Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat: Last Stand Arnhem



Message

dbz -> Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (11/15/2010 8:31:34 PM)

For your consideration,

I suggest that the 01-Eindoven to 04-Nederwetten route should be removed.

This would make the bridges in the Eindoven sector more important, and
penalize the reliance on the Nederwetten-Gemart corridor to just bypasses the bridges.



xe5 -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (11/16/2010 12:24:25 AM)

Or at least reposition it from the lower right, where it is easily accessible to the Allied player entering from Valkenswaard, to the top right.

[image]local://upfiles/31774/0EF29DFB055540C9A2BC18B0DF0D3046.jpg[/image]



STIENER -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/24/2011 9:24:24 AM)

Oddball
is this being considered?? because its a great idea.

were still going to have to have a house rule of some sort tho......a blind man can take that map in one turn as long as he's willing to lose some troops, the way the german Flak... a/t guns perform.



RD Oddball -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/24/2011 4:19:51 PM)

Yep we'll look at it Stiener. I guess it slipped past the first time this was posted. Thanks for making sure we saw it.



Andrew Williams -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/26/2011 2:58:24 AM)

I don't think removing the VL is the answer in fact it does add some interest tot he campaign.

What is really needed is a Nedderwerten   german blocking force to halt or slow down the possible XXX corps use of this route, until 107bde can be brought into action.

The route is a historical one that XXX corps attempted to use but were blocked by strong German defence.



RD Oddball -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/26/2011 4:09:08 AM)

Steve had a look and agrees with your assessment Andrew, as do I. He's leaning toward possibly moving the VL and adding a static BG on Nederwetten.



STIENER -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/26/2011 4:27:04 AM)

the book 'it never snows in september" eludes to strong german forces on that flank, but i dont believe the book actually goes into specific's as to what the allies were up against per say in that area. anyone know?

sounds like a reasonable idea Oddball. my suggestion would be a fairly strong static BG...stronger than the one the allies come up against at Valkenswaard on the 1st turn of the GC, perhaps more tanks?



RD Oddball -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/27/2011 4:32:18 AM)

Wasn't my idea. It was Steve's after I'd pointed out this thread to him but I do agree it's the best solution. Thanks for the suggestion re: stronger static BG on that route. Will pass it along for consideration.



emperor peter -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/28/2011 1:23:26 PM)

^ It's a step in the right direction, however a normal BG might be better. I already modded a static one in myself and tested it. Those static BGs are vulnerable to attrition. Without replacements for lost soldiers, you can't hold out long with them.



emperor peter -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/28/2011 1:29:34 PM)

FYI I based my static BG (21 FJ regt) in Helmond on this: http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=512




RD Oddball -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/28/2011 2:38:23 PM)

Okay thanks Mystic_Snake. Will point it out. Just out of curiosity what was the roster of the static BG you tested?



emperor peter -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/28/2011 3:57:03 PM)

All FJ troops, but different for every diffuculty level, see the StaticBG file I posted here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=2651210




RD Oddball -> RE: Eindoven-Nederwetten route removal (1/29/2011 3:36:08 PM)

Thanks!



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
5.017578