Updated France '40 ALT art / scenario pack

[Tortue Agile]

It is (or should be) less a matter of national pride than it is for units to perform historically.

Well, I haven't use my national pride to rate the French Units, or make the game by the way... It would have make no sens... What was used was how they performed during the campaign, using a German source (name given earlier). When I started to work on the oob with Glenn, he told me as a guide line to rate C the professional units (with no fight experience in a previous campaign) etc...

I did that. Very rarely an unit (one infantry division coming later) has been granted B level in the French Army.

But really, I care not if the unit is "professional" or not, I care only of their historical performance (as mentioned in the thread about the Panthers at Kursk).

In this case the 1st DM (division marocaine) should have a better rating than D, and it is not the only one...
So I would be interested to know what source you used to rate the French?

With all due respect, I suggest that YOU read the rules.

Oups... I did but too fast ;)

[Tortue Agile]

After you edit, I would really be interested in knowing your sources. Frankly.

Your point about "new book" can make sens when the author is trying to be sensational... But there it is a serious work done by a Lt-Col from the German Army who worked for years in the Archives of the German army and had also an extensive access to the French archives...

On the other hand, after WW2 some authors were more interested in making political statements than using facts.

For example, after the Defeat of France, a trial was held (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riom_Trial) were Vichy wanted to explain the defeat by showing that the French people was defeatist (if you read the link you will see that they didn't succeed) and some of the reasoning about the defeat was used without questioning by Alistair Horne in his book To Lose a Battle, 1940 in 1969...

[Volcano Man]

Well, I thought I made myself clear: my source is strictly gameplay and how they perform in the game. If French unit ratings are (overall) better now with McNamara, then it is logical that the quality needed to be lowered or the Germans won't make it past the Meuse. So I guess you can say my source is just simply logic.

I don't see why this is such a personal issue. You can rate the French as C if you want to, but this only makes sense if you do it within the realm of the stock ratings and rule set.

[Tortue Agile]

Well, it is not a personal issue for me.

I was just trying to understand your logic behind the design of the oob. Nothing else.

I have my answer I guess right there:

Well, I thought I made myself clear: my source is strictly gameplay and how they perform in the game. If French unit ratings are (overall) better now with McNamara, then it is logical that the quality needed to be lowered or the Germans won't make it past the Meuse. So I guess you can say my source is just simply logic.

Thanks,
;)

[Volcano Man]

Ok, and I will look over the quality levels again but, like I said, it was done because of unit rating changes (the Germans have less soft attack capability now as well) and to remove the requirement of the ALT direct fire, indirect fire and airstrike resolution optional rules. Perhaps my initial testing and determination was incorrect, but only further play by the community will determine that.

[Volcano Man]

[Tortue Agile]

If I seem defensive then I do appologize.

I guess I am having flashbacks of when I was play testing F40 years ago when lower French unit ratings were initially suggested. If I recall correctly, it met with similar reaction. So perhaps I subconciously continued the discussion. ;)

Didn't see that post... I have been coherent since the first day I worked on that game. I used one book from a German historian who published his work in 1995 (in German, then a few years later in French and finally in 2006 in English). His view of the campaign is somewhat different from his predecessors but he used very good sources (German and French). So I have tried since reading that book to come up with the most historical rating for the French army.

The big problem with the campaign is that it is difficult to recreate the breakthrough in the Ardennes without having the French already ready for a strong defense in the sector (on in a central position ready to react). We have the knowledge of the Campaign, of the German Strategy and of the French mistakes. And to add to all that, there is no surprise in the German attack.

Now I think it would be better to start the Campaign on the 12 or 13 to give less time to the allies to prepare. ;)

[rmonical]

The big problem with the campaign is that it is difficult to recreate the breakthrough in the Ardennes without having the French already ready for a strong defense in the sector (on in a central position ready to react). We have the knowledge of the Campaign, of the German Strategy and of the French mistakes. And to add to all that, there is no surprise in the German attack.

If a German player wants to see the historical result, why not just have the Allies play as the AI with the historical orders? Or start the game in May 13 - think there is a scenario that does this.

I am the Allies in a campaign scenario and we are through to May 13. At the cost of horrendous casuaties, we are holding the Germans back and so they are roughly a day behind schedule.

Looking at the new unit ratings, I have to wonder why the Allied player would ever agree to play an OOB where they have been derated by another 15% in quality. I understand the discussion about the units getting stronger based on (what I assume to be) raw combat power calculation. I have not looked, but I assume that the German units stayed the same.

My skepticism is this: There are virtually no units in the French (and Belgium) Army that are the the same "quality" as the lowest quality German troops. This just does not make sense. I would think that the quality of an active organization that has been together for some years would be at least as good as the most recently raised German divisions. Instead, we see the French active army mobile troops reduced in quality to below that of the newest, least effective, German division. Somehow, I think that quality is getting morphed into something else.

My experience with the Belgian E quality troops is that they are speed bumps for German infantry. Reading through a Belgian army description of the game, it appears that the Belgians could break contact and move back to another position. In FR40, this is simply not possible. So any Belgian infantry battalian that comes into contact with a German unit is fixed and soon destroyed. I have prolonged the agony of the destruction of the Belgian divisions by moving mobile troops (including the British) up to try to let them get away. It is not working.

[Volcano Man]

[rmonical]

Thanks for your response. Taking my own advice, I'm trying out 0510_02-alt as German against an Allied AI with a small advantage to the Allies. Maybe have a day or two in by Tillercon.

Anyway, it already looks like the German assault is not quite so lethal. I think I read that somewhere. This might have a decent impact. Your comment about the HE-111s is apropo. That also decreases the Wehrmachts lethaility.

I certainly apreciate all that you do and don't want to be a whiner.

Regards