RE: 6-21-42 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III



Message

sPzAbt653 -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/10/2009 4:08:16 AM)

I don't understand the question at all. Can you post a screen shot, or a link to the AAR?



cesteman -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/10/2009 5:29:58 AM)

Wonderful



BigDuke66 -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/10/2009 12:43:32 PM)

AAR is in German so I guess that won't help but here is the link to it:
http://www.si-games.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17984


Sorry I maybe wasn't precises enough.
What he said was that when you can encircle an enemy unit completely(all 6 hexes) and destroy it a small amount of the units equipment would land in the enemy replacement pool.
BUT when he tested it in FITE and encircled units with battalions and destroyed them up to 60% of the equipment landed in the replacement pool but when he did the same with regiments instead of battalions only around 5% landed in the enemy replacement pool.
And I would like to know if this depends on the size or strength of the units encircling or even something else.
Maybe he misinterpreted some results.



Jo van der Pluym -> RE: soviet spawning behind my lines (12/10/2009 12:59:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

@Curtis Lemay
Do you know when we can expect 3.4?
The last I heard was "Another one went out to the beta testers" from 5th October.


I hope [&o] [sm=innocent0001.gif] that it's a christmass gift.



Karri -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/10/2009 2:26:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

AAR is in German so I guess that won't help but here is the link to it:
http://www.si-games.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17984


Sorry I maybe wasn't precises enough.
What he said was that when you can encircle an enemy unit completely(all 6 hexes) and destroy it a small amount of the units equipment would land in the enemy replacement pool.
BUT when he tested it in FITE and encircled units with battalions and destroyed them up to 60% of the equipment landed in the replacement pool but when he did the same with regiments instead of battalions only around 5% landed in the enemy replacement pool.
And I would like to know if this depends on the size or strength of the units encircling or even something else.
Maybe he misinterpreted some results.



Well, don't read german so a few questions:
1. Did he make the attacks with same strenght?
2. How much of the equipment was destroyed BEFORE the unit evaporated?
3. Was the unit out of supply?



BigDuke66 -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/10/2009 4:00:29 PM)

Well got an answer from him he admits that it was only a fast test so I guess those results where just a bit weird.

Just to be sure who besides Norm could know details about it?
I would really like to know how much % can land in the replacement pool when an encircled unit evaporates and how this is calculated.

The only thing I found was this:
"Isolated units (those not able to trace a line of communication back to a friendly supply point), on the other hand, are truly eliminated when they evaporate. Their troops and equipment are permanently lost - assumed surrendered to enemy forces."

I can't even find the mentioning that some equipment can still make it into the replacement pool but I'm sure I already read somewhere that X% can make it home.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/10/2009 10:50:13 PM)

quote:

those not able to trace a line of communication back to a friendly supply point


And does this mean at the time of combat, or at the start of a turn? I operate under the assumption that 'isolated' means the unit cannot trace a line of communication at the start of a turn.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/10/2009 10:54:53 PM)

quote:

when he tested it in FITE and encircled units with battalions and destroyed them up to 60% of the equipment landed in the replacement pool but when he did the same with regiments instead of battalions only around 5% landed in the enemy replacement pool.


I would again assume that some units were surrounded during the turn, and were not truly 'isolated', so that most of their equipment goes back to the 'on hand'. Units that were isolated at the start of the turn have none of their lost equipment returned to the pool. So maybe he ran the quick test under different circumstances.



BigDuke66 -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/11/2009 12:16:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
And does this mean at the time of combat, or at the start of a turn? I operate under the assumption that 'isolated' means the unit cannot trace a line of communication at the start of a turn.


Very good question and I don't have a clue.

BTW I got an answer from Ralph Trickey he thinks "it looks like early next year" for the next patch.



cesteman -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/12/2009 8:24:40 AM)

Just a quick question about German Divisions regenerating. I have the Russians destroy one(can't remember the Div now) and it just says eliminated. I have a few that shattered and their coming back but I guess this isn't the case for all of them?



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/12/2009 10:17:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cesteman

Just a quick question about German Divisions regenerating. I have the Russians destroy one(can't remember the Div now) and it just says eliminated. I have a few that shattered and their coming back but I guess this isn't the case for all of them?


No, not all do reconstitute. I've been trying to figure out if I should compile a list, but I'm not sure I want to. Is it easier to say just don't lose any units, because they may not come back?

Also, sometimes they say 'eliminated', but it just hasn't come up to their turn to reconstitute yet. I think they have eight turns to qualify, and then they also have to have enough equipment to qualify (which means it could go beyond eight turns if certain replacements aren't available).



cesteman -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/12/2009 9:04:08 PM)

Thanks! A list would be nice but probably a pain in the neck.



larryfulkerson -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/15/2009 2:21:03 AM)

Here's a situation you don't find every day.  During the Soviet turn 14 Elmer moved an embarked construction unit to a 'defensive' position that doesn't quite defend anything.  He had all kinds of units to move instead but chose the construction unit.  This may not be an artifact of the scenario but I thought somebody might be interested to find out what Elmer does sometimes to shoot himself in the foot.

[image]http://www13.picfront.org/picture/jmnjIPA2W5/img/bogusdefense.GIF[/image]



larryfulkerson -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/16/2009 7:08:29 AM)

Hey Steve and all you guys following this thread:  I put together some pictures into a slide show that depicts the supply situation for turns 10 through 12 to see how fast it changes and what I can expect in the future.  It's about 5M bytes big so I can't post it here but you can find it at this url:

http://www.mediafire.com/?djvzhtnnmnz



larryfulkerson -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/19/2009 1:53:53 AM)

Patrick and I are playing August Fog ( the mirror game ) and in that scenario the range of the HQ units isn't 2 hexes like in D21 and I wondered what in the world kind of equipment could be giving the D21 HQ units 2 hexes range and discovered that the 105mm howitzer shoots further than the 150mm howitzer. It's not an artifact of the scenario but I thought it interesting none the less.

[image]local://upfiles/16287/4993983E57B6436BA8F4B2174641A8C1.gif[/image]



cesteman -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/19/2009 8:09:27 AM)

Smaller objects can be thrown further :)



larryfulkerson -> New improved version of Directive 21 (12/22/2009 4:02:03 PM)

Hey you guys:

Rick and Steve have done it again....they made D21 even better.  There's a new version of D21 and you can find it at this url:

http://www.mediafire.com/?12zjyyjhnnk

Here's what Rick said about it:

This is probably going to be the best version of the game until the next patch is released.  At that point we will have to adjust the scenario to what benefits that provides.  Elmer plays significantly better under this version because of our adjustments to how the supply points were implemented and their affect on reconstitution of Elmer’s units.  Elmer’s reconstituted units will no longer appear in far away locations where he had trouble getting them back to the front if at all.   Supply points are on RR hexes or ocean hexes but not road hexes.  This allows reconstructed units to appear closer to their original formation paths where Elmer can managed them better.   Believe it or not this was a significant improvement to his overall game play. We made some other changes to Elmer’s objective paths to fill some gaps in the lines and by sometime in 1942 Elmer can form a formidable line across the front (provided the Axis player does not take Leningrad and Moscow in 1941). 

I'm going to playtest, it of course, and post an AAR on the results. Stay tuned.


[image]local://upfiles/16287/F3100C5C53204B43B33BF9C80892EF70.gif[/image]



L`zard -> RE: New improved version of Directive 21 (12/22/2009 6:42:08 PM)

Larry......

Link to game appears to not work?

[&:]



Silvanski -> RE: New improved version of Directive 21 (12/22/2009 7:08:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson\ Supply points are on RR hexes or ocean hexes but not road hexes.  This allows reconstructed units to appear closer to their original formation paths where Elmer can managed them better.  

Brilliant! That's something to take note of![&o]



larryfulkerson -> RE: New improved version of Directive 21 (12/22/2009 7:52:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: L`zard
Larry......
Link to game appears to not work?

You can't do a 'save link as' because they want you to view their web site and click on a button to download the pig. You actually have to click on the url link and go to their site and click on the button. I tried it just now and it worked for me ( again ). Try that and see what happens.

EDIT: if you can't get it to work for you just send me an email and I'll send you a copy of mine. I'm at
larryfulkerson2002(at)yahoo(dot)com



L`zard -> RE: New improved version of Directive 21 (12/23/2009 1:59:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: L`zard
Larry......
Link to game appears to not work?

You can't do a 'save link as' because they want you to view their web site and click on a button to download the pig. You actually have to click on the url link and go to their site and click on the button. I tried it just now and it worked for me ( again ). Try that and see what happens.

EDIT: if you can't get it to work for you just send me an email and I'll send you a copy of mine. I'm at
larryfulkerson2002(at)yahoo(dot)com


Works now!

Maybe it was just me, but I tried it 3-4 times.

Oh well........



larryfulkerson -> RE: New improved version of Directive 21 (12/23/2009 2:12:21 AM)

It was just waiting for me to masssage it a little before it would put out.



Panama -> RE: New improved version of Directive 21 (12/23/2009 7:53:18 PM)

Ok, I keep getting the message that I'm not using the correct .eqp file. Here's where things are:

[image]http://i658.photobucket.com/albums/uu302/Starshaker13/ScreenHunter_01Dec231340.jpg[/image]
and

[image]http://i658.photobucket.com/albums/uu302/Starshaker13/ScreenHunter_02Dec231341.jpg[/image]

It looks good to me but I'm old, half blind and I forget what else is wrong with me. [:D]

As a side note, all the other scenarios I try with .eqp files and special graphics all work fine. [:(]



sPzAbt653 -> RE: New improved version of Directive 21 (12/23/2009 8:07:17 PM)

quote:

It looks good to me but I'm old, half blind and I forget what else is wrong with me.


You forgot that one of your legs is shorter than the other. [:D]

It looks like you have it proper, you should get the error message the first time, but it should only come up once. Try closing TOAW and restarting just to be sure.



Panama -> RE: New improved version of Directive 21 (12/23/2009 10:33:55 PM)

Over the past couple of days I've uninstalled/reinstalled closed/opened shutdown/rebooted so many times I lost count. I've tried running this scenario on my wife's computer that's running XP, I've tried using it on my notebook that has Vista. I tried everything I could. I always got the message about the wrong .eqp file. [sm=00000028.gif]

Started my computer a few minutes ago and thought I'd give it one more try. And it loaded with the proper .eqp file. [sm=happy0065.gif]

I don't know why it decided to work, I didn't do anything different. My computer is trying to make me nuts. Okay, more nuts than what I am already.



notenome -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/28/2009 1:12:29 AM)

So I think I encountered a bug, or a seriously bizarre design decision. In the latest version, German reinforcements for the early part of the game come in inside Russian territory. I have one division that is due to appear on turn 5 in Minsk, for example, aside from one that has already shown up on turn four in Riga (actually two if you count the SS Polizei division). Is this really WAD???



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/28/2009 4:01:42 AM)

quote:

... a seriously bizarre design decision ...


Um, thanks!



larryfulkerson -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/28/2009 4:02:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: notenome
I have one division that is due to appear on turn 5 in Minsk, for example, aside from one that has already shown up on turn four in Riga (actually two if you count the SS Polizei division). Is this really WAD???

After you capture Minsk, and it's turn 5 or later the division will appear. Same thing for Riga. It's cool. Working like it's supposed to. It's all good. Or do you mean that Riga is still Russian territory and it still appeared there? Maybe I misunderstand. Maybe you could post a pic?



notenome -> RE: 6-21-42 (12/28/2009 5:23:30 PM)

It shows up normally but why should a German division simply appear in a city that was captured one turn ago, instead of in the mainland? Here is why I am against this:

Unrealistic, divisions are getting to the frontline faster than they should.
Makes reinforcement timetable dependent on territorial expansion
Restricts flexibility, now I cant send the panzergren division that used to show up in Romania to help take Odessa as it pops up in the middle of the Ukraine
Eases pressure on German rail capacity.

Another thing I'd like to mention is that the railroad units that start coming (the finnish and romanian ones) don't come with an increase in rail repair capacity, as that is a fixed a number. Shouldn't the rail repair increase by +1 with every new RR unit, as it is now a new unit fixing rail?

And lastly, why is the German RR artillery not, well, RR artillery anymore? This seriously hurts their effectivness and for the most part vastly decreases their effectivness on the long term.

Don't get me wrong, great scenario, this is probably the third version I've played, and I love it.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: (12/29/2009 6:38:34 AM)

Thanks for the thoughts, here are some answers:

quote:

Unrealistic, divisions are getting to the frontline faster than they should.


The units involved arrive when and where they did historically, not faster.

quote:

Makes reinforcement timetable dependent on territorial expansion


Yes, based on the idea that some divisions were only released to certain areas because they were needed there. If the player doesn't advance, they get less units.

quote:

Restricts flexibility, now I cant send the panzergren division that used to show up in Romania to help take Odessa as it pops up in the middle of the Ukraine


You can send any unit anywhere you want, it makes no difference where it arrives.

quote:

Eases pressure on German rail capacity.


Yes, maybe we should lower it a little. Maybe we already did, I'd have to check.

quote:

Shouldn't the rail repair increase by +1 with every new RR unit


The chance of rail repair increases with each unit, but the maximum number of rail repairs never changes. More units = more possible repairs each turn.


For comments on the German Railroad Artillery, see page 15, starting with post #436.


Thanks again, let us know if anything still seems 'bizarre'!



Page: <<   < prev  17 18 [19] 20 21   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.796875