Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Directive 21 v2.0

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> RE: Directive 21 v2.0 Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 8/26/2011 12:55:06 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

... what scenario it might be that you mentioned, and if the Lebensraum scenario on your site is good for a test play?


The scenario is Lebensraum, and I didn't mention it by name because, well, I didn't want it to seem like I keep mentioning it. It's ok to playtest the version on the site. Hopefully I can have a new version ready for 3.5. The oob in LS was very well researched, I believe.

quote:

I guess there aren't any events left to make the VG divisions optional?


I don't think we need to make them optional, because if the player really doesn't need them he can leave them garrisoning Poland or Yugoslavia or wherever.

quote:

... I guess no player will suffer in this way under Elmer.


To my tally most have found the opposite to be true. I think several of us end up taking a beating in 1942, especially in the first attempt. For a scenario of such large scale and number of units, its surprisingly easy to make a strategic mistake that will cause headaches and a bit of work to overcome.

(in reply to samba_liten)
Post #: 91
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 9/16/2011 10:53:52 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline 		For those looking for the latest see post #42 on page 2 of this thread.

That would be the latest for TOAW 3.4, that is.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 92
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/4/2013 9:56:56 AM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

For those looking for the latest see post #42 on page 2 of this thread.

That would be the latest for TOAW 3.4, that is.



The link leads to a scen called "3R" but not D21......

I started playing this one some weeks ago, but used the version in my scen folder, wasnt aware there is a newer version. So can I use the newest ver with my save ? If not, are the changes very important or is the version I play now (came with game) still ok. Cause it seems to play ok ofc some things were of note, but I can live with them. Thanks.

I wonder that I got a number of stuff in the repl. pool that isn´t used at all (eg. 122mm guns)... those should be captured ones I guess. But seems no one uses them :( Well seems 122mm guns are used by someone, but these people have no losses. So it would be good to have 122mm guns, as substitute for 105+150 howitzers which are in very short supply for example. I Also note all the scout cars have very high stockpile but their losses are lower and there are not enough users for them, while the SDKF 231-8 HAS high losses and supply is low of them. Those are essentially "wheeled 20mm armored cars"....

One more q: Can this be played using the new AA patch ???

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/4/2013 11:42:34 AM >

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 93
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/4/2013 2:41:03 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

The link leads to a scen called "3R" but not D21......


Good grief, no idea how that happened. Fixed now, thanks for reporting it.

quote:

So can I use the newest ver with my save ?


Nope, the saved game will be whatever version was saved.

quote:

are the changes very important or is the version I play now (came with game) still ok.


I forget which version came with the game, but the version changes are documented thru out this thread. I would play with the latest, but since you've already started, its up to you. (Restart ? Arghhhh).

quote:

Can this be played using the new AA patch ???


I have no experience with this, so I have no idea.

quote:

I wonder that I got a number of stuff in the repl. pool that isn´t used at all


Thanks for pointing these out, I'll see if I can dust off my D21 brain and put some thought to them.

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 94
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/4/2013 3:49:14 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline 		Thanks, seems this version works ok, so no big deal.

I wonder if one can play the soviet side ? I just run a AI vs. AI game and it seems the Germans are moving / attacking quite ok......


From the ongoing game. I startet it just to get some more ideas of HUGE toaw scens, as I played only small to medium ones before. I first thought this would be to huge, but just gave it a try. So I maybe played not really "serious" the first 2 turns or so. But then I got hooked and tried to really play it. Seems the leisure stance I took bites me now in the ass, as the soviets seem to have air superiority and hundreds of good bombers as well getting all the yak 1 and Lagg fighters. Actually the northern and southern flanks are in danger for my brave allies air units (which are a bit too weak ?? The Finnish and Rumanian air forces did quite good in reality). Will they get better planes eventually ?

Here is a pic of the soviet winter offensive which seemed to aim at velijke luki (sp?), this was turn 62 or so....






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/4/2013 3:55:04 PM >

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 95
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/4/2013 3:57:28 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline 		Well did not work out good for Stalin (turn 68 or so). Sent massive reeinforcements per rail (v.luki is the last functioning rail head so this was luck) as well tried flanking movement from the south






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/4/2013 3:59:34 PM >

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 96
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/4/2013 9:31:20 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

I wonder if one can play the soviet side ?


Its not designed for that, so it wouldn't be to fair.

quote:

The Finnish and Rumanian air forces did quite good in reality). Will they get better planes eventually ?


The units have their historical compositions. They get better planes later when they historically got them.

In reference to one of your earlier questions, the 122mm's have plenty of slots in the HArKo and ArKo units. These were added in a later version, so you probably don't have them.

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 97
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/7/2013 12:12:10 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

The units have their historical compositions. They get better planes later when they historically got them.



Ok, seems I lost a valuable unit: Italian MC200 fighter squad evaporated, I wont get em back it seem. A pity as I have plenty of the planes. Even if in game they are slightly underated. The same is true for the IAR80 btw. these were quite ok fighters. Italians and Rumanians had mostly the problem with only mediocre engines, as Germans had none to spare to give away. But the designs were quite good, even if a bit underarmed and underpowered. But should be on the same level as LAGG 3. In game LAGGs are better tho.

Is anyone playing this scen still ? Seems a good one.

A pity so low traffic here and interest in this game goes away cause no support anymore. But as soon you learn how it actually works TOAW is very powerful and flexible also for desingning all sorts of different conflicts.

Btw: Pic from Feb 42 turn 66 or so, Germans reach vicinity of Moscow, however red army throws enough untis units in their way that Wehrmacht is forced to stop advance....




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/7/2013 3:57:02 PM >

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 98
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/8/2013 4:09:16 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		I am playing this right now too So everything is not as dead as it may seem

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 99
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/8/2013 8:10:07 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I am playing this right now too So everything is not as dead as it may seem

Was never dead :) Regarding the Lvov Pocket in Steve's D21... Try doing it in War in Russia, where you got a WEGO system. Or put yourself in the boots of von Rundstedt... Back then AG South faced the toughest resistance compared to the easy 'walk-overs' of AG North and AG Centre within the first 2-3 weeks of the campaign.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 100
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/9/2013 12:47:43 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		I actually have a thread in WitE about trying to replicate the Lvov pocket that you can do in WitE but cannot do in this scenerio in TOAW At least I could come nowhere close in TOAW to do what I could do in AGS in WitE.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 101
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/9/2013 9:33:52 AM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline 		Die you try it in FitE? :)

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 102
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/9/2013 4:24:34 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		No only one monster scenerio at a time please lol.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 103
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/18/2013 2:58:16 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline 		Well JFYI the AA patch works fine with this scenario :) This means that the Russian mass attacks like with 400-500 fighters and 300-400 bombers now lose some bombers to AA (also NO AA units fire now at planes). In my experience mostly PE2 and IL4 seem to be targeted while IL2 do not suffer much from AA. This helps the German of course a bit, cause he has not enough fighters to cover most of the front (only parts of it)... and the Allied planes (like Falcos or IARs) are too weak to compete in game with Russian MIG3, LAs or Yak fighters.

It seems now in Apr.-May 42 my Russian campaign developed in a more WW1 style fighting meanwhile - the days of wide and fast panzer strikes are quite over cause the Reds have now units en masse that they throw in your way. Germans need to find weaker spots in the front. The south seems to be weaker, so FM Alpha decided to stop the advance in direction Moscow. There were just too much enemies around....

In the south the following bigger cities have fallen: Kiew, Kharkow, Woronesh and Voroshilowgrad. Rostov would be the next important target, our plan to trap a bigger part of Russians with a sweep from the north in direction Taganrog (or better the coast of the Assow sea) did only work partly. Ca. 15 units of different sizes were trapped, but others escaped. Rostov now was reeinforced also with heavy arty so will not be that easy to take.....

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/18/2013 3:02:32 PM >

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 104
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/18/2013 3:13:44 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I am playing this right now too So everything is not as dead as it may seem


So how are you doing, some words or pics would be cool ???

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 105
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/18/2013 6:32:02 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		Well considering I am just on turn 2, I don't have a lot to show .

I was actually able to get four attacks in turn 1. So it took me a LONG time to complete the first turn. Maybe in a few more turns, I will post something up.

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 106
RE: Directive 21 v2.0 - 10/28/2013 2:18:25 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline 		Moscow still heavily defended, as well Leningrad. But the Heer captured some smaller locations (this is from some turns ago):





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 107
RE: D21 v2.3 - 11/21/2013 10:40:29 AM   
serumph

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 9/4/2011
Status: offline 		I downloaded sPzAbt653's new D21 stuff installed double checked filename .eqp that error message won't eradicate itself. Will it affect game play? I have the proper .eqp file in the graph dir for D21 and the game, its folders, etc are all named Directive 21 1941-1945 however I left the bmps named as downloaded.

My only concern: will the game play properly? I don't care about an error message if it is meaningless.

Thanks!

_____________________________

Gerry

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 108
RE: D21 v2.3 - 11/21/2013 1:09:27 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 5104
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerry Leb

I downloaded sPzAbt653's new D21 stuff installed double checked filename .eqp that error message won't eradicate itself. Will it affect game play? I have the proper .eqp file in the graph dir for D21 and the game, its folders, etc are all named Directive 21 1941-1945 however I left the bmps named as downloaded.

My only concern: will the game play properly? I don't care about an error message if it is meaningless.

Thanks!


I don't think this is necessarily a problem with the scenarios. I think there is a problem with the game engine. It seems that even if you use the proper eqp file that message will present at least once when a scenario with a special eqp file is started.

I think what a scenario designer who uses a special eqp file needs to do is have one equipment type that appears on the top of the equipment file that will appear at that position but is unused in the scenario. Then whey you open 'view/inventory and replacements' you can immediately check to see if the proper eqp file is being used. You could even name that first equipment type after the scenario. Then there is no doubt that the proper eqp file is being used.

(in reply to serumph)
Post #: 109
RE: D21 v2.3 - 11/21/2013 1:47:06 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 12969
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

It seems that even if you use the proper eqp file that message will present at least once when a scenario with a special eqp file is started.


No. There are plenty of scenarios included with the game that use modified .eqp files that don't issue that warning, ever. If you're getting that error either you've installed it wrong or the designer saved it wrong.

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 110
RE: D21 v2.3 - 11/21/2013 3:21:57 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline 		@ Gerry Leb - see Page 1, Post 24 on how to confirm you're using the proper equipment file.

@ Lobster - The confusion in the case of this scenario is that when submitted to Matrix for release, they renamed the scenario from 'Directive 21' to 'Directive 21 1941-1945'. Then when I posted updates I retained the original name, making it necessary for the players to redo the graphics folders.

(in reply to serumph)
Post #: 111
RE: D21 v2.3 - 11/21/2013 3:55:16 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 5104
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

It seems that even if you use the proper eqp file that message will present at least once when a scenario with a special eqp file is started.


No. There are plenty of scenarios included with the game that use modified .eqp files that don't issue that warning, ever. If you're getting that error either you've installed it wrong or the designer saved it wrong.


With all due respect, I strongly disagree with this statement. I have played scenarios where everything was in their proper place and upon starting the scenario for the first time got that error message. Upon restarting the scenario the error message did not reappear. I am not mistaken in this. It happened. Sorry for disagreeing.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 112
RE: D21 v2.3 - 11/21/2013 4:05:06 PM   
TPOO

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 11/15/2007
From: Garden Grove, CA
Status: offline 		I get the error message all the time when I am in the editor working on Directive 21 and then go over and work on FITE2. The correct equipment files are in each folder. I do not worry about it because it is just a bad message. There is nothing wrong with the set ups.

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 113
RE: D21 v2.3 - 11/21/2013 7:35:59 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 12969
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

It seems that even if you use the proper eqp file that message will present at least once when a scenario with a special eqp file is started.


No. There are plenty of scenarios included with the game that use modified .eqp files that don't issue that warning, ever. If you're getting that error either you've installed it wrong or the designer saved it wrong.


With all due respect, I strongly disagree with this statement. I have played scenarios where everything was in their proper place and upon starting the scenario for the first time got that error message. Upon restarting the scenario the error message did not reappear. I am not mistaken in this. It happened. Sorry for disagreeing.


Disagree all you want. But if you are seeing that message then either the scenario has been installed wrong or the designer saved it wrong. The scenarios that install with the game do not ever produce that error.

Let me clarify: The .eqp file used may actually be the .eqp file that the designer intended the scenario to be played with, but not be the .eqp file the scenario itself expected to use. In that case, the scenario hasn't been saved right and that is the cause of the error.

< Message edited by Curtis Lemay -- 11/21/2013 11:21:50 PM >

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 114
RE: D21 v2.3 - 11/21/2013 7:37:18 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 12969
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TPOO

I get the error message all the time when I am in the editor working on Directive 21 and then go over and work on FITE2. The correct equipment files are in each folder. I do not worry about it because it is just a bad message. There is nothing wrong with the set ups.


Ok, FITE2 is a 3.5 scenario. If you are using that, there may be some issue that hasn't been resolved. But 3.4 has no such issue.

Try swapping between the D21 that comes with the game and the FITE that comes with the game.

< Message edited by Curtis Lemay -- 11/21/2013 8:38:10 PM >

(in reply to TPOO)
Post #: 115
RE: Newest Version of D21 - 11/23/2013 11:02:04 AM   
serumph

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 9/4/2011
Status: offline 		Well I now have a broken D21. The rails don't break so the scenario is completely unrealistic. I downloaded the new version from Mr. Fulkerson but that didn't function. I think I am going back to the original scenario download unless someone has a better idea. Help!

_____________________________

Gerry

(in reply to Panama)
Post #: 116
RE: Newest Version of D21 - 11/23/2013 11:27:20 AM   
Telumar


Posts: 2236
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: niflheim
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerry Leb

Well I now have a broken D21. The rails don't break so the scenario is completely unrealistic. I downloaded the new version from Mr. Fulkerson but that didn't function. I think I am going back to the original scenario download unless someone has a better idea. Help!


Which rails? At what date in the scenario? How so?

I've been playing all version of D21 (well, not to the end..) and didn't encounter that issue.

_____________________________

http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com

(in reply to serumph)
Post #: 117
RE: Newest Version of D21 - 11/23/2013 12:00:12 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerry Leb

Well I now have a broken D21. The rails don't break so the scenario is completely unrealistic. I downloaded the new version from Mr. Fulkerson but that didn't function. I think I am going back to the original scenario download unless someone has a better idea. Help!

Gerry,

send/post or link the files you got in a bundle. Ron's Mod, which 'Onkel Larry' is using works as designed. More info appreciated as well.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to serumph)
Post #: 118
RE: Newest Version of D21 - 11/23/2013 12:28:05 PM   
Telumar


Posts: 2236
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: niflheim
Status: offline 		But Ron's Mod is a FitE Mod and cannot be played solitaire against the Soviet PO.

_____________________________

http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 119
RE: Newest Version of D21 - 11/24/2013 4:25:39 AM   
TPOO

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 11/15/2007
From: Garden Grove, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerry Leb

Well I now have a broken D21. The rails don't break so the scenario is completely unrealistic. I downloaded the new version from Mr. Fulkerson but that didn't function. I think I am going back to the original scenario download unless someone has a better idea. Help!


Can you please send me a screen shot or a more detailed explanation of what problem you are encountering? I have never encountered any problems with the rail net in any version that we created including the version that is completed and waiting for the release of TOAW 3.5

(in reply to serumph)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> RE: Directive 21 v2.0 Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.250