 |
|
PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Tiller Operational Campaigns (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=11) +--- Thread: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) (/showthread.php?tid=70830) |
RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Kool Kat - 03-02-2018 Gents:  Recently completed a Budapest '45 scenario. Comments in original post. 
RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Kool Kat - 05-19-2018 Gents: I added my feedback to the following Stalingrad' 42 scenario: 1223_01: The Bear Strikes Back ![[Image: 3ccc126c29icon_thelmutsalute.gif]](https://www.theblitz.club/uploads/users/3ccc126c29icon_thelmutsalute.gif) Check this new update and my other comments in the original post in this thread!
RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Jesopi - 05-19-2018 Amazing post Kool Kat! Very usefull scenario information. For me the best thread on the forum. Big tumbs up 
RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Kool Kat - 05-20-2018 (05-19-2018, 04:02 AM)Jesopi Wrote: Amazing post Kool Kat! Very usefull scenario information. Thank you sir! I like to give detailed feedback on the games I play to help other gamers decide on various scenarios to play!
RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Kool Kat - 11-17-2018 Gents: Just completed another Crete Campaign scenario and have made a few comments on play! Check it out under the Salerno '43 entry.
RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - evaught93 - 11-17-2018 Enjoying the detail in your comments, makes me rethink how I post scenario feedback. RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Kool Kat - 11-20-2018 (11-17-2018, 12:56 PM)evaught93 Wrote: Enjoying the detail in your comments, makes me rethink how I post scenario feedback. Gent: Thank you! All players profit from detailed feedback on PzC scenarios. It helps folks decide how best to invest their gaming time. 
RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Pepe Botijo - 11-20-2018 A lot of valuable information. Thank you so much Kook Kat! RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Kool Kat - 03-02-2019 Gents: A new entry under Sicily '43! 0710_01: The JOSS Beach_Alt Enjoy! 
RE: PzC Scenario Feedback (Various Titles) - Mowgli - 10-07-2019 So let's keep all reviews/impressions in a single thread: WELL BALANCED FOR H2H (both sides can win) UNBALANCED BUT NOT IMPOSSIBLE FOR H2H (very challenging for one side - pls. mention which side) France '40/#0521_01 Arras (challenging for the allies) Sicily/#0713_01 Primosole (challenging for Allies) NOT RECOMMENDABLE FOR H2H (clearly unwinnable for one side) Sicily/#0710_03: MobGrp_E (unwinnable for axis) Sicily/#0710_03: MobGrp_E_Alt (unwinnable for axis) Smolensk/#0730_01: Yelnya2_Alt (unwinnable for soviets) DETAILS (SPOILER ALERT!!) Sicily/#0710_03: MobGrp_E (unwinnable for axis) & Sicily/#0710_03: MobGrp_E_Alt (unwinnable for axis) The Gela objective is just too dominant (200 VPs). If the US player just shoves as many forces as possible into Gela, the Italians can't do anything about it. Even if they manage to cut Gela off its supplies (which is hard as the supply sources are close to the objective), it's practically impossible to disrupt all of the ca. 10 US units in Gela (trenches, village) at once. The best the Italians can reach (take all the other objectives and don't (!) attack Gela to prevent casualties) is a minor defeat in this case. It would be much more interesting if Gela was worth 100 VPs - this would incite the US player to also keep an eye on the other objectives, forcing him to spread out his forces more. Right now, it's just "let's all move into Gela!". Sicily/0713_01 Primosole (challenging for allies): I'm not quite finished playing PBEM though this one. Also, my opponent made some mistakes due to his unfamiliarity with the rules (250 paratroopers of mine were able to cut off and capture 1000 men). Still I think this is the most interesting scenario I've played so far (despite historical inaccuracies). Generally speaking, it's hard to judge the balance of the scenario as it features many interesting variables that are a potential source for player mistakes that can shift the balance very quickly. The Allies need to move forward against german defences, pressured by supply, time and more german reinforcements arriving from the north. The most important features are the two rivers (Simeto and Leonardo) that cut the map into thirds along the east-west axis. Unlike the allies, the axis troops do not directly depend on the bridges for supply (their supply runs east-west) but the bridges are still required to let the heavy equipment (arty, Sturmgeschütze) retreat northwards. The germans do receive a bridge-engineer unit later which can be raced south (through the british paratroopers) to build an alternative heavy bridge in case the British commandos are in posession of Malati bridge. Going against the Augusta objective (200VPs) early/unpreparedly is risky for the Allies as the Augusta "peninsula/bottleneck" can be cut off by the axis quite easily. However, if the axis try to delay/trap the capture of Augusta, they risk being cut off south of the Leonardo river themselves. Note that the german paratroopers start the game without their transports, so you'd need to stack them with their HQ to get them back. This can be very important, as you want the paratroopers to delay the allies as long as possible without getting cut off by the british tank regiment. Also, any concentration of axis troops in the eastern part of the map is in danger of being cut off by advances of the Allies on the western part of the map. So there are a lot of things to consider! [I wonder if the high dig in chance (30%) is intended?] Smolensk/#0730_01: Yelnya2_Alt (unwinnable for soviets) I was playing this against the AI and had no chance of winning. So I guess it's even worse against a human opponent. Due to the alternative PDT, the soviet units are even slower in the predominant soft ground conditions. You will have a hard time to even reach the objective locations even without enemy interference! Unfortunately, the Germans have at least as many troops as you, well positioned and dug-in at bottlenecks. The alternative scenario makes the soviet forces even weaker (the tank battalions are totally depleted!), so the soviets simply can't win this one. They're up with inferior, slow and outnumbered forces against a well prepared force guarding the bottlenecks. France '40/#0521_01 Arras (challenging for Allies) My opponent made some mistakes by concentrating his troops too much on the objectives, which left me ample space to manoeuvre into his flanks and rear to cut off his strongholds from supply. Despite that, I could only reach a draw (thanks to casualties). Even if you cut off the opponent, preparing his concentrated forces for the assault (which alone dislodges him from the objective hexes) takes more time (villages --> 30% cover!) than the scenario gives you. If you assault too early (still undisrupted enemy units), you will fail to dislodge the opponent and suffer inacceptable casualties yourself. So despite almost full encirclement, I was unable to capture even a single objective. I think that if I had concentrated on only one objective and managed the attack better, I would have been able to pull off a minor victory. But in any case things are much harder to the Allies in this scenario. The Axis can just shift as many troops as possible into the objectives and due to the time constraints, the Allies will have troubles to dislodge them in time. |
){kind=link}