(11-15-2015, 08:13 PM)ComradeP Wrote: We're lucky you can give us these updates David, no need to apologize when they're a bit late.

As much as I like having a lot of scenarios, really short ones (<10 turns) are not my favorite due to how they can often be manipulated by the defender.

Though I've never played the game, advance to Cristot looks like a case where blocking units in difficult terrain can make it impossible to reach and attack Cristot on time. 6 turns is really not much to move ~12-15 hexes through difficult terrain. Volcano Man would call this speculation, but things like movement costs and the time it takes for an infantry attack to work in difficult terrain as I see it won't be too different from PB: Kursk. It's nearly the same engine, so you can predict likely results without playing a scenario based on an understanding of the system.

The difference between Cristot and Le Hamel looks a bit like State Farm compared to the full day July 10th Prokhorovka scenario: you have more units and in this case also a lot more time to reach more or less the same objectives.

I'd say the lost battalion scenario might be winnable, but the last two on the list look like they might cause "concentrate somewhere and make the attacker run out of time" issues. In Hill 285, there's a single objective for the Americans to hold, and they seem to have two reinforced companies facing two not full strength German PzG companies, so as the Americans you can move all units to the center and pour fire into the Germans, whilst as the Germans the outcome mostly depends on getting disruption rolls against what will be a large stack.

The Mortain Counterattack scenario requires the Germans to move at least 11 hexes against a ~two battalion force that again only need to hold a single objective. There is no incentive in those smaller scenarios for the defender to hold the line they start in: if they hold the one objective and don't take serious losses, they win, so the obvious thing to do is to move everything in the path of the Germans. That's the main problem with the small scenarios: there's usually only 1 or 2 objectives that decide the result, and the defender has no incentive to hold a realistic line. If his entire force ends up isolated in a hedgehog around the important objective(s), he wins.

Later on, I'll post an appeal to reduce the interdiction rate, but I need some more time to phrase it and point out what I see might be the problem with the rate of 15% on this scale.

And well, looks like work is harder when timeline is arriving to the end 4-5 weeks to 

PD: how many scens are waiting the "Strela´s weekly report", enough for 2??? 

Quote:There is also no German Interdiction value as there was no German aircraft - one thing that could be included is a low percentage (say 1%) to reflect Allied friendly fire. There are a number of documented cases of Allied aircraft shooting up their own ground vehicles. Happy for peoples thoughts on that?

(11-17-2015, 02:43 PM)Ex.Volcano Man Wrote: Ugh, good luck with the data loss Strela.

I FEEL YOUR PAIN. During France '14 development, I lost about a year of work myself to a data loss. F14 and FWWC almost never happened, but *somehow* I managed to restart and do it all again. It almost makes me cry thinking about it.