ME - Battle for the Straights of Tiran

[RADO]

Gents,

I cannot tell you just how much i am enjoying this new game but do have a few comments on this scenario. Steve (Tiger 88) & I played this one for some 40+ turns before setting it aside & starting another one. This one has limited units & a very large map. Both of us played "blind" having not played before & not knowing just what the enemy had. Steve was Israeli & I, Egyptians.

From the Egyptian perspective, moving forward is not an option as covering the open expanses of the West is simply not possible. Secondly, why advance at all? Most all the high VP hexes are to the very South edge. I adopted a Fabian strategy that seemed to work extremely well, but was boring to say the least.

Steve was left scratching his head with 20+ turns left, knowing he could never reach the VP hexes in the South. We went on to another scenario.

Perhaps we both missed something but from an enjoyment perspective, this one is at the bottom of the list so far, & personally, I'd look at revamping it a bit as it has very little action & is a 65 turn scenario.

Perhaps Steve will give us his insight.

[Tiger 88]

Gents,

I cannot tell you just how much i am enjoying this new game but do have a few comments on this scenario. Steve (Tiger 88) & I played this one for some 40+ turns before setting it aside & starting another one. This one has limited units & a very large map. Both of us played "blind" having not played before & not knowing just what the enemy had. Steve was Israeli & I, Egyptians.

From the Egyptian perspective, moving forward is not an option as covering the open expanses of the West is simply not possible. Secondly, why advance at all? Most all the high VP hexes are to the very South edge. I adopted a Fabian strategy that seemed to work extremely well, but was boring to say the least.

Steve was left scratching his head with 20+ turns left, knowing he could never reach the VP hexes in the South. We went on to another scenario.

Perhaps we both missed something but from an enjoyment perspective, this one is at the bottom of the list so far, & personally, I'd look at revamping it a bit as it has very little action & is a 65 turn scenario.

Perhaps Steve will give us his insight.

Yes - totally agree with Greg's comments!  A real yawner from my perspective.  I had a mix of ground forces - infantry and engineers and I kept thinking to myself - what am I missing with my unit mix - is there something I need to build - load onto arriving boats perhaps - just could not wrap my arms around this one!

It felt like this game was not given a thorough play-test perhaps?  The map is huge and the travel was slower than a snail - had Greg not come up to see what was going on - I would have never seen his units.  With 20 turns or so left I was barely making my way to the 1st Southern vhex - but that would have taken at least 5 to 10 more turns and with 10 remaining turns - my forces would never have made it to the very southern vhexes.

Agree this one needs to be revamped!


Just providing constructive feedback - no harm intended!

Steve ~ Tiger 88

[Jason Petho]

There is a short version of this, which just deals with the assault on Sharm el Shiek.

This long one was is intended to show two main things.

1. The extremely tedious journey south that the Israeli's had to contend with, how to do it quickly and how to be agressive once they are out in the open.

2. Historically, the Egyptians didn't do much as they didn't know the Israeli's were coming down the coast. They didn't expect it as they thought the coast was impassable. They are still able to patrol and an Egyptian player will use their patrols to meander about looking for where the Israeli's are coming from.

Holding up the Israeli's is the main task for the Egyptians. If they can do so, there is no way the Israeli's can acquire a victory, as the Israeli's can't doddle... they really need to move fast and move hard.

Yes, I agree, it's not a very exciting scenario as it consists of a lot of the frustrating advance that the Israeli's experienced. (This was the main reason they just air-assaulted the place in 1967). And that is why there is a second, much shorter, scenario.

Hope that helps.

Jason Petho

[RADO]

Gents,

I cannot tell you just how much i am enjoying this new game but do have a few comments on this scenario. Steve (Tiger 88) & I played this one for some 40+ turns before setting it aside & starting another one. This one has limited units & a very large map. Both of us played "blind" having not played before & not knowing just what the enemy had. Steve was Israeli & I, Egyptians.

From the Egyptian perspective, moving forward is not an option as covering the open expanses of the West is simply not possible. Secondly, why advance at all? Most all the high VP hexes are to the very South edge. I adopted a Fabian strategy that seemed to work extremely well, but was boring to say the least.

Steve was left scratching his head with 20+ turns left, knowing he could never reach the VP hexes in the South. We went on to another scenario.

Perhaps we both missed something but from an enjoyment perspective, this one is at the bottom of the list so far, & personally, I'd look at revamping it a bit as it has very little action & is a 65 turn scenario.

Perhaps Steve will give us his insight.

Yes - totally agree with Greg's comments!  A real yawner from my perspective.  I had a mix of ground forces - infantry and engineers and I kept thinking to myself - what am I missing with my unit mix - is there something I need to build - load onto arriving boats perhaps - just could not wrap my arms around this one!

It felt like this game was not given a thorough play-test perhaps?  The map is huge and the travel was slower than a snail - had Greg not come up to see what was going on - I would have never seen his units.  With 20 turns or so left I was barely making my way to the 1st Southern vhex - but that would have taken at least 5 to 10 more turns and with 10 remaining turns - my forces would never have made it to the very southern vhexes.

Agree this one needs to be revamped!


Just providing constructive feedback - no harm intended!

Steve ~ Tiger 88

There is a short version of this, which just deals with the assault on Sharm el Shiek.

This long one was is intended to show two main things.

1. The extremely tedious journey south that the Israeli's had to contend with, how to do it quickly and how to be agressive once they are out in the open.

2. Historically, the Egyptians didn't do much as they didn't know the Israeli's were coming down the coast. They didn't expect it as they thought the coast was impassable. They are still able to patrol and an Egyptian player will use their patrols to meander about looking for where the Israeli's are coming from.

Holding up the Israeli's is the main task for the Egyptians. If they can do so, there is no way the Israeli's can acquire a victory, as the Israeli's can't doddle... they really need to move fast and move hard.

Yes, I agree, it's not a very exciting scenario as it consists of a lot of the frustrating advance that the Israeli's experienced. (This was the main reason they just air-assaulted the place in 1967). And that is why there is a second, much shorter, scenario.

Hope that helps.

Jason Petho

Thanks Jason. Appreciate you taking time to give some input.