DAK Africa placement

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

DAK Africa placement

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] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> DAK Africa placement

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

DAK Africa placement - 6/20/2018 2:57:22 PM

PvtBenjamin

Posts: 1066
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline

Hubert & Bill,

We have an unprecedented situation where Sugar, KZ and myself agree. We believe that the current rules linking Allied city control and DAK Africa placement should change. Below is a post from KZ in the AAR thread on the battle between he & Sugar.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KorutZelva

What to do with the DAK?

Depending on who holds what in NA, the DAK spawns in different places.

Tripoli (Allied) + Gazala (Allied) = Trieste
Tripoli (Allied) = Benghazi
Tripoli (Axis) + Gazala (Axis) = Benghazi
Tripoli (Axis) + Gazala (Allied) = Tripoli
etc.

This means it's possible to game the system to get the DAK to spawn in a favorable spot. Example, if I omit to take Gazala, take the cities behind it and reduce Benghazi's port and city to 0. The DAK spawns trapped and crippled. Sugar could still select not to spawn the DAK but given they appear on his turn he could operate the plane out, and by itself is still worth the price because it allows him to go over the unit limit. While it's not game breaking (like taking all of the UK but not London) but it still feels cheap as heck.

What says you, dear reader? Should I take Gazala or not? (Sugar, you can chime in too)

Currently the Allied player can game the DAK placement with which cities they control in NA, thus wiping out the DAK when they land.

Two solutions are:

1) Change the Cities

2) Let the Axis player determine where they would like the placement of the DAK.

If I've missed anything or someone proposes other changes please feel free.

We do all agree its important to change this.

ty

< Message edited by PvtBenjamin -- 6/20/2018 3:03:57 PM >

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/20/2018 3:38:15 PM

sPzAbt653

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

Would this work ?

; Tobruk is in Allied hands OR
#CONDITION_POSITION= 194,122 [0,0] [1,1] [2] [0]
; Gazala is in Allied hands OR
#CONDITION_POSITION= 192,122 [0,0] [1,1] [2] [0]
; At least one Allied unit within five hexes of Benghazi
#CONDITION_POSITION= 186,122 [5,5] [1,1] [2] [0]

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)

Post #: 2

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/20/2018 6:25:46 PM

PvtBenjamin

Posts: 1066
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline

Looks like that would do the trick. The big issue is not taking Gazala and surrounding DAK when they land in Benghazi.

It may be better that the Axis just gets a decision. Currently the Allies get to determine where the DAK goes.

< Message edited by PvtBenjamin -- 6/20/2018 6:26:40 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 3

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/22/2018 11:13:21 AM

Guderian1940

Posts: 191
Joined: 2/24/2017
Status: offline

There are issues withe DAK. I have started to use a strategy of trying to occupy the area around Tripoly and Benghazi if not actually taking them. This prevents the DAK of arriving which was my goal. However sometimes I did not totally succeed and a few of the DAK units arrive on the hexes not covered. Which leaves the fewer DAK units in a precarious position. To someones point you could use this knowledge to ambush the DAK on purpose. Not a good game design decision. Unfortunate too many of these kinds of things can be done in the game.

IMHO this is another unwanted consequence of the game following historical timelines (AI or PBEM) rather than the current game situation. The GE player should have the full flexibility of deciding on the DAK. When and where at all times.

There is also the issue of the RN blockading the two Ports. They go to 0 and still the DAK arrives. Illogical. Now it would be difficult for the Italian navy to break the blockade but those are decisions both players must make and deal with. That the DAK arrive regardless is ridiculous which means there is no control. There are consequences if the Allies decide to blockade the ports so it is not an automatic decision to do. That's what the game should be about and not canned decision scripts that do not consider what is going on in a game.

My impression is that the game rules were designed around historical events and the rules and choices reflect it. The game decision is that DAK must be available, regardless of the situation, Dunkirk has to happen, ergo the port rules. Stalingrad has to happen ergo supply rules based on towns and cities. Automatic deployment situations. It just appears the rules try to make sure these events can happen and the consequence of the rules affecting the the game situations during the WHOLE war. Creating issues all over the place.

It would have been nice to have scenarios based on a historical situation, limiting the time and map to that area rather than just major scenarios covering all Europe. Plying Barbarossa without worrying about the West front etc.. Yes I know they can be created, Only a few would want to learn and do them. Fnding opponents for your own scenario design might be an issue. IMHO

Just to clarify in spite of the issues, the game is worth buying and is basically very fun. You will have many enjoyable hours and frustrations till you gain experience.

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)

Post #: 4

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/22/2018 4:12:38 PM

PvtBenjamin

Posts: 1066
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline

The main purpose of this thread is to rectify the issue of the Allied player being able to game the DAK placement in NA.

You make many good points. Personally I like the correlation of the games events and history. I do agree that making timing and placement (SU reinforcements placement as a example) of troops/events more arbitrary would add significantly to the game.

Unfortunately I don't know what would be involved in making these events more random or if its at all possible.

_____________________________

(in reply to Guderian1940)

Post #: 5

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/24/2018 8:32:38 PM

BillRunacre

Posts: 4945
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Would this work ?

; Tobruk is in Allied hands OR
#CONDITION_POSITION= 194,122 [0,0] [1,1] [2] [0]
; Gazala is in Allied hands OR
#CONDITION_POSITION= 192,122 [0,0] [1,1] [2] [0]
; At least one Allied unit within five hexes of Benghazi
#CONDITION_POSITION= 186,122 [5,5] [1,1] [2] [0]

Hi

I'm not sure that this would work, as there are six different Decision Events guiding the deployment of the DAK and I'm not sure how these would be implemented (to which of those scripts?) and how they would work in practice in a way that would ensure that one of the six would definitely fire, and only one.

In theory I think I see what you're getting at, but I'm very unsure of it working in practice.

I'm very happy to be proven wrong of course.

Bill

_____________________________

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 6

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/25/2018 2:06:33 AM

Christolos

Posts: 953
Joined: 4/24/2014
From: Montreal, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

I like the correlation of the games events and history

I like this too, and my preference for a fix to this issue, if it is possible, would be to allow the Germans to decide where to deploy the DAK.

quote:

There is also the issue of the RN blockading the two Ports. They go to 0 and still the DAK arrives. Illogical. Now it would be difficult for the Italian navy to break the blockade but those are decisions both players must make and deal with.

I totally agree with this too!

C

_____________________________

�Excellence is never an accident. It is always the result of high intention, sincere effort, and intelligent execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives - choice, not chance, determines your destiny.�

-Aristotle-

(in reply to BillRunacre)

Post #: 7

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/25/2018 2:07:36 AM

sPzAbt653

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

Oh right, good point on the six different scripts. Every time I post something like this I have to think about it first, because I've only been playing a mod for over a year now. I have to try not to post things that don't apply to the standard campaigns, and this is one of those times that I failed. So I should remove my comment as being not applicable, but instead I will stick my neck out further

In 653H/N all of those six DE's were removed and replaced with one that uses those triggers in Post #2. My reasoning was that historically Mussolini turned down Hitler's offer of assistance in Afrika, but then requested assistance once the UK had its' great success in routing the Italians. Therefore, the DE for DAK only occurs if those conditions are met. Similarly, the UK gets its' DE to reinforce Egypt only if there are German units in Libya via:
; German units in Libya
#CONDITION_POSITION= 191,124 [5,5] [2,2] [1] [45]

The idea is that both DE's may not ever fire, depending on the conditions. The DE's are more of a back up if the player needs them, and are a safety net for the Computer Player. It's a different situation from the stock campaigns.

(in reply to BillRunacre)

Post #: 8

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/25/2018 10:46:41 AM

PvtBenjamin

Posts: 1066
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline

So Is it possible to change to the 1) Axis deciding where they want the placement of the DAK in NA and 2) if the NA Axis ports are at 0 then they appear in Italy?

If not a Gentleman's (or womens) agreement would have to be the solution I guess.

< Message edited by PvtBenjamin -- 6/25/2018 10:47:20 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 9

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/25/2018 3:01:40 PM

BillRunacre

Posts: 4945
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PvtBenjamin

So Is it possible to change to the 1) Axis deciding where they want the placement of the DAK in NA and 2) if the NA Axis ports are at 0 then they appear in Italy?

If not a Gentleman's (or womens) agreement would have to be the solution I guess.

Hi

It's not impossible. The trouble is that all the Decisions already in existence would have to have numerous further layers of scripts added on top of them, to ensure a range of choices and also to cater for the presence of enemy ships outside any relevant ports.

Or to put it another way, there would have to be a string of scripts leading to just the one that players would see, and this would have to be worked out and replicated (with suitable modifications) for all six of the Decisions that exist for the DAK.

I'm afraid that the amount of time it would take isn't really available. I appreciate this isn't ideal, and can only recommend a sensible, gentleman's approach to the DAK.

_____________________________

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)

Post #: 10

RE: DAK Africa placement - 6/25/2018 3:37:42 PM

PvtBenjamin

Posts: 1066
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline

Bill,

Many thanks for your attention and time. I will propose a Gentleman's agreement which states that the Allies agree not to have units west of Gazala at the time of DAK arrival unless they have captured Gazala & Tobruk.

_____________________________

(in reply to BillRunacre)

Post #: 11

RE: DAK Africa placement - 7/2/2018 6:10:23 AM

Guderian1940

Posts: 191
Joined: 2/24/2017
Status: offline

Was not the DAK a decision made to help the Italians because they were losing. Is this not a decision the Axis player would make depending on the situation or strategy chosen from the start of the war. Therefore there should be no DAK event in the 39-40 scenarios. It is historical but if you start a 39 scenario a lot of decisions would invalidate the need for a DAK. Seems out of place. Later scenarios yes as historical timeline are relevant.

IMHO

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)

Post #: 12

RE: DAK Africa placement - 7/2/2018 9:38:28 PM

PvtBenjamin

Posts: 1066
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Guderian1940

Was not the DAK a decision made to help the Italians because they were losing. Is this not a decision the Axis player would make depending on the situation or strategy chosen from the start of the war. Therefore there should be no DAK event in the 39-40 scenarios. It is historical but if you start a 39 scenario a lot of decisions would invalidate the need for a DAK. Seems out of place. Later scenarios yes as historical timeline are relevant.

IMHO

Interesting alternative but adjustments would have to be made for the balance of power. Brits have to get from GB to Egypt seems Germans could get across the Mediterranean

_____________________________

(in reply to Guderian1940)

Post #: 13

RE: DAK Africa placement - 7/3/2018 10:33:18 PM

Birdw

Posts: 196
Joined: 3/21/2007
Status: offline

If the DAK can not deploy in Africa it needs to deploy in Italy. If the Axis has paid for it then they should get them either in N. Africa or Italy.

_____________________________

Birdman

It's just like shooting squirrels, only these squirrels have guns

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)

Post #: 14