First impression report Attacking disrupted units

Stryker · 07-13-2008, 05:58 AM,

@ Hawk Kriegsman
You remember how the old and original EF played???? jeez boy - you're not drinking enough!! lol - I've still got the SOB, I might just load it up and challenge you to a game.. ha ha ha... can we still register it?

cheers

alaric99x · 07-13-2008, 06:05 AM,

I've been waiting for the 1.03 patch before buying this title, I'm kind of losing interest in that plan now.

Tiger 88 · 07-13-2008, 06:45 AM,

Hi Chris - long time no talk - hope all is well my friend - with regards to the artillery vs armor - well - I am on turn10 of 16 in EF Gatway to Berlin: Sealow and I am the Ivans - and Ed (Mr. Roadrunner) the Huns - I have lost 3 sp's already due to the arty barrage from him and I have IS-2 M44's and just IS-2's - pretty big bastards and they are getting the crap kicked out of them from artillery...not too sure if thats realistic? They seem heavy to me....

Von Earlmann · 07-13-2008, 07:04 AM,

Ok..........if the assault rules are similar to the original game then I am all for them.The leader and truck thing is obviously a bug as Huib pointed out.I have found it ridiculous that a 2 strength unit can hold off 3 Panther platoons just because it is not disrupted....almost as ridiculous as a 1 strength rifle platoon taking out a 6 strength disrupted anything....I always thought that was what the assault tables were for...........you make your assault..you takes your chances.............you want gauranteed success...bring enough to do the bloody job! If adding realism means guys can't play the game engine the way they are used to.........I say bring it on........like all good commanders we will adapt over time...and we're all good commanders here right :-)

As for artillery against armor;I have never been a fan of the concept that arty always fires at 1 against armor.....it appears to be based on one early war study done by the Brits........if you don't think arty can hurt armor ask the Germans who were at Normandy,Salerno, and Kursk.......the arty,naval gunfir, and Katyushas knocked the dogsnot out of German armor in all those battles....besides to disable any afv all that needs be done is blow a tread...or wheel.....or whatever.....doesn't matter how big it is without it's mobility.

von Earlmann
(I have to go back to the campaigns now)

A word to the wise for the Beta Brigade..."If you try to please everyone;you end up losing your own ass".....taken from a very wise joke about a man and his donkey trying to cross a bridge.

Hobbes · 07-13-2008, 07:36 AM,

Tiger 88 Wrote:Hi Chris - long time no talk - hope all is well my friend - with regards to the artillery vs armor - well - I am on turn10 of 16 in EF Gatway to Berlin: Sealow and I am the Ivans - and Ed (Mr. Roadrunner) the Huns - I have lost 3 sp's already due to the arty barrage from him and I have IS-2 M44's and just IS-2's - pretty big bastards and they are getting the crap kicked out of them from artillery...not too sure if thats realistic? They seem heavy to me....

Hi Tigger, is Ed happy about this? ;)

In the past there have been a few potential scenarios I thought about making but decided not to bother as they involved an armoured attack being stopped in it's tracks by heavy artillery
which didn't seem possible with the Talonsoft game. Maybe this is more realistic - but as Jason admits artillery could be modelled better
so maybe it's too early for such a change.

I expect we will get more feedback from players over the next few weeks to see how well the change is working.

Cheers, Chris

Hobbes · 07-13-2008, 07:39 AM,

One more vent on 1.03 before I go to bed.

The few scenarios I have made I hope are realistic. Certainly I know what units are present but you can't know exactly what hex every unit would
have occupied so given what hopefully is an historical OOB you place them in the sort of positions they would have chosen to occupy themselves
given the terrain. AT guns especially would take positions knowing the terrain and visibility. On a clear summers day they would not expect the visibility to change much. Now suddenly they find the visibility has changed yet they are unable to reposition themselves quickly enough to avoid enemy artillery raining down.

AT guns are the most obvious losers in this situation but all defending units can suffer - it only takes one hex of extra visibility to destroy the
designers careful game setup. As I mention fixed units can also suffer badly.

I'm now thinking that I may have to change the scenarios I have made to make the visibility 15 (from 12) to avoid the variable LOS change and reposition a few units. I doubt many scenarios will get this treatment.

Cheers, Chris

Huib Versloot · 07-13-2008, 08:04 AM,

Hobbes Wrote:One more vent on 1.03 before I go to bed.

The few scenarios I have made I hope are realistic. Certainly I know what units are present but you can't know exactly what hex every unit would
have occupied so given what hopefully is an historical OOB you place them in the sort of positions they would have chosen to occupy themselves
given the terrain. AT guns especially would take positions knowing the terrain and visibility. On a clear summers day they would not expect the visibility to change much. Now suddenly they find the visibility has changed yet they are unable to reposition themselves quickly enough to avoid enemy artillery raining down.

AT guns are the most obvious losers in this situation but all defending units can suffer - it only takes one hex of extra visibility to destroy the
designers careful game setup. As I mention fixed units can also suffer badly.

I'm now thinking that I may have to change the scenarios I have made to make the visibility 15 (from 12) to avoid the variable LOS change and reposition a few units. I doubt many scenarios will get this treatment.

Cheers, Chris

Chris,
I would leave it at 12 initially (for Hell's Corner) and see how it works out. Longer visibilty does not often make a scn better. I'm not going to make any changes to my scns, at least not for the time being. Played quite a few turns today against Cole and Otlig with 1.03. Still in the process of forming an opinion but so far the assault rules are not affecting the games in a negative way, in one of the scns (**The French in Holland) they even contribute to the quality very clearly. It has a map with a lot of space on it, and the Germans may have had an easy task to do the surround, disrupted, assault routine on the French pockets over and over in the previous version.
It's just like Earl said. Try to be a good commander. I don't gamble on things anymore that unrealistically worked 100% of the time before.

Huib

Ivan · 07-13-2008, 08:14 AM,

I agree wholeheartedly with Von Earl in his comments.

The original game was/is very unrealistic in many respects and prone to being "gamey" if there's such a word. By that I mean it's easy to exploit the gaming system rather than playing to the spirit of it being wargame which should at least aim to be realistic and accurate in its modeling. Any changes that address these problems should be welcomed in my opinion. If the game is to survive and grow then there will inevitably be changes that will take some getting used to. A few bugs can be fixed and with time and games played a consensus will develop about what changes work and which ones don't. It must be hugely frustrating for people who have worked on the game to face some of the reactions on here. No offense to anyone, I think you are all nice people but we all have an opinion and this is mine. :conf:

Relayer · 07-13-2008, 08:48 AM,

I appreciate the hard work the Matrix crew has done on this game.
But I think..Unless they are able to change for the better the assault rules!..The game is ruined for me!
Playing some turns on my pbem games I got going!
All I can say is...I'm SAD VERY SAD!:(
Hope it can be fixed?

Relayer

K K Rossokolski · 07-13-2008, 09:02 AM,

It seems to me the issue is that the previous assault rules were too much in favour of the assaulter, whereas the rules are now seen as to favour the assaultee. That is the way I read the posts. Might not somewhere in between be the optimum??
I have a series of 1936 Italy-Ethiopia(more correctly Abyssinia) scens under test. No big deal, and will probably never be played much. But someone went to huge trouble to buid the OOBs, so ....
An example, from 10 minutes ago. The locals have little firepower, (and can't seem to shoot anyway), so must rely on the assault to hurt the enemy. (This is historically sound, as the culture placed great value on hand to hand combat) Anyway, a leader and a disrupted Italian unit in a rough hex, only one avenue of escape, into an Italian held rough hex +2 elevation higher. This hex pretty much jam packed. One Ab MG takes a shot, wipes out the Inf, leaving only the leader who is assaulted from all available sides by as many howling tribesman as the game will allow -remember there are packing limitations. Did he get away up the hill---of course!!! I don't think that is realistic.
Do you??