start posting till a few turns down the road, so as to keep intel from being compromised.

(in reply to RufusTFirefly)
Post #: 12
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/6/2008 6:34:03 AM   
GrumpyMel

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
USA Turn 2 done and sent to NATO.


Some bombing raids in various hotspots and a little ground combat between Israel and Syria. Nothing else terribly exciting.


Had AT crash on my most of the way through my turn....so I had to restart.  Replayed it with the exact same moves upto that point (had got through everything except Asia).... results were pretty close to the same....bigest difference was Cairo was less of a slag heap the 2nd time around...but I didn't loose any stealths.  (before the crash I pretty much had Cairo knocked out..but it cost 2 stealths.) 

(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 13
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/6/2008 12:00:01 PM   
Appren


Posts: 170
Joined: 6/5/2008
Status: offline
Soviet allies in Africa, The Middle East and Cuba have serious issues, and our generals fear that they will fail soon, lazy nekulturnij savages all of them!

(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 14
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/13/2008 8:04:20 PM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
hmmm... so where is the game at?

(in reply to Appren)
Post #: 15
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/14/2008 5:42:10 AM   
GrumpyMel

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
Just got the turn from Rufus (PDRC) tonight....I have just completed it (USA) and sent it on to you (NATO).

Some highlights.....

- The Syrian Army has mostly been knocked out of the war as the IDF destroyed most of it while taking Damascus this turn.

- Havanna and Addis Abeba are feeling some "shock n awe" these days, as US air and naval bombardments are in the process of turning them into giant rubble piles.

- The Soviet 1st Airborne north of Kabul was surrounded and wiped out by Afghan fighters.

- A major portion of the Siberian submarine force is lying on the bottom of the Sea of Japan after it attempted to inflitrate Nagasaki harbor to stage a sneak attack against the well protected 7th Fleet. The 7th sortied out and sunk some of the survivors on it's turn.

- The Sea of Japan is seeing even more scrap metal these days....in the form of Chinese Mig's flying sorties against Korea and Taipei, in what is becoming known as "Operation Turkey Shoot", although Taipei has sustained some damage...the PDRC flyboys are paying a major price for it.

- Another major development in Asia. North Korea joins the war alongside the PDRC. However in the opening salvo, it is stopped cold at the DMZ by the ROK 2nd Division....the attacking forces suffer heavy casualties as they are rebuffed. Even more losses are sustained by North Korea and PDRC forces along the DMZ as a large US air-strike this turn catches enemy infantry, armor and artillery in it's corsshairs while they are massing for attack.


(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 16
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/15/2008 9:33:49 PM   
RufusTFirefly

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 8/29/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
China turn 4 completed and send.

Burmesian liberation forces were successful in attacking the revisionistic imperialistic forces of the USA. North Korean units supported by their brothers of PDRC drove back the traitorous troops of south Korea.

Unfortunately Chinese air recon suffered heavy losses over the south Korean sea.

(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 17
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/18/2008 5:38:32 PM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
NATO turn 5 done

Soviet special forces landed in important roads in Germany and Prague retaken by USSR during their turn.

Highlights of my turn.
- The battle of the highway Hamburg surpasses the battle of Kursk as the biggest armoured encounter in history. 3 amoured corps from the 1st Bundeswehr heavily supported by airforces and infantry sqare of against parts of the USSR Tanks guard army. Some 15 USSR tanks are destroyed at a high cost of infantry & 5 tanks for NATO. Several heavy armoured battalions destroyed.
- the USSR is standing outside Vienna on four sides.
- Prague is captured again by NATO forces heavy casualties on both sides.
- NATO strategic bombers encounter USSR fighters and is crippled.
- Finnish army retreats.
- South african airforce starts strategic bombardment of namibia.
- Losses of Infantry high for NATO. A lot of production switched from airforce to infantry.

< Message edited by Grymme -- 10/18/2008 5:44:25 PM >

(in reply to RufusTFirefly)
Post #: 18
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/19/2008 1:36:49 PM   
RufusTFirefly

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 8/29/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
China turn 5 done and send.

In Burma Chinese troops forced US units to retreat. In Korea China lost several fighters and bombers due to massive concentration of US fighters. In Korean sea some Chinese subs get lost.

An attack on US units ended without success. Several Chinese and North Korean units got lost while US had only few losses.

(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 19
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/20/2008 2:07:20 AM   
GrumpyMel

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
USA Turn 5 Done and sent on to NATO.


- Egypt largely knocked out of the War as well, as both the Suez Canal and Cairo have fallen to the IDF, Iraqi oil siezed as well. Very few Pact formations left in the Middle-East.

- All of Cuba and Latin America now controlled by USA.

- In Korea, a massive air strike against the forces besieging Seuol results in tremendous amounts of PDRC and North Korean casualties and equipment destroyed. US AirForce is unscathed.

- Burma is under heavy pressure but still holding.

(in reply to RufusTFirefly)
Post #: 20
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/20/2008 10:00:48 PM   
RufusTFirefly

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 8/29/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
Hi to all,

hope you have fun playing this game.

I have no fun at all. It is the most boring and disappointing game I ever did!!!

Why the hell should anyone play China? There is USSR in the north and in the south (Thailand). In the west Burma can be attacked. But the mountain area cost so much action points that it is impossible to launch an attack when the units has been moved, although it was moved only one hex. The Burmese partisans are too weak to attack an US unit of 1 infantry although they are 19 inf (readiness is too low); great!

In Afganistan the taliban are defending so no area can be won.

In Korea there are so strong US units that it is impossible to be successful. I have brought a lot of units to North Korea, attacked from two hexes, but I lost anyway

So, no matter where I move, I can get no further. My attacks are all to weak even in case the amount of enemy units is smaller. USSR is nearly everywhere around. Why does Thailand belong to USSR? This makes it hardly impossible to move anyway.

I will not leave the game, dont worry. But I stay only for not to spoil the game, fun is anywhere els, but not in this game.

I would suggest to do some major changes in this game concerning the Asian theatre. I have made up my mind not to participate in WW3 as China agian. Thanks, I am done!

(Sorry, guys, it is not your fault. Hope you know that I dont want to blame anyone of you.)

(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 21
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/21/2008 4:57:57 AM   
GrumpyMel

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
Rufus,

First of all....sorry that you are not having fun.

I've actualy played this scenerio solo a couple of times... to get a feel for it.... and I believe the PDRC is a VERY viable power. It's a little slow getting started out of the gate.... but it's got alot going for it.

I don't think I'm mistating it when I say in the first test game we played China (Grymme) is pretty much mopping the floor with the US player.


Some observations if I may... and please don't take this the wrong way. I actualy intend this to try and help you have a more enjoyable experience... even though it will make my road a little tougher.

I believe you've done a few things that have severely handicapped you as the PDRC.

1) You've pretty much thrown away your air power. Although China starts with a tech disadvantage in the air....they have a pretty decent sized air-force and certainly can at least contest the asian air space with the USA....and can even achieve dominance if lucky. However, you are using your air in penny packets.... 2 or 3 fighters and 2 or 3 bombers in a group....and only one group assigned to a single mission. This is a pretty sure way to loose your airforce unless you have total air dominance.

For example, say that you have 12 fighters and I have 12 fighters.... but you send those fighters at me in groups of 3, one group at a time... they are going to get totaly shot up...because I have 4 to 1 odds in each of those fights. This is pretty much what you are doing with your air.

Even where there are no intercptors... if the enemy has flak guns....and you send your air attacks in small groups rather then bunched....you are giving the enemy flak alot more opportunities to shot down or surpress your planes.

Part of the reasons you are not doing so well is that your air-force isn't really being very effective in supporting your ground operations in key areas (like Korea).... conversely you are not doing much to contest my air-force from knocking out your assault troops.

2) Your ground operations are also hindered by the fact that you are not taking advantage of concentric attacks. The attack you made against Seoul on turn 5 is a perfect example. You sent alot of good troops in...but they got absolutely massacered... why? There was an unoccupied mountain hex next to Seoul that you could have moved into to attack from 3 sides(even if it meant a turns delay)... but instead you attacked only from 2 sides. The difference between an attack from 3 sides and 2 is huge....not only can you jam about 50% (I believe) more troops into such an attack...but the difference in the attack bonus is more then double as well. It's not such a big deal when the enemy is in relatively indefensible terrain or you have huge odds against them...but when attacking a well prepaired defense...a concentric attack is almost a requirement. Had you hit Seuol from 3 sides that turn instead of 2 (especialy if you were able to soften it up with air, artillery or shore bombardmemt) you had a decent shot at taking it...rather then getting slaughtered.

3) Burma can be a bit of a slog. PDRC really needs to bring thier engineers along there to build a road through the pass and speed up movement... but you can do well there.... use Partisans and purely foot mobile troops to occupy the high mountains on either side of the pass...to open up concentric attack.... make use of air and artillery to soften up the enemy....and don't forget your para's and using air transports from your HQ's to do air supply missions. You actualy aren't doing bad in Burma.

4) Given it's position... the PDRC really needs to be quite a bit of a naval power as well. It's got pretty decent starting naval forces as well. Although the US has a larger and more able Navy it is far more spread out...and has more areas it needs to commit to... China actualy can get a local naval advantage against the US early on. However, you really haven't done much with your navy so far.... you've left it out in penny packets (especialy the subs) for the US 7th Fleet to take on and destroy piecemeal before running back to the safety of a protected harbor. Note that even though you have far more naval assets in the area...I've won every naval engagement so far....because I've faught each one on MY TERMS. I find a small group of your ships, close to where my port is....I run out, hit them once....then run back to the safety of port before you can retaliate. You keep letting me do this, I am going to wither away your Navy.

Leaving your navy out to sea can be very risky. If you do it...you want to make sure you stack them in big enough groups that it is risky for the enemy to attack...and when they do, they'll use up all thier action points...so they can't just run away to safety after the fight.

Also, you've given me no reason to force an engagement with you. Naval shore bombardment from capital ships can be devastating....you haven't done any. Ships and sub's can interdict supplies, production and troop transfers. I've been pretty free in my ability to move stuff around without much hinderance.


Anyway, I'm NOT trying to be overly critical. Sorry, if my post comes off that way....but I think if you try to employ some of these tactics with the PDRC... you'll see they are alot more competitive power.





(in reply to RufusTFirefly)
Post #: 22
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/21/2008 7:36:53 AM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
Hi Rufus. I guess i have to take a little responsibility for PDRC (Chinas) position since i designed the scenario.

I am not sure if your criticism is mainly that there isnt much to do for China or that their possition is to difficult to play from. So ill try to adress both issues.

If you are a player who enjoys large land fronts and land battles then i can fully understand why you are not having to good a time. China in WWIII pretty much plays the role of Japan in WWII with large air & naval battles, some islandhopping and not much land battles. I should say that you are only on turn 5 in the game and from that turn and on there is the possibility for the China or the US to open up the Pakistani/India conflict. This does make for much more land action and also helps opens up a second front in Afghanistan.

As for some more specific issues.

- South Korea contains 3 US units from the start & they have 2 turns to strenghten their position before China can attack. It is also within reach of naval & air interdiction. I think that just by placing some fighters in intercept/ASW mode close to Seul you will be able to do some damage to their reinforcement. So i do not think that South Korea is to dificult to take.

- Its Vietnamn that is USSR controlled. Thailand is US controlled and can be attacked by China after Burma is captured. This is because of historical issues. China & Vietnam pretty much hated eachother during the cold war (after the vietnam war) & Vietnam was much closer affiliatet with USSR.

- As for Burma. Yes the terrain is difficult. But the US position is almost unholdable and Burma should fall within 5 turns of attacking. Which it looks like its doing in the game also. Partisans role is mostly to cut supplylines & open up roads, possibly to take undefended cities. They are not ment to be able to attack regular units very well. Sorry if you havent been able to kill even 1 inf though (i guess they might be a little weak :)

- The chinese/afghan border mirrors reality & looks very uninviting. i agree.

___________________

I should say that i have made some changes to the scenario since we started the game. Not major ones, but still. Among other things i reduced all starting powers research to 1. This reduced US & NATO airresearch, USSR air & artillery and China sub research. I think it makes for a more balanced airgame.
_____________________

I think that a standard strategy for China in a WWIII game goes something like this.
- Try to stop reinforcements to South Korea with navy & aircraft.
- Imediatly build some 30-40 carrier air to use for striking against any US naval force that gets to close.
- Build up on China/North Korean border and attack directly on turn 3.
- Build up on Burmese border with paratroops among other things. Also get your engineers here & reinforce them. Attack Burma & cut of Burmese supply as soon as possible.
- After Burma is captured start the long walk towards Singapore.
- Bomb Taiwan with long range artillery & after fall of south Korea also with air & naval assets. Then invade. The US should not be able to stop this.

- Production should initialy be focused on fighters, carrier air, ships & engineers. Possibly flak as well. the ground forces you have should be plenty for what you have to do.

In the first test game China has captured South Korea, Burma, Singapore, Borneo, Jakarta, Brunei (6 production cities) and have landed in full force in Australia & is fighting its way towards Sydney. They are also standing outside Kabul and tried to assault it once (not very successfully though). So it can be done.

< Message edited by Grymme -- 10/21/2008 7:46:09 AM >

(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 23
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/21/2008 5:20:49 PM   
GrumpyMel

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
Actualy, I didn't even reinforce South Korea. I just established an HQ there, transfered in a handfull of staff.... and directed Seuol's production to that HQ (Mostly supplies and a handfull of infantry/MG's each turn). I pretty much figured he'd interdict anything coming/going to Seoul.

What's holding South Korea right now are essenrialy my starting ground forces. I'm going to start posting an AAR in a couple of turns. However, essentialy what happaned there was PDRC failed to challange for local air superiority and I was flying heavy CAP over that air-space... thus not much success in pre-invasion softening up (no bombardments from his fleets either).

Then on turn 3 he didn't cross the DMZ but tried a (I believe) 2 hex-side attack against the ROK infantry dug-in in the hills north of Seuol (probably suffered a pretty significant over-stacking penalty), with minimal softening up. When this attack failed to dislodge the ROK's, it left his forces with 0 action points sitting in open terrain in range of my strike aircraft. Naturaly on my turn I launched a concentrated strike... he didn't fly any intercept...so his ground troops took it in the teeth.

Next turn, he got a better attack on the weakened ROK's in the mountain (alot more softening up with Art, if I remember) ... he moved in, adjacent to Seoul but didn't attack.... still left alot of his ground forces (especialy tanks & artillery) sitting in open terrain in front of Seoul. He brought in some flak this time to try to protect them, but not enough and still no intercepters. Naturaly, I repeated my air-strike again.

Turn 5 he attacked Seuol with a large force, but only from 2 hex-sides (there was an occupied hill hex next to Seuol that he could have taken to give him a 3 sided attack)....probably suffered a large overstacking penalty again...this attack got creamed...miniml losses for the ROK garrison....heavy losses for attackers.... on my turn...once again alot of heavy equipment bunched up in the open for my ground attack craft...some flak, but again no interceptors. I had good luck on that strike, I have to say. So at this point, his ground forces have suffered significant attrition... and I'm still holding on to Seoul.


(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 24
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/21/2008 6:01:03 PM   
RufusTFirefly

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 8/29/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
Hello guys,

thanks for reply and especially for advice. Seems I have to learn much better how to play AT.

GrumpyMel is right in his description of what I can do better. Have to learn especially how to use air and naval forces better than I did. I am still too much doing like in Panzer General series, where it makes sense to attack with a small air group first to let enemy fighters intercept and then attack a second time with no more interception possible. Same with naval forces that can not move, attack, and move back to harbour in one turn in games of PG series.

I am better in handling ground forces. Thats why the situation is not that bad in Burma. Have dropped parachuters, brought units without tracks to the border and send engineers to the mountains (they have not yet arrived but are already quite close to the border and can soon begin building roads).

What I was mostly frustated about was the missing possibilities to move due to large areas around belonging to USSR and other areas blocked by enemy forces. The situation is different in WW3 game 2 where I am leading NATO. Widell has pushed my close to the edge but it is not frustrating because I have a lot of possibilities to move and attack. So, it is quite different. Doing China I feel like a mouse in a trap, not able to move around a lot although I try to get my more space around.

So I see that I should wait til my forces are strong enough to attack and do better preparation by air and naval bombardment first. Ok, I will try, lets see how it works.

< Message edited by RufusTFirefly -- 10/21/2008 6:07:40 PM >

(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 25
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/21/2008 9:58:35 PM   
Widell


Posts: 913
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: Trollhättan, Sweden
Status: offline
Well, I think one learning from this discussion is that the scenario description should maybe outline some of what each side can expect to help players pick a side that fits with the type of game they want to play. Obviously, PDRC is very different from the WP which is different from NATO which is different from the US. This is also a scenario which is very frustrating at times as the tech level makes it possible to strike your opponent in unexpected ways with long distance special forces paradropping, stealth bombers etc, so you need to be ready for that as well compared to a WWII scenario where the tech's are limiting your moves a whole lot more.

_____________________________


(in reply to RufusTFirefly)
Post #: 26
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/22/2008 9:18:17 AM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
Widell: I think thats a good idea. Although it would make for a very lenghty scenariodescription. You wouldnt feel like writing up a short description for each power?

Rufus: You should not feel to bad for being beaten up by Grumpymel. He tortured and killed me of in a couple of games. Also i promise you that you will get much more land action once someone (you or Grumpy) plays the Indo-pakistaniwarcard. I think the PDRC is a difficult power to play though. And i can symphatize with your mouse in a trap feeling. NATO is much more straightforward to play. USA is probably the easiest nation to play in the game, and pretty much cant loose its ground territory.

Another tip is to buy fighter II technology if you havent spent yout initial PPs.

(in reply to Widell)
Post #: 27
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/22/2008 5:51:19 PM   
Widell


Posts: 913
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: Trollhättan, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Grymme
You wouldnt feel like writing up a short description for each power?


Maybe we can collaborate a little around this. I think you more or less nailed the PDRC "disclaimer" in a previous post, and I can most likely throw out a few sentences on what style of play the WP can expect. Maybe someone that tried out NATO and the US can do the same?


_____________________________


(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 28
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/22/2008 10:58:48 PM   
RufusTFirefly

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 8/29/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
China turn 7 done.

Took the advice and did combined attack from three sides on US forces at Seoul after artillery bombardment from land and sea. Captured the city. It is completely damaged (supply production = 0).
Minor success in Burma.
Stratetic bombing on Taiwan.
Still doing some secret negotiations with Pakistan, but they are not yet at war.


(in reply to Widell)
Post #: 29
RE: (open places) World War III - East vs West: Game III - - 10/24/2008 3:01:14 PM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline
Nice that you got some momentum Rufus. Although i am on the other side.

As for the Pakistani/India thing. I do have some advice if you are interested. Do not forget that the US can start the war by themselves after turn 8.

The key is that India has 8k production & is slightly more powerfull than Pakistan. Pakistan has 6k production and no hinterland to fall back on. The counter to this has to be pressure from china.

So china has to act fast. This has a 2 fold purpose. To prevent Indian armies from killing off Pakistan and to be able to force through the mountains and down to the plains before any significant US reinforcements reaches India. If China can push through the mountains and build a road through i think that it will be fifficult for US to put up a longtime defence. Dont worry about killing off every single Indian unit. You can bypass them & cut them off instead if you have enough groundforces.

Another thing to consider is the possibility to post some naval air or ships in Pakistan that can try to intercept US reinforcements. If you are able to capture an indian harbour early it is even better, but it could be tough. Expect the US to be prepared and starting to push reinforcements through from day 1.
  

(in reply to RufusTFirefly)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Opponents Wanted >> (game started) World War III - East vs West: Game III Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
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

0.171