MC Tournament The Warriors Path

[Tide1]

Gentelmen if you all want to play the pbem version of the scenario that is fine by me. Your WP opponent has to agree to it of course.

Gary

[Tide1]

Gentlemen I didn't get one reply from my last post. If the Warriors Path was so bad you all can start over with the pbem version. What says y'all

Gary

[Landser34]

Hi Gary I've been done with the game i know for over a week or more .so i cant play finished the game

[Lucid]

I would like to see the tournament move on to the next round.

I feel that this scenario, which was hopeless for NATO, was fair compensation for the previous NGP scenario, which was hopeless for the WP.

The previous scenario called for a long and rapid WP advance by a single East German division (with no helos and only a single T-72 battalion) through a forest, opposed by Leopard IIs and Chieftains. It's so easy to fight a delaying action in a forest like that.

I resigned that game about halfway through when it became clear that I wasn't going to get to the juicy victory hexes in the endzone and I wasn't going to win by casualties.

My opponent in the Warriors Path game resigned about halfway through for roughly the same reasons. I might have the minority opinion, but I think that NATO has more chance in the current scenario than the WP had in the previous NGP scenario, though in both cases, the chances can only be realized if the defending player messes up badly.

[Dave68124]

Even as a NATO player, I tend to agree with Chris (Lucid). Maybe one option is to throw out the two games out in their entirety and play the rest on the list or replace the two games. Just throwing it out for discussion, but rather indifferent to which ever way we decide to go.