Danube Front'85 Opponentes wanted

burroughs · 03-23-2013, 03:43 AM,

Just to throw a stone into Your garden here, but to clarify the details and sort out a bit of mess - I am assuming that when You wite about "BOFB" it's not "The Battle of the Bulge" but "The Bolt from the Blue" ( BFTB ) - but that is what the acronyms stands for historically. "The Bolt ... " is not the stock DF '85 scenario , but a custom mod. However, following the discussion here I am assuming that all the time people here have been referring to "The Bolt ... " anyway. I am having an unpleasant impression that mostly we want to speak ourselves, but are not practicing reading comprehension here to a decent extent - I was just considering the options and generally wasn't that much up for "The Bolt ... ", even on the WP side as I amy simply may not make it to handle that, especially if that was to be the WP command in "The Bolt ... " - tempting, but with my level of commitment and all the stuff I am handling right now ... That's why I was mostly and mainly interested in the DF '85 campaigns as a team game idea and pointed to the fact that "The Bolt ... " is way larger than any of the DF '85 campaigns, both stock and custom ones.

~~goomohn~~ · 03-23-2013, 12:29 PM,

Thanks for the correction in my grammar. After retrieving my cereal box decoder ring and deciphering your last post I see that you are pulling out of the TBftB (good enough?) team game. It is rather huge, but I believe if 3 people somehow could divide the area's of responsibility equally per side. That it would take 30-60 minutes per turn per person to move these 100,000 man armies. It would be possible to clear a turn every 24 hours realtime.

I'd point out that the stock DF'85 Western Germany campaign would be twice as efficient (barring TBftB's "super realism") with 3 persons. That the stock DF'85 Danube Front campaign played by 3 persons would take only 20-40 minutes per person.

I still am intrigued by the idea of a modern team campaign of cold war turned hot. Naturally, the Soviets would get the extra person on odd numbered teams. If there is any group of people ready for such a campaign only needing one other player, you may count me in.

CarnageINC · 03-23-2013, 04:07 PM,

Sorry to be a party pooper, but I must drop from the game. Looking over things I best not get into another game, I just don't have the time. Sorry to jump the gun on this one gentlemen.

Gunther Sheepdog · 03-23-2013, 08:06 PM,

After the last posts, We are 4. Please, Narcpaul, if you aren't member of the blitz, sign in.
Goomohn and I are wanting to play. Marder and narcpaul confirm please if ou want to wait. If not I think that the better thing to do is close the topic

~~goomohn~~ · 03-24-2013, 12:39 AM,

Round and round we go. Perhaps you (gunther), burroughs, and I could play a stock DF85 campaign. 2 Players for the WP. 1 as the less numerous NATO forces. Preferably the more expierenced player as NATO.

Gunther Sheepdog · 03-27-2013, 08:21 AM,

(03-24-2013, 12:39 AM)goomohn Wrote: Round and round we go. Perhaps you (gunther), burroughs, and I could play a stock DF85 campaign. 2 Players for the WP. 1 as the less numerous NATO forces. Preferably the more expierenced player as NATO.

If you agree we can play. Of course, Marder and Narkpaul are invited to join

~~goomohn~~ · 03-27-2013, 04:58 PM,

Quote:If you agree we can play. Of course, Marder and Narkpaul are invited to join

I'm suggesting a 3 player danube85 short HTH match. I've PMed burroughs who seemed earlier to be very enthusiastic about playing a stock DF85 scenario. I suggested that he start the game with his optional ruleset. That he'd play the GSFG/CGF forces and choose strategic decisions. He'd pass the pbem battle file to you. You'd play as the CSLA. You'd each use any Western TVD assets within your area of operation. End the turn and pass it to me. I'll play all of NATO.

Aaron · (This post was last modified: 03-27-2013, 05:14 PM by Aaron.)

the speed of the game is something ive been lookin at and its not the speed of finishing it per say it is units being to slow and casualties not high enough, If anything could change it would be a complete overhaul of the speed values of all units. I feel they are to slow and casualties not high enough... A slight move in favor of both or just the actual speed of the unit would quicken the game by a few days...lol

~~goomohn~~ · (This post was last modified: 03-27-2013, 05:33 PM by goomohn.)

Was that the bolt from the blue? The way I see it on your initiative you are moving, firing, and assaulting for one hour (1.5 hrs in MC). Then, your opponent is doing likewise while your forces regroup. That can be the only explanation for the low movement speeds. Taking that in mind I think casualties caused by limited fire are realistic. Assaults should be more wild though. It is all modifiable in the PDTs....

Aaron · (This post was last modified: 03-27-2013, 05:36 PM by Aaron.)

(03-27-2013, 05:28 PM)goomohn Wrote: Was that the bolt from the blue? The way I see it on your initiative you are moving, firing, and assaulting for one hour. Then, your opponent is doing likewise while your forces regroup. That can be the only explanation for the low movement speeds. Taking that in mind I think casualties caused by limited fire are realistic. Assaults should be more wild though. It is all modifiable in the PDTs....

Yes the BotB. I like my modifiers or the existing ones as is but always will look at changes if you see them. Im lookin at the actual MPH/KPH value. I dont think the units are fast enough overall, if speed was increased overall the game would go faster overall