Opponents wanted for Jihad '04 Campaign Game

[Steelwhip]

appreciate the offer. but I looked over the scenario some time back. its just to big for something I would be comfortable with. im happy with running 4-6 divisions. anything above that I start to get overwhelmed. add in that im not the strongest player and still iffy on some of the mechanics...makes for a bad combination if im 50% of the force commanders

[Ricky B]

Having played this 3-4 times already, and in another battle of it, I have always played it with Interdiction reduced to 4, and Interdiction Effect=12, which makes for losses about 1/3 of the standard. This leads to some heavy wear and tear, but leaves the Arabs with a chance to win. Otherwise, their losses from just moving the Egyptians to the front leaves them too much in the negative to have a real chance of winning, from my experience.

Enjoy, this is a great scenario, I think.

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

As far as teams go, it doesn't have to be 2vs2. If either side wants a third or fourth team mate, that's fine. That is what the shadow player is for when it comes to reporting the game.

Also, the forces don't have to be split evenly either. If Steel Whip only wants 4-6 divisions and that is ok with the Cdr, he can still play if they want. No worries here.

[burroughs]

Sounds good to me, but form my experience with team games it is the magic 4 that gets the job done the best. This scenario is not long and even with a turn per week it's only a bit under a year and a half if I can remember well so turnaround is not that much important as in my K'43 team game with around 450 turns. Nevertheless with two days at least for a guy to move and five guys in total it's already over a weak and multiplies further the time to complete the game further - then the delays, RL commitments, holidays in the meantime. Our seven man DF '85 BFTB 4.7 game ended in a fiasco after over twenty turns and a year and a half or something and I am still unable to report that.

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

No worries. If we are not using nuclear, are we also to assume we are not using chemicals? I personally prefer conventional but will play where the majority goes.

Also, if anybody tries to open the file and it doesn't work, double check you are up to date with the latest patch.

[Steelwhip]

Id be fine with joining in and having command of a small number of divisions if the respective commanders and other players are ok with it. Just reinstalled the game an DLed the mod.

Im mostly a stay at home househusband so I have plenty of time to do the turns and get the turns around quickly. I am West Coast USA so Im on PST, and my email if anyone has any more questions is [email protected]. not real particular about sides although I would say that the last couple email games Ive done with a buddy (FG 85) has had me on the attack with WP forces. and not that running C and D class troops are the worst things in the world....but I would like to try something with a bit higher rating-but that not a deal breaker or anything

[Ricky B]

Having played this 3-4 times already, and in another battle of it, I have always played it with Interdiction reduced to 4, and Interdiction Effect=12, which makes for losses about 1/3 of the standard. This leads to some heavy wear and tear, but leaves the Arabs with a chance to win. Otherwise, their losses from just moving the Egyptians to the front leaves them too much in the negative to have a real chance of winning, from my experience.

Enjoy, this is a great scenario, I think.

FYI, burroughs let me know the values were already lower in the download, and I see that Volcano Man has them already set to values close to what I posted earlier - value of 4 and effect of 15. As a result, I would suggest NOT lowering it further as I think that will shift the balance in the Arab favor, from what I think is currently fairly well balanced.

Regards
Rick

[Volcano Man]

Yeah, I vaguely remember changing it after all the feedback at the time. :)

Also, everyone keep in mind that you can avoid interdiction altogether if you don't move in T mode (just something to remember as you get closer to the front line).

[burroughs]

Yes, technically its quite obvious in terms of the way the game engine works, but in fact would that not mean that the Egyptians deploy into Sinai in assault formation as a rule of thumb, buttoned and arms at the ready all the time entering a basically demilitarized zone - is that realistic? Not mentioning that perhaps applying some pressure in south - western occupied Palestine ( mind you please that I am already role-playing now )early into the war is of quite an importance operationally and strategically? Anyway, I am already leaning towards playing with the last VM's values anyway now so it's not that much of a problem.
Steelwhip can always join us, but so far the discussion has a bit stalled and I was withholding the setting up of the scenario unless Ricky B responds my inquiry which he has.

[Volcano Man]

Yes, technically its quite obvious in terms of the way the game engine works, but in fact would that not mean that the Egyptians deploy into Sinai in assault formation as a rule of thumb, buttoned and arms at the ready all the time entering a basically demilitarized zone - is that realistic? Not mentioning that perhaps applying some pressure in south - western occupied Palestine ( mind you please that I am already role-playing now )early into the war is of quite an importance operationally and strategically? Anyway, I am already leaning towards playing with the last VM's values anyway now so it's not that much of a problem.
Steelwhip can always join us, but so far the discussion has a bit stalled and I was withholding the setting up of the scenario unless Ricky B responds my inquiry which he has.

I am not sure what you mean. I said that once you get close to the front line you move tactically, not in T mode, not move across the entire Sinai tactically. ;) But yes, you can do that if you want too -- sacrifice speed for safety. You can also restrict heavy T mode movement to night turns, or at least you could in PzC -- to avoid the bulk of the interdiction.

Either way, the real recommendation is to just deal with the interdiction. The Arabs are much more numerous, the interdiction exists to balance it and to model the superior IDF; one of the strength of the Israelis is that the Egyptians would have been bombed relentlessly as they crossed the Sinai demilitarized zone. Cutting this down to almost nil will put the campaign too much in favor of the Arabs.