Moscow '42 Team Game

[raizer]

I would not be so sure of this...esp in frozen conditions where you cant dig in and the german defense/attack/assault values are all adversely affected by the frozen penalty of 20% for all values, and 10% when in villages/towns, while the soviets are good to go and unchanged by the weather. There is little room for error when playing the germans in this particular scenario.

It looks like great challenge for both sides. But I think the ideal team size is 2x2, for a game of this length, otherwise you guys are talking a week to do two moves max.

[burroughs]

Well, I was thinking about the size and the numbers myself and I was about to take over the Bryansk Front too if necessary, provided someone would command in the centre. If we are to complete a turn per week, the game is to last for over five years roughly - not impossible to happen, but also not very likely, somebody simply has to drop out given such a time span and doubt if we can finad a replacement then.Then, commanding both Kalinin and Bryansk Front requires handling dozens of divisions without counting the numerous reinforcements so I'd sat we should have three player per side to make it doable and a fun at the same time, not yet another chore, dull & boring.We have five to six guys now, are we sure that we need to tackle a 250 turn campaign scenario or it's just high spirits after the brand new release?

I'd say we would go for #1206_03 The Klin - Solnechnogorsk Front Offensive:the Right Wing - looks manageable, to say the least and spans for only 88 turns. I know that it lacks the operational depth of a full blown campaign scenario, but let's get serious.Then ideed two guys per side should be feasible and doable, Raizer is making a point here, I can team up with Schmolywar, take the Soviets, You two guys can join Your commands if You wish and still it remains within the realm of reality to think about completing the scenario. even if one or two of us drops out, one guy per side may carry on if absolutely necessary, but I hope it's only once bitten, twice shy.Liebchen seems to be counting on a slower gameplay and wth sucha size and length we can manipulate the OptTempo at will and speed the things up whenever possible or slow down should that be necessary.

Consider that then, please, and let me know what You think.

[raizer]

These team games can be quite epic in length. My friend keith and I just hit our 2 year anniversary for F40; first turn was sent November 4, 2010. We are teamed up against Brian "Dog Soldier" and Al and just hit turn 108 out of 180. They just moved the bar to a minor defeat just this turn as the attacking germans, but they have the momentum and we will be hard pressed to keep them from another 25k VPs they need for a minor victory.
All Im saying is that the game went thru fast and slow spells for sure and it seems we are on a fast pace again. To be sure, we, as the French did move kind of slowly, esp in the summers because of our vacations, travel and work. But all 4 players have stuck with it. Its a great fun and quite an accomplishment, esp. which such a huge oob that both the germans and allies possess. But patience and a kind respect about other's schedules is key-both Brian and Al were, and remain, incredibly patient with our turn rates (and the game's weather), and as the attackers, you know they want to get into a flow, but being a punching bag and conducting a fighting withdrawal for 2 years can be taxing also.

[burroughs]

I know that,Raizer, believe me; I also happen to have played long TOAW III scenarios which lasted well over two years, but those wre one on one and that's a different story here so I took from Your piece of advice what there was the best and it's not like You have gotten me suddenly disheartened. I'd love to play the full campaign and would be pretty srue of myself to last in business for up to five years, but the fact that a human factor is unpredictable in the long run also counts against myself and we really do have to be realistic about that, anything goes and can happen.I do believe that the team game mode is the only way to bite any of the full campaign scenarios so it's got to be taken into consideration; how one could play the full Kharkov '42 or Rzhev '42 campaigns? I guess people used to do it and still do, but to me is a science - fiction with a far larger proportion of fiction.

[Liebchen]

Consider that then, please, and let me know what You think.

My thoughts are this:

I would like a game with a casual pace, but committed players. My Minsk team game has turnaround of about 2-4 weeks. Slower rates are only when someone has something come up. But the turns are done, we're several days into it, and it's a lot of fun - and we get to participate in the entire battle.

The scenario that you're suggesting looks good to me - for a 1-on-1 game. I'm willing, if you are. But only if we can't get a team game off the ground.

When I earlier posted lists of players/teams, this was just bandying names and preferences about. This was not even close to firm.

So far, we have interest from:
Liebchen
Schmolywar
Burroughs
RickyB

We have possible interest from:
Mark wuwu25
ComradeP

Sides seem to be up for grabs, can be dealt with later. Let's establish who's in, first.

Burroughs, I think that a team game is a leap of faith, there's no getting around this.

[ComradeP]

You can also use timezones to your advantage, which in my opinion always help with teamgames.

[burroughs]

You can also use timezones to your advantage, which in my opinion always help with teamgames.

@ComradeP

I am definitely more interested whether You are in or not, I thought that the thing were to clarify by the last Friday.

@Liebchen

I'da say fair enough, but actually I didn't get if my alternative proposal for a team game scenario ticked in or not.However, I'd also like to draw the attention to the fact that suddenly an idea for a one on one game came into discussion regarding another scenario whereas we were discussing a team game - and that's the point I made - the human factor is incalculable from a certain moment.

As a faithful nonbeliever I count more on determination, honesty and valour, then a bit of responsibility and an adult approach to our favourite pastime.So - what'sthe status?

Wuw25 is in, but he stated that, judging by the thread here, we still haven't gotten anywhere near launching that.

[ComradeP]

I am definitely more interested whether You are in or not, I thought that the thing were to clarify by the last Friday.

No e-mail from my opponent yet.

[Liebchen]

So - what'sthe status?

The status is this, and nothing more, as far as I can tell:

We have interest from:
Liebchen
Schmolywar
Burroughs
RickyB

We have possible interest from:
Mark wuwu25
ComradeP

Sides seem to be up for grabs, can be dealt with later. Let's establish who's in, first.

(My offer of a one-on-one game was a fallback position, only.)

[burroughs]

So - what'sthe status?

The status is this, and nothing more, as far as I can tell:

We have interest from:
Liebchen
Schmolywar
Burroughs
RickyB

We have possible interest from:
Mark wuwu25
ComradeP

Sides seem to be up for grabs, can be dealt with later. Let's establish who's in, first.

(My offer of a one-on-one game was a fallback position, only.)

Mark is in and that's 100% sure,but I am with him in regard that we seem to be beating about the bush here for some time. I know that we are waiting for ComradeP and his statement -I'd see home on the Soviet side, he's got a nickname or a callsign good enough to be given a post in the people's armed forces - but have we already agreed to accept Schmolyvar as an either team full member , for instance - or are we sticking to the 6th Jan campaign stubbornly? You didn't address that and I still think that it's a proposal good enough for a 3 X 3 team game. I think I'll leave the apparently fruitless lobbying at the very point, let the situation develop and see what transpires.