Here is a sequence of screens showing Day 1. This was a good run, everything went "right" except that the Russians at Boom took longer to disrupt than may have been desirable. It did not play out exactly like history (few scenarios covering more than a couple turns ever will) but the end result is fairly close.
-Mike P
11-18-2020, 05:20 AM, (This post was last modified: 11-18-2020, 05:37 AM by phoenix.)
Excellent, Mike! Thanks. I'm going to go and try it right now. You seem to have evicted the bunker to the east of Wilrijk in one move with a single tank unit. I had not thought that possible. Obviously, I'm doing something wrong. Maybe too cautious.
UPDATE: Yes. Tried it, moving as quickly as possible, not pausing to completely reduce the Boom defenders, but only to shift them far enough to make passing space. I managed roughly the same. Evicted that Eastern Wilrijk bunker on turn 5. Previously, I was being too cautious, I think. Great. Thanks, Mike. Very helpful indeed. I still can't see how I would get tanks into the actual city by turn 5, as All_American did, but it's not far off.
With alt assault on, you can launch effective assaults with tanks against bunkers due to their hard attack value being (much) higher than their assault value. As the defenders in Antwerp tend to be D or E quality and company size, I would say it's not that unusual to dislodge them from bunkers with an assault by tanks. That is: provided there's only one defending unit in the hex.
11-18-2020, 07:28 AM, (This post was last modified: 11-18-2020, 07:28 AM by All_American.)
(11-18-2020, 01:22 AM)phoenix Wrote: UPDATE: I just played the AI version. It was great fun, and very well set up. I didn't manage to get tanks into Antwerp by turn 5, All_American, and would love to know how you did that. I did get tanks into the city by the start of day 2. The Axis script does, in fact, withdraw a little from the ring of bunkers, as Mike Prucha hinted, and if you can find the hole it might be possible to make faster progress, but I didn't find it in time. Is this what you did, All_American, or did you somehow manage to blast your way through in 5 turns? That is beyond me, how you managed ot get up there in 5 turns...
Honestly all I did was to dash to the city ignoring anything else in the way. I got a lucky disruption in the bunker (defended by a single unit) to the southeast and after that tanks were on their way. Could be luck, could be audacity. Going to try again later today from scratch.
Maybe, just maybe, before everyone rushes to judgement concerning either the historical validity or balance of a specific scenario, that you take the time to play a mirrored PBeM match against a human opponent first?
I am currently playing the following scenario - #0904_01 Antwerp "Taurus Pursuant" (19 turns) against a human opponent. Once we complete our current game, we will switch sides.
I command the Germans and we are currently on Turn #6. My Allied opponent has breached the bunker parameter and is driving hard toward the Antwerp suburbs. Reinforcements have arrived for both sides and play should get really interesting in the next several turns.
Congratulations to Mike P, David and the entire Scheldt '44 Development Team! I find this game to be very challenging, exciting, and demanding - especially when commanding Morale D and E quality troops.
So again, everyone take a deep breath, relax, enjoy, and play. Get some human versus human matches under your belt before rushing to judgement.
Regards, Mike / "A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week." - George S. Patton /
11-19-2020, 05:46 AM, (This post was last modified: 11-19-2020, 05:56 AM by phoenix.)
'So again, everyone take a deep breath, relax, enjoy, and play. Get some human versus human matches under your belt before rushing to judgement.'
No thanks. As you know, of course, not everyone wants to play PBEM. I love PBEM, but time and work constraints make the commitments difficult, and though everyone I've ever played in here has been super-understanding, I always end up feeling guilty about not getting enough moves in quick enough....
But I did rush to judgement, for sure. (Actually it started with me reading ComradeP's comment about certain defences being 'bullet-proof' in another thread...) And worse than the process (documented above) of discovering that I did that by playing against the AI and against myself and having various people chip in with very helpful info and experience, was the fact that yesterday, lol, I read Mike's really excellent notes document.... And there I found that everything about the Antwerp set-up was very carefully and adequately explained. Sorry, Mike.
But it's nice to get a discussion going, especially about a new title, and, to be fair to myself, I did make clear from the off that I was loving the title. Actually, one of the things I'm really loving about it is the smaller AI scenarios where, for once, I'm finding that the scripts are working very well. So that first Overloon scenario, for example, which I've played quite a few times against the AI, can actually give a good game for either Axis or Allied, I've found. Again, great work on the part of the design team. And thanks!
Look forward to the results of your Antwerp game, Kool Kat.
This thread reminds me of discussions in the past where people believe a scenario is not winnable, ahistorical etc. We definitely have these when play testing scenarios before release. I wrote up one such conversation and posted it on the WDS blog here: WDS Blog Post
Thanks to Mike for coming on the boards and providing his examples. Like the above Blog post we think that is one of the best ways to explain the how's and whys. Mike & David have done absolutely sterling work across the board. Both in research and applying that to the games systems. There are lots of subtle things added, which fortunately John added optional rules for that allowed the resistance forces to work they way we wanted. As you all play further you will see additional nuances in this title.
Talking of AI scripts, the team have doubled down on trying to make these work as best as possible. I know Bill Peters did a huge amount of work in Japan '46 to up the AI level and Mike has done the same here in Scheldt '44. We know there are more solo than PBEM players and are putting the time in. For those of you that don't own Japan '46, it will be discounted in the sale so now is the time to pick it up. It is quite a different title to Japan '45 and our biggest error was releasing them close together. People didn't understand the differentiation.
Finally a word on upgrading the other PzC titles to the new graphics engine. I will be starting that process soon, but we have time constraints for a range of reasons currently. Just know it is being scheduled and we will provide the new hi-res graphics and the 'legacy' Gold graphics in the next round of updates.
(11-19-2020, 07:27 PM)All_American Wrote: Thank you David and the team for the amazing work and effort. Japan '45, '46 and Scheldt '44 are all great titles.
I totally agree with you, I love all these titles, especially Japan '45 and '46. I'm playing the grand Japan '46 campaign via PBEM right now and it's great. We have played 57 turns so far and it's very enjoyable. Thanks to David and all the others that have created these masterpieces.
(11-19-2020, 11:10 AM)Strela Wrote: Finally a word on upgrading the other PzC titles to the new graphics engine. I will be starting that process soon, but we have time constraints for a range of reasons currently. Just know it is being scheduled and we will provide the new hi-res graphics and the 'legacy' Gold graphics in the next round of updates.
David
I'm currently hot seating Kursk43 and know i cant add the new OR's to my game but i will be able to use the new graphics if i'd ike, correct?
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
