• Blitz Shadow Player
  • Caius
  • redboot
  • Rules
  • Chain of Command
  • Members
  • Supported Ladders & Games
  • Downloads


The Battle for the Dak To Hills
09-14-2014, 08:32 PM,
#1
The Battle for the Dak To Hills
Hi , can anyone give me tips how to win this Vietnamscenario on the Us side ?

The Battle for the Dak To Hills

Thanks for help.

Micha
Quote this message in a reply
09-15-2014, 12:14 AM,
#2
RE: The Battle for the Dak To Hills
(09-14-2014, 08:32 PM)Micha Wrote: Hi , can anyone give me tips how to win this Vietnamscenario on the Us side ?

The Battle for the Dak To Hills

Thanks for help.

Micha

It has been a long while since I have played this but especially in some of the earlier title scenarios the best way to win brings back the line from the movie 'Wargames' i.e. The only way to win is not to play. LOL
Not all scenarios are balanced vs the computer or a human opponent. Went back and looked at the data base and it was 3(US)-2(DRAW)-6(VN) so not totally unbalanced. Have you played this vs a human or just the AI? I am open for a match if you'd like to play-I am willing to take the US.Big Grin
Quote this message in a reply
09-15-2014, 01:26 AM,
#3
RE: The Battle for the Dak To Hills
So I'm curious. Micha's post prompted me to look at this scenario. I can see some real problems for the US.

A question for you old-timers: Was "Obstructed" terrain part of the original design? or was it a "back-fill" concept?

The US helos can only land on the objective hex, which is going to make for some logistical nightmares. So I'm wondering - if Obstructed hexes, and their prohibition on helo landing were added after the release of this game, and somehow added in without a, shall we say, informed and intentional methodology, then this may have inadvertently increased the difficulty for the Americans.
Quote this message in a reply
09-15-2014, 02:13 AM,
#4
RE: The Battle for the Dak To Hills
Hello,,
sorry Fastphill , for onlinegaming i dont have time for the Moment.

Holding the hex in the south is not a Problem but capture the northern one i cant find a way.
The ojective is enough for landing Zone, can place all Units i Need.
By the way after years of loosing in squadbattles against the ai i won almost every battle i
playd during last month . But this one seems to be a hard nut.
Thanks for helping.
Quote this message in a reply
09-17-2014, 10:25 PM, (This post was last modified: 09-17-2014, 10:26 PM by TheBigRedOne.)
#5
RE: The Battle for the Dak To Hills
I looked at the scenario yesterday. I do not believe any attributes of the terrain were changed over time that would have led to a chopper not being able to land in the jungle. Jungle is jungle. Unless you cut a clearing, choppers aren't going to be able to land. I'd imagine that's what the one open hex on that southern objective represents.

If I had to guess the situation, I'd say the choppers are the landing force for the southern objective. You can land and unload 3 at a time based on what I tried yesterday, so it should take 2-3 turns to land all of your men and start to fan out in a perimeter. The northern objective is the job of the troopers slogging overland.

The early SB were not balanced well for PBEM. Tiller went for historical accuracy which often led to the possibility of one side never winning. That said, it seems that the game is winnable on the US side, but I'm sure it's a tough one.
Site Commander: Task Force Echo 4
Quote this message in a reply
09-18-2014, 01:47 AM,
#6
RE: The Battle for the Dak To Hills
Thanks BRO for the feedback. that is good to know.


(09-17-2014, 10:25 PM)TheBigRedOne Wrote: I looked at the scenario yesterday. I do not believe any attributes of the terrain were changed over time that would have led to a chopper not being able to land in the jungle. Jungle is jungle. Unless you cut a clearing, choppers aren't going to be able to land. I'd imagine that's what the one open hex on that southern objective represents.

If I had to guess the situation, I'd say the choppers are the landing force for the southern objective. You can land and unload 3 at a time based on what I tried yesterday, so it should take 2-3 turns to land all of your men and start to fan out in a perimeter. The northern objective is the job of the troopers slogging overland.

The early SB were not balanced well for PBEM. Tiller went for historical accuracy which often led to the possibility of one side never winning. That said, it seems that the game is winnable on the US side, but I'm sure it's a tough one.
Quote this message in a reply
09-19-2014, 06:34 PM,
#7
RE: The Battle for the Dak To Hills
Ok, i tryd every possible variant. For the objective in the south only 1 heli Crew is necessary .
The objective in the norh is not to capture, the Support Comes to late.
The Maximum i could reach is a minor defeat.
If anyone finds a way to win on the us side please let me know.
Ist not a Problem, not every scenary has to be winnable. To have a draw for the Scenario its ok i think.
Quote this message in a reply
09-20-2014, 06:10 AM, (This post was last modified: 09-20-2014, 04:22 PM by Micha.)
#8
RE: The Battle for the Dak To Hills
Ok, finaly i got a minor victory.
[Image: KLpXFv.jpg]

How to make it.
Drop your men step by step in to the objecive and wait for the enemy, he will come.
Use the helis to kill es much enemys from secure range.
Use all Support to kill enemys on the northern objective.

Let your man in the North fire to the enemys from secure range, they will be more sucessfull than the Vietcong, do not try to get the objective in the North , you will fail.

After years of not really understanding this game i must now confess ist really good and deep strat,
good work Mr. Tiller.
Quote this message in a reply
09-20-2014, 09:40 AM,
#9
RE: The Battle for the Dak To Hills
Part of understanding how to play SB games is knowing when not to fire....
Quote this message in a reply
09-20-2014, 04:23 PM,
#10
RE: The Battle for the Dak To Hills
(09-20-2014, 09:40 AM)kolc Wrote: Part of understanding how to play SB games is knowing when not to fire....

Hello, could you please explain this a bit more ?
Quote this message in a reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)