Opfire in 1.04

[Adolf Vahringer]

Is it just me or does it seem that the opfire in 1.04 has become a bit more effective and lethal?

Gavin

[junk2drive]

Only for the enemy. My own troops still stink. Doesn't matter which country I play.

[Adolf Vahringer]

Nope, mine has been pretty effective also. :whis:

Gavin

[Herr Straße Laufer]

I've been compiling some experiences which have shown that opt fire in the new 1.04 is devastating.
I've seen AT's firing at max range that disrupt a tank platoon and often take out three tanks at the same time. I've seen long range rifle fire disrupt my infantry and/or kill multiple strength points in the unit. And, the type of terrain the defender is in does not seem to matter.

I don't want to go off topic but, the new 1.04 extreme assault rules coupled with potent opt fire, and artillery, has really not added "realism". It sure sucks the previous fun out of the game? :chin:

I'm going to post later, when I have a moment, and throw out my thoughts on the overall changes to the game.

RR

[Huib Versloot]

I've been compiling some experiences which have shown that opt fire in the new 1.04 is devastating.
I've seen AT's firing at max range that disrupt a tank platoon and often take out three tanks at the same time. I've seen long range rifle fire disrupt my infantry and/or kill multiple strength points in the unit. And, the type of terrain the defender is in does not seem to matter.

I don't want to go off topic but, the new 1.04 extreme assault rules coupled with potent opt fire, and artillery, has really not added "realism". It sure sucks the previous fun out of the game? :chin:

I'm going to post later, when I have a moment, and throw out my thoughts on the overall changes to the game.

RR

Don't bother.
OP fire wasn't changed in 1.04

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Herr Huib,

I'm not sure if your quote of mine, and your dismissive comment, is meant as a slight to me. Personally, I really don't care.
I was responding to others on the issue of opportunity fire and how is "seems" to have changed for them.

And, as to opt fire not being changed. Sorry, I do not believe you.
I've had the more potent opt fire experience when using either the extreme assault or the more mild version 1.02 assault rules. I've never seen the amount of totally outrageous opt fire results prior to 1.04.
Like being assured that the new assault rules, in version 1.04, were 50% as potent as version 1.03? Then finding out that the only change to the new assault rule was removing the glitches and bugs that made it a most impossible assault rule? All the while it is the same impossible assault formula. It could have easily been made half as effective as it ended up becoming? But, I digress.

And, lastly, my comments concerning the changes to 1.04 were not going to be in this thread. That would be off topic and might result in being modded?
I was going to start a new topic thread on version 1.04 which explain the experiences and observations that I have had over the hundreds of game turns that I have played. These will be juxtiposed to the 10's of thousands of game turns that I have played previous to the 1.04 experience.
My concern is that the game is fundamentally changed by the update.

If you can stay objective and focused on the topic, I look forward to your input. If you find the club's forum a venue for expressing your personal venom, then I suggest you avoid my separate post?



RR

[Jason Petho]

And, as to opt fire not being changed. Sorry, I do not believe you.

OP-fire was not altered. OP-Fire ability of some units were altered (AT guns, AA guns) but weapon values have not been altered.

OP-Fire effectiveness has always been potent, especially since West Front. Which is why I usually play with ambushes as opposed to direct fire during a turn when on the defensive.

Of course, OP-Fire also has a tendancy to be useless, just as one has turns when they seem to not to be able to hit the broad side of a barn. The CRT seems to cycle, it always has, ever since the beginning; some turns you'll have amazing "luck", other turns all your shots are wasted.

I've had the more potent opt fire experience when using either the extreme assault or the more mild version 1.02 assault rules. I've never seen the amount of totally outrageous opt fire results prior to 1.04.
Like being assured that the new assault rules, in version 1.04, were 50% as potent as version 1.03? Then finding out that the only change to the new assault rule was removing the glitches and bugs that made it a most impossible assault rule? All the while it is the same impossible assault formula. It could have easily been made half as effective as it ended up becoming? But, I digress.

The assault formula was altered to be easier for 1.04, significantly easier from 1.03. Yes, even 50% easier.

There is also the option of not playing with the optional assault rules and indulging in the Disrupt, Surround and Capture of pre-1.04.

Jason Petho

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Thanks Jason.
I've heard from enough others and played enough game turns to know that something is not right.
It is more a feel and cannot explain a cyclical CRT which would then effect each and everyone?
Opt fire has been scary and effective in disrupting units. Always has. Disrupts are one thing, eliminating entire platoons at range are another?
Nah, something is different. Something feels different. :(

I will address the assault issues more in an upcoming post (I want to stay on topic). But, it is my firm opinion that little was done to "lessen the effectiveness" of a defender other than remove the bugs and glitches.
Significantly easier? Hardly! :rolleyes:

And, instead of belittling those who "liked/like" the old version, you may want to listen to those who think that your stepping into "realism" has removed some of the fun in simply playing the game.
It's my personal belief that it was the fun that kept the game alive all these years. I do not think it will be "realism" that will sustain it for many more. Most of my opponents, which include many of the top players at The Blitz, are expressing that they may want to continue playing me but under the version 1.02 rules. Most think that "realism" was added and made the game susceptable to more cheesy play.
I believe the cheese is there, but, there was hardly added realism. That's my opinion and if contrary to any others that is fine with me.
Disrupt, surround, and capture, once learned, made the game fast and fun to play.

Now, in an example of extreme assault; a German motorcyle platoon can be in the clear, in the desert, surrounded, out of supply, disrupted multiple times, reduced in strength points down to one or two, and assaulted multiple times each turn, over multiple turns by multiple units attacking from multiple hexes, only to recover morale and survive for three more turns of multiple assaults.
Realism?
Honestly, I'm leaning toward the old assault rules as being more realistic. :chin:

Guderian had a phrase that said something like, "where the armor goes victory follows". He might not have played CS or he would have had a different opinion? ;)

In no way am I attacking anyone personally. I am expressing my opinion and believe I have maintained proper decorum in doing so. I'd like to have a more detailed discussion of these issues in an appropriate thread.
This thread is about opt fire and I'd like it to stay within those bounds. :smoke:

Ed

[Jason Petho]

Thanks Jason.

No problem, Ed.

Nah, something is different. Something feels different. :(

Something may feel different, but there is no logical explanation as to why that would be the case, as nothing that deals with OP fire was altered in anyway.

Now, in an example of extreme assault; a German motorcyle platoon can be in the clear, in the desert, surrounded, out of supply, disrupted multiple times, reduced in strength points down to one or two, and assaulted multiple times each turn, over multiple turns by multiple units attacking from multiple hexes, only to recover morale and survive for three more turns of multiple assaults.
Realism?

Major David Currie was leading a force that was tasked with cutting off the retreating Germans in the Falaise pocket of France during the Battle of Normandy. At an enemy-held village, he personally led an attack that allowed the Canadians to gain a position there and then. With much personal heroism, he helped the unit hold on against fierce German counter-attacks for three days (combat that saw 800 Germans killed or wounded and 2,100 captured). He then led his men in securing the rest of the village and helped seal off the Falaise pocket.

Major David Currie would be herded up in a turn or two with the old rules, let alone holding out for three days (or the course of a scenario depicting the action).

And, instead of belittling those who "liked/like" the old version, you may want to listen to those who think that your stepping into "realism" has removed some of the fun in simply playing the game.

There was no belittling, merely a reminder that the rules are now optional.

Different strokes for different folks... and that's ok.

Jason Petho

[Mike Abberton]

Now, in an example of extreme assault; a German motorcyle platoon can be in the clear, in the desert, surrounded, out of supply, disrupted multiple times, reduced in strength points down to one or two, and assaulted multiple times each turn, over multiple turns by multiple units attacking from multiple hexes, only to recover morale and survive for three more turns of multiple assaults.
Realism?

Major David Currie was leading a force that was tasked with cutting off the retreating Germans in the Falaise pocket of France during the Battle of Normandy. At an enemy-held village, he personally led an attack that allowed the Canadians to gain a position there and then. With much personal heroism, he helped the unit hold on against fierce German counter-attacks for three days (combat that saw 800 Germans killed or wounded and 2,100 captured). He then led his men in securing the rest of the village and helped seal off the Falaise pocket.

Major David Currie would be herded up in a turn or two with the old rules, let alone holding out for three days (or the course of a scenario depicting the action).

While there is some truth in what you're saying Jason regarding the Falaise Pocket closure, Ed's example is about 6-12 soldiers (i.e. 1-2 SPs out of a 6SP German platoon) out in the open resisting multiple strong attacks. Not a mixed force of armor, SP AT guns and infantry in an urban area.