TGW scenario

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

TGW scenario

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 >> TGW scenario

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

TGW scenario - 7/17/2015 2:04:36 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

Question for Steve/sPzAbt653:

Was gonna try this one, is the 1.8 your latest version? (I noticed that the patch did not include the D21's latest)
Looking at the OOB, I notice that the JG-27 unit is equipped with Bf-110 "Zerst�rer", which, historically is not correct. Is this a mistake or a "feature"?
Thanks.

Post #: 1

RE: TGW scenario - 7/17/2015 4:14:34 AM

sPzAbt653

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

Yes, 1.8 is the latest.

JG-27 - Niehorster lists it with Bf-110, WW2.dk lists it with Bf-109. What is a sPzAbt to do ?

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 2

RE: TGW scenario - 7/17/2015 4:16:57 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Yes, 1.8 is the latest.

JG-27 - Niehorster lists it with Bf-110, WW2.dk lists it with Bf-109. What is a sPzAbt to do ?

Really? Should be a typo on part of Niehorster. JG 27 was always a fighter unit (Marseille served there f.e.), never used Bf-110.

Thanks, starting the war right now

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 3

RE: TGW scenario - 7/17/2015 5:03:33 AM

sPzAbt653

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

Here is a clue from the well of knowledge [Wiki]:

Just 51 air worthy Bf 110s took part in the initial rounds of Operation Barbarossa, and all were from three units; ZG 26, Skg 210 and ZG 76.

Maybe we'll do a v1.9 and change JG-27 from Bf-110 to Bf-109.

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 4

RE: TGW scenario - 7/17/2015 5:47:10 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Here is a clue from the well of knowledge [Wiki]:

Just 51 air worthy Bf 110s took part in the initial rounds of Operation Barbarossa, and all were from three units; ZG 26, Skg 210 and ZG 76.

Yeah I don't know about that, 51 is exactly the number for serviceable 110's in just one unit, ZG 26 (see below)

quote:

Maybe we'll do a v1.9 and change JG-27 from Bf-110 to Bf-109.

Here's a good source for LW OOB's

http://www.oocities.org/sturmvogel_66/LWJul42.html

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 5

RE: TGW scenario - 7/17/2015 7:28:38 AM

sPzAbt653

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

I wondered what happened to Sturmvogel

Yeah, every source has different numbers. I think I read somewhere that this is because most of the good records were destroyed.

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 6

RE: TGW scenario - 7/17/2015 2:45:49 PM

Cmdr_Vessery

Posts: 268
Joined: 7/21/2007
Status: offline

FYI - This is a great scenario. I started a new game the other day as well.

Enjoy.

-Vess

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 7

RE: TGW scenario - 7/18/2015 2:38:18 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

I'm changing the JG 27 110's for 109's... man that takes a lot of clicks... is there any editor that would make that job easier?
Also, can't seem to change the authorized number for that unit, help please.

Thanks.

Edit: nevermind, found the way to change authorized numbers.

< Message edited by Meyer1 -- 7/18/2015 4:02:31 AM >

(in reply to Cmdr_Vessery)

Post #: 8

RE: TGW scenario - 7/18/2015 2:40:43 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cmdr_Vessery

FYI - This is a great scenario. I started a new game the other day as well.

Enjoy.

-Vess

Yeah, looks like it. I really like the OOB/forces structure, regardless the effect on the gameplay, makes the job of moving hundreds of counters a lot easier.

(in reply to Cmdr_Vessery)

Post #: 9

RE: TGW scenario - 7/18/2015 3:27:20 AM

sPzAbt653

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

quote:

I'm changing the JG 27 110's for 109's... man that takes a lot of clicks...

Find a unit that has only 109's > Hit 'G' on the keyboard > Select the target unit > Hit 'A' on the keyboard. Now you have 109's in the target unit, and need to scroll to the 109's in the Equipment Inventory in order to change the Authorized.

Or, scroll to the Aircraft in the Inventory first, add 109's, then delete the 110's. It's really quite simple

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 10

RE: TGW scenario - 7/18/2015 3:43:03 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

I'm changing the JG 27 110's for 109's... man that takes a lot of clicks...

Find a unit that has only 109's > Hit 'G' on the keyboard > Select the target unit > Hit 'A' on the keyboard. Now you have 109's in the target unit, and need to scroll to the 109's in the Equipment Inventory in order to change the Authorized.

Or, scroll to the Aircraft in the Inventory first, add 109's, then delete the 110's. It's really quite simple

Well, that was a lot easier

Thanks,

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 11

RE: TGW scenario - 7/18/2015 5:59:14 PM

sPzAbt653

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

Looking over the Sturmvogel link you provided, listed are 117 'servicable' on the East Front on 6-22. Looking at the I&R in TGW I've got 400.

Seems like I maybe should make some adjustments.

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 12

RE: TGW scenario - 7/19/2015 12:22:26 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

Yeah, I thought about change the air OOB to adjust it to those numbers, but was hesitant that that would change the "balance".
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I have the impression that the air units did not receive the same attention regarding the withdrawing of units to other theaters, new units, and that kind of things, so it wouldn't make much sense to adjust the initial air OOB down to the smallest detail.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 13

RE: TGW scenario - 7/19/2015 12:32:57 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Looking over the Sturmvogel link you provided, listed are 117 'servicable' on the East Front on 6-22. Looking at the I&R in TGW I've got 400.

Seems like I maybe should make some adjustments.

Note that those numbers are good for June 24th, so maybe it would be more accurate for the start of Barbarossa to use the total figures or round it close to the authorized strength.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 14

RE: TGW scenario - 7/19/2015 3:15:54 AM

sPzAbt653

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

quote:

I have the impression that the air units did not receive the same attention regarding the withdrawing of units to other theaters, new units, and that kind of things,

They did but the groups were swapped around a lot, so anything you see that may seem abnormal can be attributed to making the best of a messy situation. The overall concern would be the end of game numbers. If at the end of the scenario the Losses and On Hand are out of whack then some possible adjustments should be looked into.

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 15

RE: TGW scenario - 8/14/2015 3:01:04 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

Hey Steve, just got my Panzer division to this marsh hex, coming from the badlands/ligh woods road to the south. Now, I can't move it out of there. According to the manual, motorized unis shouldn't move through badlands hexes, I wonder if this is related to the engineering capabilities of the Panzer units in the TGW scenario?

Did I lose my precious 8. Panzer division?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Meyer1 -- 8/14/2015 4:01:36 AM >

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 16

RE: TGW scenario - 8/14/2015 6:04:02 AM

sPzAbt653

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

Is that hex 62,28 ?

It's not the engineering, its the weirdness that we can move from a road hex but not back into the road hex in some cases. Sorry I didn't notice that when doing the map, I do keep an eye on that kind of silliness. I'll fix it for v.10.

Meanwhile, only thing you can do is disband the 8th Pz and hope it doesn't regenerate in that same hex.

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 17

RE: TGW scenario - 8/14/2015 2:35:01 PM

Cmdr_Vessery

Posts: 268
Joined: 7/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Meyer1

Hey Steve, just got my Panzer division to this marsh hex, coming from the badlands/ligh woods road to the south. Now, I can't move it out of there. According to the manual, motorized unis shouldn't move through badlands hexes, I wonder if this is related to the engineering capabilities of the Panzer units in the TGW scenario?

Did I lose my precious 8. Panzer division?

Dude, first rule of mobile operations, never,never, drive your tanks in the badlands... Leave the Russians sit in that crappy landscape and be out of supply.. bummer.. Also, watch for impassable terrain west of Moscow..

I used Mountain troops if I had to move into the badlands hexes. With mountain troops, I found that I could get back out to a supplied hex with full movement at the start of moving into the badland hex.

Have you waited a turn to get full movement points and try to get back to the road hex?

-Vess

< Message edited by Cmdr_Vessery -- 8/14/2015 3:36:50 PM >

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 18

RE: TGW scenario - 8/14/2015 9:00:09 PM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Is that hex 62,28 ?

Yep, that's the one.

quote:

It's not the engineering, its the weirdness that we can move from a road hex but not back into the road hex in some cases. Sorry I didn't notice that when doing the map, I do keep an eye on that kind of silliness. I'll fix it for v.10.

Meanwhile, only thing you can do is disband the 8th Pz and hope it doesn't regenerate in that same hex.

Thanks for the explanation. And don't worry, I was dramatizing a little for effect, I have a save to replay and avoid that

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 19

RE: TGW scenario - 8/14/2015 9:11:59 PM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cmdr_Vessery

Dude, first rule of mobile operations, never,never, drive your tanks in the badlands... Leave the Russians sit in that crappy landscape and be out of supply.. bummer.. Also, watch for impassable terrain west of Moscow..

Actually, that is not my problem, what happened was that I had the entire 4.Panzergruppe resting back near Riga or something to resupply, and when moving it back to the front, used that Pz. Division to broke the front there where I was having little forces. So, got a litle carried away RBCing a soviet RD.. didn't realize that I wouldn't be able to get it back.
And that in fact is the weakness of my playing, I hate the red dot on the counters so I'm not pushing my units hard enough. And in TOAW unit with 1% of supply are pretty useful. Hope that gets fixed in IV.

quote:

Have you waited a turn to get full movement points and try to get back to the road hex?

Yes, it's a new turn, all movement points available but can't move it in any direction.

(in reply to Cmdr_Vessery)

Post #: 20

RE: TGW scenario - 8/14/2015 9:21:49 PM

Lobster

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

Please bring this to the attention of the TOAW4 team. Probably a pm to Bob Cross aka Curtis Lemay. Have to be sure they know of this.

< Message edited by Lobster -- 8/14/2015 10:22:28 PM >

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity and I�m not sure about the universe-Einstein

Q: What do you call a boomerang that doesn�t come back?
A: A stick.

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 21

RE: TGW scenario - 8/15/2015 1:32:10 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster
Please bring this to the attention of the TOAW4 team. Probably a pm to Bob Cross aka Curtis Lemay.
Have to be sure they know of this.

I posted something in the comprehensive wishlist thread, that's the thread where we post all kinds of
stuff that would be really neato to have in TOAW IV. It's pinned to the top of the development forum
so he's going to see it if he ever logs in again. I'm talking about Bob. He's the boss I gather. He knows
more about TOAW than anybody I've ever known. I've not stumped him yet with a question. He's
worth his weight in gold. There might not even be a TOAW if Bob weren't involved.

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 8/15/2015 2:33:00 AM >

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to Lobster)

Post #: 22

RE: TGW scenario - 8/15/2015 3:00:05 AM

sPzAbt653

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

v1.9 is posted at http://www.dizium.net/TOAW

Minor changes to the Luftwaffe, and the change to hex 62,28 are what's new.

quote:

Please bring this to the attention of the TOAW4 team.

I did several years ago and it isn't considered a TOAW problem. Designers just need to keep an eye out for these cases when putting maps together.

To clarify, using the screen shot in post #18 above, a unit can move from any of the three road hexes adjacent to the Pz unit into the hex that the Pz unit is currently in, but the same unit cannot move back. This is because those hexes contain terrain that is impassable for motorized or mixed movement units [in this case badlands]. There are other possibilities, such as major river hexes, in which no unit can move back. The easy fix is for the map designer/modder to put a road extension leading to that hexside.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 23

RE: TGW scenario - 8/15/2015 3:05:29 AM

sPzAbt653

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

Forgot to mention that the Graphics file is changed, so if you get v1.9 you will need to add the folder that is in the zip file to the TOAW graphics folder. Wait ...

Sigh ... Actually, I changed the name of the scenario to match the scenario in the 3.4.1.9 release, so if you have that, there is no need to add the graphics folder as it should already be there. But if you never got 3.4.1.9 then you need to make the change.

I think.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 24

RE: TGW scenario - 8/15/2015 3:45:59 AM

Lobster

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

v1.9 is posted at http://www.dizium.net/TOAW

Minor changes to the Luftwaffe, and the change to hex 62,28 are what's new.

quote:

Please bring this to the attention of the TOAW4 team.

I did several years ago and it isn't considered a TOAW problem. Designers just need to keep an eye out for these cases when putting maps together.

To clarify, using the screen shot in post #18 above, a unit can move from any of the three road hexes adjacent to the Pz unit into the hex that the Pz unit is currently in, but the same unit cannot move back. This is because those hexes contain terrain that is impassable for motorized or mixed movement units [in this case badlands]. There are other possibilities, such as major river hexes, in which no unit can move back. The easy fix is for the map designer/modder to put a road extension leading to that hexside.

I...I...

Unbelievable.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lobster -- 8/15/2015 4:47:05 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 25

RE: TGW scenario - 8/15/2015 3:56:53 AM

Lobster

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

If unit is in terrain that it can only enter via a road hexside
Then if can't leave the hex except via a road hexside.

Now, how hard was that? If I can do it an experienced programmer can do it. To say it's a scenario design problem is either a lame copout or laziness, period.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lobster)

Post #: 26

RE: TGW scenario - 8/15/2015 4:15:46 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

v1.9 is posted at http://www.dizium.net/TOAW

Minor changes to the Luftwaffe, and the change to hex 62,28 are what's new.

Thanks for the update. Just curious, what changed in the hex? I just see a different color (and I didn't update the graphic folder), but otherwise seems the same?

Noted the changes in the Lw, now the big decision, restart or not...

< Message edited by Meyer1 -- 8/15/2015 5:16:13 AM >

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 27

RE: TGW scenario - 8/15/2015 5:29:05 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

now the big decision, restart or not...

Not meaning to influence your decision at all, let me say that I re-started.

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 28

RE: TGW scenario - 8/15/2015 5:37:31 AM

sPzAbt653

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

quote:

what changed in the hex?

Added Badlands to it so that the 8th Pz will no longer be able to get in there. I could have left it as it was and added a road 'burr', but I doesn't like the look of burr's too much.

(in reply to Meyer1)

Post #: 29

RE: TGW scenario - 8/15/2015 5:52:33 AM

Meyer1

Posts: 899
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

now the big decision, restart or not...

Not meaning to influence your decision at all, let me say that I re-started.

Hey, I play at a slower pace than you...

. But maybe I will.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 30