Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Conflict of Heroes Series >> Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/23/2012 8:53:44 AM

76mm

Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

I've only played a few games with CoH but have a couple of questions/comments:

1) I've played "The Gap" as German several times without winning; is it just me, or is this one a tough one?

2) I'm kind of amazed at the lack of effect of rifle and LMG fire on Sov troops advancing across open ground; as often as not, my rifle squads in particular are completely ineffective even at point blank range, and my LMGs only seem to stop the Russkies once they are within 1-2 hexes. Again, am I doing something wrong?

3) It seems like it is rather hard to suppress enemy troops with fire--I fire on Sov maxims, etc, but generally with no apparent effect (I guess units have to be damaged before they are considered "suppressed"?

Post #: 1

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/23/2012 9:01:10 AM

Winti10

Posts: 10
Joined: 6/15/2012
Status: offline

Have a look on some game results, normally Germans have better chance in this scenario.

http://www.wargamer.com/forums/posts.asp?t=583544

Also try to use CAP to increasing your firepower, and advance with cautious movement to reduce your exposure to enemy fire (hold CTRL during move) (if that option is on

(in reply to 76mm)

Post #: 2

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/23/2012 2:48:05 PM

junk2drive

Posts: 12907
Joined: 6/27/2002
From: Arizona West Coast
Status: offline

I always see a low percent chance unless I add CAPs. Being a CAP manager isn't why I play war games.

(in reply to Winti10)

Post #: 3

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/23/2012 5:37:13 PM

76mm

Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

quote:

I always see a low percent chance unless I add CAPs. Being a CAP manager isn't why I play war games.

Yeah; in a different scenario I plastered a Sov squad in the open with fire from multiple LMGs and mortars (with multiple shots each), with absolutely no effect.

(in reply to junk2drive)

Post #: 4

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 2:22:41 AM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

CAPs are the equivalent of having a good leader with a stack in SL/ASL, which makes a huge difference. Enemies moving in the open should be easy to destroy for a German LMG within its normal range. Typically with a Russian squad you'd expect about two shots to damage the squad and three or four to destroy it. With two APs per shot, that can happen in one turn.

Adding CAPs, you can do it in one or two shots.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to 76mm)

Post #: 5

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 1:28:45 PM

genehaynes

Posts: 202
Joined: 12/29/2002
Status: offline

IMO, you guys have identifed both the beauty (simple game mechanics) and frustration (simple game mechanics) of the game.

If you think about it, whether you score a hit or miss is based simply on a simple 2d6 dice roll result. The higher the roll, the better your chances for a hit. You guys know as well as I do that the game gives you the opportunity to modify (i.e. Add to) the dice roll. Plus, you don't have to figure out what you need to roll or the percent chance you have, because the game tells you on the screen.

So it's really simple to increase your chances by using CAPs, firing at close range, firing from the flanks, using group combat, etc. Now what can be a little frustrating is after all your planning to get a 83% hit chance, YOU ROLL A THREE! Now it's the computers turn, it needs a 10 to score a hit and IT ROLLS A TWELVE!

I try to accept the fact that the dice rolls will equal out, try to use good tactics and enjoy what I think is a really great game.

BTW, I'm by no means a military genius, and I'm down to the last two ATB scenarios, having won all (Normal difficulty) BUT the Monster scenario.

(in reply to 76mm)

Post #: 6

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 4:04:49 PM

vonRocko

Posts: 1447
Joined: 11/4/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: genehaynes

IMO, you guys have identifed both the beauty (simple game mechanics) and frustration (simple game mechanics) of the game.

If you think about it, whether you score a hit or miss is based simply on a simple 2d6 dice roll result. The higher the roll, the better your chances for a hit. You guys know as well as I do that the game gives you the opportunity to modify (i.e. Add to) the dice roll. Plus, you don't have to figure out what you need to roll or the percent chance you have, because the game tells you on the screen.

So it's really simple to increase your chances by using CAPs, firing at close range, firing from the flanks, using group combat, etc. Now what can be a little frustrating is after all your planning to get a 83% hit chance, YOU ROLL A THREE! Now it's the computers turn, it needs a 10 to score a hit and IT ROLLS A TWELVE!

I try to accept the fact that the dice rolls will equal out, try to use good tactics and enjoy what I think is a really great game.

BTW, I'm by no means a military genius, and I'm down to the last two ATB scenarios, having won all (Normal difficulty) BUT the Monster scenario.

That's the truth! I'm still waiting for my die rolls to "equal out"! I am the worst roller, with real or digital dice! I seldom hit at 83% (the computer always hits me), and at 17% I hit about 50% of the time!?

Great game, but man my rolling stinks.

(in reply to genehaynes)

Post #: 7

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 4:18:38 PM

junk2drive

Posts: 12907
Joined: 6/27/2002
From: Arizona West Coast
Status: offline

I played my first MP game last night. It was the wargamer tourney with this scenario and me as Soviets. I did not play as well as the AI did when I was the Germans. I used caps to get to 83 and missed, when I ran out of caps I would shoot at 16 or so and hit. What killed me was that every turn I would have less caps and limited cards. My illusion was that my opponent had unlimited caps and lots of cards.

(in reply to vonRocko)

Post #: 8

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 6:13:56 PM

genehaynes

Posts: 202
Joined: 12/29/2002
Status: offline

Ok, I just finished the next to last ATB scenario, Assualt on Peprez, playing as the Germans. After using my brilliant tactics, and judicial use of CAPs, I managed to LOSE by only 12 points!

Units destroyed: Germans:26pts (1 per Russian unit destroyed), Russians:23pts (1 for each German unit destroyed).

What did me in was that I took ZERO objectives. So at the end of the game the Ruskies got an additional 15pts (3 for each of the 5 objectives). Final score: Germans:26, Russians:38, damn!

My plan is to have a Jack Daniels (always clears the head), and try again, focusing more on taking objectives.

Love this game!!

(in reply to 76mm)

Post #: 9

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 6:37:15 PM

Gerry4321

Posts: 874
Joined: 3/24/2003
Status: offline

Hello All:

Is there no modifier for firing at someone in open ground?

Gerry

(in reply to genehaynes)

Post #: 10

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 7:20:47 PM

genehaynes

Posts: 202
Joined: 12/29/2002
Status: offline

I may be wrong, but if you use "cautious movement" in the options menu, you are penalized for moving (recklessly, I think it's called) in the open. I think it subtracts 1 from your defensive rating. I believe you need to use the CRTL when moving key to negate the penalty. It costs more APs to "move cautiously".

I'm sure someone will let me know if I'm wrong about this.

(in reply to Gerry4321)

Post #: 11

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 7:23:06 PM

whako

Posts: 43
Joined: 2/6/2010
Status: offline

No modifier for firing at someone in open ground. Unit being fired upon also receives no help and has no modifiers unless he entrenches himself in open ground.

(in reply to Gerry4321)

Post #: 12

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 7:39:08 PM

junk2drive

Posts: 12907
Joined: 6/27/2002
From: Arizona West Coast
Status: offline

I would think that in a game that has modifiers there has to be a base level. That should be open ground. Everything else gets a modifier up or down.

(in reply to whako)

Post #: 13

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/24/2012 7:47:05 PM

Missouri_Rebel

Posts: 3065
Joined: 6/19/2006
From: Southern Missouri
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: genehaynes

I may be wrong, but if you use "cautious movement" in the options menu, you are penalized for moving (recklessly, I think it's called) in the open. I think it subtracts 1 from your defensive rating. I believe you need to use the CRTL when moving key to negate the penalty. It costs more APs to "move cautiously".

I'm sure someone will let me know if I'm wrong about this.

You are quite right. It costs 1 extra AP in Open Ground using Cautious Movement. Players should also consider using Fire Groups to up their chances and be aware of the short range of some units. I prefer it harder to destroy units. If every combat result ended in a hit or kill the game would become very stale and tactics would not be much of an issue.

Can the rolls be frustrating? Sure. But that is all part of this system and games in the genre.

mo reb

_____________________________

**Those who rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul
**A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have-Gerald Ford

(in reply to genehaynes)

Post #: 14

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/25/2012 12:34:29 PM

hugi

Posts: 34
Joined: 5/10/2012
Status: offline

I came from Tide of Iron to Conflict of Heroes.
And in the first games ... I missed the "many dice" from ToI.
In ToI you roll usually with 8 - 16 dices (attack and defence dices).
So it's not so random than only 2 dices like the CoH system uses.

But I think CoH is the better system, clearer rules, easier system and more complex game

.
I like flanking, hidden units, cautious movements, groups

, and so on.

Maybe a house rule update would be nice.
CoH with normal rules and tokens but more dice per roll.
I must think about this. Should be possible.

One simple Idea: Roll 4 dice (instead of 2) and don't use the best and the worst roll.
So your remaining "2" dices should be more average. But maybe we need sometimes rolls with 11 or 12 eyes.

What are you thinking?

And back to topic: The gap is a really great scenario and can be won from both sides.
I player yesterday against Missouri_Rebel and it was a stunning experience.

Greetings
hugi

< Message edited by hugi -- 6/25/2012 12:36:32 PM >

(in reply to Missouri_Rebel)

Post #: 15

RE: Scenario-The Gap-SPOILERS - 6/29/2012 4:44:53 PM

ericbabe

Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hugi
One simple Idea: Roll 4 dice (instead of 2) and don't use the best and the worst roll.
So your remaining "2" dices should be more average. But maybe we need sometimes rolls with 11 or 12 eyes.

What are you thinking?

I like the normal 2d6 distribution myself, but I was curious about your suggestion so I whipped up a quick Python script to crunch the numbers.

Here is the distribution of results I got from 100,000 trials using normal 2D6:
2 0.02784
3 0.05552
4 0.08331
5 0.11067
6 0.13881
7 0.1681
8 0.13813
9 0.11063
10 0.08351
11 0.05564
12 0.02784

Here's the distribution with 4d6 discard highest and lowest rolls:
2 0.01575
3 0.04225
4 0.08467
5 0.11862
6 0.15439
7 0.16371
8 0.15627
9 0.12075
10 0.086
11 0.04197
12 0.01562

The effect is smaller than I had guessed it would be. The main effect is to almost halve the chance of rolling a 2 or a 12. The rest of the curve is flattened only very little; the chance of rolling an 11 is only about 20% smaller with 4d6-middle-two.

If you want a more dramatic curtailment of edge results, use your method, but reckon one of the dice always to roll a '3' with every roll. That produces this distribution:
2 0.00447
3 0.01398
4 0.0738
5 0.1685
6 0.23911
7 0.20823
8 0.15926
9 0.08199
10 0.03248
11 0.01346
12 0.00472
With this system a 10 becomes almost as rare as a 12 used to be.

This skews the distribution toward missing, so maybe replace one of the rolls with a 4:
2 0.00467
3 0.01369
4 0.03264
5 0.08363
6 0.15776
7 0.20907
8 0.24046
9 0.167
10 0.07277
11 0.01354
12 0.00477

With this you're almost as likely to roll a 10 as you were with 2D6, but the chances for 11 and 12 are greatly diminished.

_____________________________