Just bought the game and since I had already had two opponents off the club vanished on me ( should have known better than to take on anybody outside ... )in the TOAW III 3.4 Falotti's the Great War 1914 - 1918 scenario, I decided to change the title and the recruitment area.
For some reason I'd like to play as the Entente Cordiale side ( perhaps it's because I speak little French like merde! sacre bleu! debrouillez vous pour la Patrie and vive la France! so I should make a good EC opponent ... ) , but actually feel fine with either( zum Teufel! Donnerwetter! ). Prefer to start with something small and short like Mons battlegrounds etc. to get a feeling for the ground and sniff some cordite before embarking on a more ambitious campaign - besides I am having my hands full already and it will take some time to shake it off.
Have a look at the attached file to see the optional rules I promote; virtually everything to be negotiated prior to launching any scenario though.
marcinstrozny at gmail dot com
04-25-2012, 04:33 AM, (This post was last modified: 04-25-2012, 06:09 AM by Volcano Man.)
I don't recommend using the delayed disruption rule in the FWWC series (it is in your preferred optional rules image). The defender already has a great advantage in FWWC, and delayed disruption only reinforces that -- the defender doesn't need more help. I feel that this is something that makes more sense in WW2 and beyond when units were spread out and their status is hard to determine, as opposed to the mass units of WW1.
This optional rule was added later in a patch that was carried over from PzC change and I never felt it fit well in this series. But really, it is up to your personal preference of course, but I only mention this because I want everyone to know that it will be much more difficult as the attacker when the rule is used (more of an impact than in PzC where units can move much faster post breakthrough). :)
As a tester of the series i also like to suggest that you consider playing with the default rules that we tested with, i believe it will enhance your enjoyment of this excellent title, can i also suggest you read my article of the main differences between PzC and F14, it may help to explain some of the differences you may come across.
Aw, yes, I have been thinking about that and on reading Your advice I can only say that I second that.It's just that I haven't had much time to study the game mechanics and the settings were also largely carried over from my WWII and MC TOCs. That is also why I need to start with something relatively small and short in order to practice how the things are suppossed to be done here. Thanks a lot for the input, it's always appreciated to share the lessons learned and the knowledge possessed.Great mods by the way,I always use them, hope that the _ Alt versions will be available for that particular title, too.
(04-25-2012, 06:09 AM)burroughs Wrote: Aw, yes, I have been thinking about that and on reading Your advice I can only say that I second that.It's just that I haven't had much time to study the game mechanics and the settings were also largely carried over from my WWII and MC TOCs. That is also why I need to start with something relatively small and short in order to practice how the things are suppossed to be done here.
I agree that starting small is the best way forward until you get a good feel for the game engine and its unique characteristics, taking on a monster scenario now will only lead to frustration.
(04-25-2012, 06:09 AM)burroughs Wrote: Great mods by the way,I always use them, hope that the _ Alt versions will be available for that particular title, too.
The _Alt scenarios are Ed's edited versions of other designers work, as Ed is the designer of F14 means that the scenarios in this title are already "_Alt" by default, if you know what i mean. ;)
04-25-2012, 06:40 AM, (This post was last modified: 04-25-2012, 06:42 AM by burroughs.)
Yes, I understand. Thank You very much again for all the counselling, assistance and support.I have just read the article You pointed kindly to and must admit that I am impressed with the accuracy of the attempts - the way those were discussed there in theory - to emulate the nature of the conflict.Having had researched a bit the subject myself I was amazed how Piero Falotti managed to incorporate it into his TOAW III WWI scenario and it was seen and felt once You started the hostilities there the different kind of warfare in terms of the game which was designed with a thought of manoeuver one. I introduced a few custom house rules myself into my gameplay,namely, but not solely regarding the cavalry units that in my humble opinion should not be allowed to dig in at least before autumn '14 so as to emulate the situation in which there was still a common misconception present on both sides regarding the inevitability of the final breakthrough which cavalry was suppossed to exploit as the main and on occassion only mobile force available.As soon as I got my hands on the title today in the afternoon I checked quickly a few basic concepts and it dawned on me that the game behaves exactly the way I would have imagined for it and that was done really intuitively.Great job, anxious to fight there.
I also hope that the subject is going to be covered furtherly - the East, Balkan and Italian theaters, colonial engagements in German West Africa for instance would be a great addition I think ( despite all the technical issues like the size of the AoRs versus the gameplay etc.)So far so great.
I noticed that one of the (non-default) optional rules that was up for discussion was counterbattery fire.
I blinked when I saw that, and then thought about it for a minute, and came to the conclusion that, while it makes sense when there were more stable front lines (e.g. the various Ypres scenarios from the end of 1914), I just couldn't see it during the war of maneuver.
I may not be thinking about this correctly. Anyone care to weigh in on this point?
And how do we feel about explicit supply? I'm rather fond of it, and never noticed that it seemed to make any difference one way or the other in terms of play balance.
History is a bad joke played by the living on the dead.
(04-25-2012, 12:07 PM)Philippe Wrote: I noticed that one of the (non-default) optional rules that was up for discussion was counterbattery fire.
I blinked when I saw that, and then thought about it for a minute, and came to the conclusion that, while it makes sense when there were more stable front lines (e.g. the various Ypres scenarios from the end of 1914), I just couldn't see it during the war of maneuver.
I may not be thinking about this correctly. Anyone care to weigh in on this point?
Correct, I wouldn't recommend that either until we have an F16,17,18. ;)
Quote:And how do we feel about explicit supply? I'm rather fond of it, and never noticed that it seemed to make any difference one way or the other in terms of play balance.
Good question. Some love it, some hate it -- hopefully it doesn't effect play balance as you say, because if not then that means I got the arrival/quantity of supply units down correctly.
04-26-2012, 04:53 AM, (This post was last modified: 04-26-2012, 04:54 AM by burroughs.)
So regarding the counterbattery fire You're implying that it should not be used before the advent of the trench warfare period?Is it due to the fact that once we get 2 hour turns it would be unrealistic to target a specific spot on the enemy side known to have the arty assets set up and firing because of the obsolete, laborous and time-consuming methods of trageting then etc.?How about the night then when we get 4 hour turns and it's easier to spot the gun muzzle flashes and the like?I must admit that I am not an expert by no means when it comes to artillery assets so I'll appreeciate any formative feedback.
By the way the thread devolved into a discussion here albeit an interesting and rewarding one, but let me just remind You all kindly that I am looking for an opponent here. I just need to hire somebody.
Philippe, whatdaya say?I saw You have palyed a few already ... Wanna get back to the ghastly trenches of WWI before thay actually appear?
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
