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: Occupation Event Triggers

 
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 >> Scenario Design >> RE: Occupation Event Triggers Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Occupation Event Triggers - 3/30/2008 12:23:40 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Legun
I really like the idea. Correct me, if I'm wrong:
A designer can define a number of zones. Each of them can be used to get some defined effects . . .


Would be nice if one of the effects simulates a mine field. Wouldn't be difficult to write events so that mine fields are more, or less, randomly placed within a defined area, both land and sea. Maybe the effect could be something like the disengagement effect . . . around a .80 probability that causalities will be incurred.

Regards, RhinoBones

(in reply to Legun)
Post #: 331
RE: Occupation Event Triggers - 3/30/2008 3:45:20 PM   
a white rabbit


Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM


quote:

ORIGINAL: Legun


quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

We definitely want to include definable zones in TOAW IV. There are a host of uses, beyond simply being efficient, for zone-based events.


I really like the idea. Correct me, if I'm wrong:
A designer can define a number of zones. Each of them can be used to get some defined effects:
- be excluded zone,
- trigger an event if occupied or attacked,
- one of hexes of the zone can be selected at random as enter hex of reinforcements, etc.

My suggestion - there is an option "show the zone in the info bar" - in the case a designer can rename the zone f.e. "Belgium".


Here are some more uses of zones:

- Localization (Differentiation) of Shock Effects.
- Localization (Differentiation) of Environmental Effects and Weather Patterns.
- Localization (Differentiation) of Guerrilla Events.
- Event-based terrain changes, i.e., flooding a set of hexes, raising and lowering of exclusion zones, cease-fire areas, etc.

I'm sure that some of the clever designers we have in the community can come up with other ideas...



..EvEd controlled exclusion zones with a localized(read radius ) effect ?..

..just sooooo sweet, i plant my rice, harvest my rice then you fight, oh please..

..now if we could just put Elmer controlled forces in there, with a blue helmet...


_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 332
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/8/2008 8:22:13 PM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline 		Would like to see a subparagraph of 4.14 Command Radius added as a modifier for different scenario eras. As an example, for eras where wireless is the dominate form of communication then the command radius can be a true radius. However, in eras where the messenger or line of sight is the means of command and control, then the radius needs to be modified to include the effects of terrain.

Regards, RhinoBones

PS – Can you switch from bright green to maybe dark blue or brown? Otherwise, an excellent compilation of thought.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 333
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/8/2008 11:49:04 PM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline 		Add a subparagraph to 5.5 Supply points can be set to full, 3/4, 1/2, or 1/4 supply in editor.

For supply points that support both forces, the designer should be able to set the level of supply independently for the two forces.

Regards, RhinoBones

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 334
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/9/2008 6:38:02 PM   
Curtis Lemay


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

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Would like to see a subparagraph of 4.14 Command Radius added as a modifier for different scenario eras. As an example, for eras where wireless is the dominate form of communication then the command radius can be a true radius. However, in eras where the messenger or line of sight is the means of command and control, then the radius needs to be modified to include the effects of terrain.


There are already versions for both eras. See item 11.3.

quote:

PS – Can you switch from bright green to maybe dark blue or brown? Otherwise, an excellent compilation of thought.


I tried a number of other colors. It's tough to find the right combination of contrast and readability. I can experiment some more.

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 335
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/9/2008 6:39:55 PM   
Curtis Lemay


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

ORIGINAL: rhinobones
For supply points that support both forces, ...


You mean if a hex has supply points for both sides? They're already independent, but I'll make that clear.

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 336
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/9/2008 10:39:15 PM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
There are already versions for both eras. See item 11.3.


Paragraph 11.3 still describes Command & Control in terms of a radius with no regard for the impact of adverse terrain upon communications. Instead of a simple radius, I would like to see area of C&C defined as the area the HQ can move to in any one full move. As the HQ moves the C&C area moves and would then be redefined starting from the hex where the HQ stopped. Maybe a feature could be added (such as right clicking on the HQ button) that would highlight the hexes within the individual HQ’s area of C&C. The same type of thought can also be applied to the distribution of supply.

With the advent of radio communications I can see the area of C&C being described by a radius, but I don’t see a radius being applicable any time prior to radio.

In the attached picture, the hexes that the HQ is in contact with are occupied by friendly units. Using a simple radius to describe the C&C of a HQ would not be able to account for the effect terrain has on the communications train.

Regards, RhinoBones


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rhinobones -- 5/10/2008 6:01:57 PM >

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 337
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/10/2008 2:51:10 PM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline 		Hi
developing paragrapgh 5.6, as only a very short version of my suggestion was included in the document

QUANTITATIVE SUPPLY SYSTEM
 
A supply system based upon supply points (Tons) with a difference between fuel and the rest (ammo, equipment…)
 
1)      Units spend supply points depending on their TOE composition
2)      Supply sources produce supply points every turn
3)      Supply points are delivered to depots
4)      Depots are immobile units that have the capacity to store supply points to maximum depending on their TOE (They have “supply squads”). They could be created in a scenario by theatre options available to players.
5)      Depots have 3 different stands to reclaim supply from the sources, so that the player can control supply allocation. There is a supply lose depending on distance from the supply source, only through roads/railways/sea transport/air transport.
6)      Depots deliver supply points to adjacent HQs, with a maximum allowance depending on load capacity (Transport squads will have a load capacity) which in turn deliver supply to units of the same formation within movement range of HQ formation (with supply penalty depending on distance in MPs)
7)      There will be a hierarchy of deliverance of supply through HQs, so that a Superior HQ could deliver supply to attached/friendly HQs
 
This system will have the advantage, besides being more realistic, of eliminating the need for the hex possession system. That would allow fort a different movement system
 


< Message edited by Iñaki Harrizabalagatar -- 5/10/2008 2:52:07 PM >

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 338
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/10/2008 3:54:35 PM   
jmlima

 

Posts: 782
Joined: 3/1/2007
Status: offline 		Maybe someone can clear a question for me. This wishlist is exactely for what purpose? TOAW 3? TOAW 4? TOAW 100? An hypotetical wargame to be? 

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 339
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/10/2008 7:20:22 PM   
Curtis Lemay


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

ORIGINAL: rhinobones
Paragraph 11.3 still describes Command & Control in terms of a radius with no regard for the impact of adverse terrain upon communications. Instead of a simple radius, I would like to see area of C&C defined as the area the HQ can move to in any one full move. As the HQ moves the C&C area moves and would then be redefined starting from the hex where the HQ stopped. Maybe a feature could be added (such as right clicking on the HQ button) that would highlight the hexes within the individual HQ’s area of C&C. The same type of thought can also be applied to the distribution of supply.

With the advent of radio communications I can see the area of C&C being described by a radius, but I don’t see a radius being applicable any time prior to radio.


A radius in courier movement points would be more realistic than a radius in hexes, of course. But we don't have anything at all now. Even a radius in hexes would be an improvement. And it might be simpler for the players, although your "highlight" idea would help.

Ultimately, all pre-radio units get their orders via aide-de-camp. But a command radius would allow some sensible simplification of that. It should depend upon the time scale: if you have 6-hour turns, then if you're close enough that the courier can get to you in, say, 30 minutes, it's probably ok to omit the physical courier movement and just assume you're in C&C. So, if the turn interval is one-week, then maybe the radius could be 14-hours by courier, for example. It's not cut-and-dried. That's why I prefer it to be a designer setting.

Finally, there's the issue of the courier's terrain costs. They're not going to be the same as a formed unit. I expect that some terrain that slows formed units down wouldn't have much effect on a single rider that was getting frequent remounts.

One more thing: Back to 4.14. Note that the penalty is not very severe. Players will probably still spray their units all over the place, even with that rule in place. Ultimately, it needs to be a bit more odious. But I'm reluctant to propose that until we also have the ability to shift units between formations (4.2).

quote:

In the attached picture, the hexes that the HQ is in contact with are occupied by friendly units. Using a simple radius to describe the C&C of a HQ would not be able to account for the effect terrain has on the communications train.


Good choice for illustration!

< Message edited by Curtis Lemay -- 5/10/2008 7:26:14 PM >

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 340
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/10/2008 7:21:42 PM   
Curtis Lemay


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

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar

Hi
developing paragrapgh 5.6, as only a very short version of my suggestion was included in the document

QUANTITATIVE SUPPLY SYSTEM
 
A supply system based upon supply points (Tons) with a difference between fuel and the rest (ammo, equipment…)
 
1)      Units spend supply points depending on their TOE composition
2)      Supply sources produce supply points every turn
3)      Supply points are delivered to depots
4)      Depots are immobile units that have the capacity to store supply points to maximum depending on their TOE (They have “supply squads”). They could be created in a scenario by theatre options available to players.
5)      Depots have 3 different stands to reclaim supply from the sources, so that the player can control supply allocation. There is a supply lose depending on distance from the supply source, only through roads/railways/sea transport/air transport.
6)      Depots deliver supply points to adjacent HQs, with a maximum allowance depending on load capacity (Transport squads will have a load capacity) which in turn deliver supply to units of the same formation within movement range of HQ formation (with supply penalty depending on distance in MPs)
7)      There will be a hierarchy of deliverance of supply through HQs, so that a Superior HQ could deliver supply to attached/friendly HQs
 
This system will have the advantage, besides being more realistic, of eliminating the need for the hex possession system. That would allow fort a different movement system
 



5.6 is something else. See 5.15.

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 341
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/10/2008 7:24:58 PM   
Curtis Lemay


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

ORIGINAL: jmlima

Maybe someone can clear a question for me. This wishlist is exactely for what purpose? TOAW 3? TOAW 4? TOAW 100? An hypotetical wargame to be? 


The purpose is to record all the wishes. Primarily so they don't get forgotten, and don't have to be repeated over and over. What they will be used for, if anything, is unknown.

(in reply to jmlima)
Post #: 342
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/10/2008 7:52:43 PM   
jmlima

 

Posts: 782
Joined: 3/1/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: jmlima

Maybe someone can clear a question for me. This wishlist is exactely for what purpose? TOAW 3? TOAW 4? TOAW 100? An hypotetical wargame to be?


The purpose is to record all the wishes. Primarily so they don't get forgotten, and don't have to be repeated over and over. What they will be used for, if anything, is unknown.


Ahhhhhhh... ok ,thanks. That clears my doubts.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 343
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/12/2008 6:11:47 PM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay



5.6 is something else. See 5.15.


No, they are different, and I know that very well, because 5.6 was my original suggestion, but reduced to a very simplistic mention, Jarek´s idea and mine were submitted to a poll in the TOAW design forum (I can´t recall the exact name of the site) and my idea lost, so in an effort to put together a document as simple as possible it was relegated to a mere mention. However a few days ago, reading the last version of the doc I noticed there was another quantitative supply suggestion, so I decided to explain in detail my original idea.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 344
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/12/2008 7:07:50 PM   
Curtis Lemay


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

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar
No, they are different, and I know that very well, because 5.6 was my original suggestion, but reduced to a very simplistic mention, Jarek´s idea and mine were submitted to a poll in the TOAW design forum (I can´t recall the exact name of the site) and my idea lost, so in an effort to put together a document as simple as possible it was relegated to a mere mention. However a few days ago, reading the last version of the doc I noticed there was another quantitative supply suggestion, so I decided to explain in detail my original idea.


What you posted in #338 is more or less identical to 5.15. It bears no resemblance to 5.6 which is about making supply units function as supply sources. Post #338 doesn't even mention supply units.

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 345
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/13/2008 11:39:08 AM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline 		No, it is about using supply squads, that can be used for the TOE of different units, depotss and HQs, as I explained in post 338

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 346
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/13/2008 6:09:38 PM   
a white rabbit


Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar
No, they are different, and I know that very well, because 5.6 was my original suggestion, but reduced to a very simplistic mention, Jarek´s idea and mine were submitted to a poll in the TOAW design forum (I can´t recall the exact name of the site) and my idea lost, so in an effort to put together a document as simple as possible it was relegated to a mere mention. However a few days ago, reading the last version of the doc I noticed there was another quantitative supply suggestion, so I decided to explain in detail my original idea.


What you posted in #338 is more or less identical to 5.15. It bears no resemblance to 5.6 which is about making supply units function as supply sources. Post #338 doesn't even mention supply units.


..actual on-map supply, that actually gets eaten...

..sighhhh...


_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 347
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/13/2008 8:52:56 PM   
Curtis Lemay


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

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar

No, it is about using supply squads, that can be used for the TOE of different units, depotss and HQs, as I explained in post 338


I don't see any material difference between what you posted in #338 and what is already in item 5.15. Both are about supplying forces by physically lifting and moving quantities of supplies, in tons, from the sources to the units. That you incorporate supply squads into the mix is not very material, but I can add a line to 5.15 about that.

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 348
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/14/2008 9:43:40 AM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline 		No, they are completely different, in 5.15 If I understand correctly, supply would be represented by actual units in the map, in my proposal supply would still be inmaterial, while depots would be material units. Supply squads are part of the Depot TOE to determine the unit supply capacity. Besides, in my proposal there is a supply hierarchy distribution through HQs.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 349
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/14/2008 7:19:11 PM   
Curtis Lemay


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

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar

No, they are completely different, in 5.15 If I understand correctly, supply would be represented by actual units in the map, in my proposal supply would still be inmaterial, while depots would be material units. Supply squads are part of the Depot TOE to determine the unit supply capacity. Besides, in my proposal there is a supply hierarchy distribution through HQs.


Sorry, but I still don't see any material difference. They're both quantitative supply systems - moving physical quantities of supply from sources to the units by some mechanism. The actual nut & bolts of just how to do that is not really the point. As I said, I can add some text about alternate methods.

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 350
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/15/2008 1:21:50 PM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline 		Well, yes, they are both quantitative, but since I saw there was another quantitative supply system fully explained that was (at least to me) significantly different from my suggestion in 5.6 I decided to show an expanded version of 5.6, thats all. If you think they are too close to merit a separated explanation or that my suggestion does not add any significant improvement then I would suggest you just delete 5.6 leaving 5.15 as the only quantitative supply system, because they are not directly related (at least they were not when I redacted my original proposal).

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 351
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/15/2008 5:46:14 PM   
Curtis Lemay


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

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar

Well, yes, they are both quantitative, but since I saw there was another quantitative supply system fully explained that was (at least to me) significantly different from my suggestion in 5.6 I decided to show an expanded version of 5.6, thats all. If you think they are too close to merit a separated explanation or that my suggestion does not add any significant improvement then I would suggest you just delete 5.6 leaving 5.15 as the only quantitative supply system, because they are not directly related (at least they were not when I redacted my original proposal).


I probably shouldn't have been so expansive in 5.15. Ultimately, the programmer is going to figure it out for himself & what we get probably won't resemble anyone's initial idea. My idea was to just give him a few examples on how it might work. But, as I said, I'll try to expand that a bit with your alternates.

I still don't know what you see in 5.6 that makes you think its about what you're talking about. It's a completly different idea, and has some merit. It might be useful for amphibious scenarios.

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 352
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 5/24/2008 11:43:53 PM   
Jo van der Pluym


Posts: 834
Joined: 10/28/2000
From: Valkenburg Lb, Netherlands
Status: offline 		Mayby can these on the wishlist.

V/STOL Planes Need no airfield can like Helicopters in every hex only further range.

Use of Autobahn/Highway as alternate airfield. Some countries has therefore trained.

_____________________________

Greetings from the Netherlands

Jo van der Pluym
CrazyDutch

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 353
Scenario Generator - 6/15/2008 12:16:52 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline 		Would like to see a scenario generator added, something like Advanced Tactics. It would probably need additional selects for the length, era, basic unit size, number of formations and whether the scenario is intended for play against the AI or Cheyenne.

Regards, RhinoBones

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 354
RE: Occupation Event Triggers - 6/15/2008 6:47:09 AM   
BillLottJr


Posts: 333
Joined: 4/24/2006
Status: offline 		WEATHER
Are there any plans for changing the way weather is modeled in TOAW3? such as designer defined "weather zones", where the designer could define the boundaries of the zones?
Or perhaps increasing the number of zones as they work now, from 3 to maybe 6?

MAPS
It had been previously stated that there were no plans to increase the 300x300 max map size in either of the upcoming patches. Is that a completely dead issue for TOAW3? If the 300x300 limit can't be increased, is there any chance support for maps of say 150x600 or 200x450?


(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 355
RE: Occupation Event Triggers - 6/15/2008 11:02:35 AM   
Legun

 

Posts: 209
Joined: 4/22/2006
From: Cracow, Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill II
It had been previously stated that there were no plans to increase the 300x300 max map size in either of the upcoming patches. Is that a completely dead issue for TOAW3?


This is alreay far away a dead line of my perception .

(in reply to BillLottJr)
Post #: 356
RE: Occupation Event Triggers - 6/15/2008 12:41:39 PM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Legun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill II
It had been previously stated that there were no plans to increase the 300x300 max map size in either of the upcoming patches. Is that a completely dead issue for TOAW3?


This is alreay far away a dead line of my perception .



Somehow you don't seem like a 500x800 hex scenario kind of guy...

However, if we're voting, I definitely want a larger max map size -- even if, as Bill suggests, it's merely one dimension at the cost of the other.

If nothing else, the work involved in making the upgrade can't be too challenging. Perhaps extensive, but surely it doesn't involve any breakthroughs in computer science?

The need isn't necessarily for unplayable monsters like 'all of the Eastern Front at 2.5 km per hex -- and can we have a unit limit of ten thousand so I can do it all at battalion/company scale?'

Au contraire. There are several interesting potential scenarios that involve combat by relatively small forces over potentially enormous areas: a 'centrifugal offensive' scenario, for one. My own need is so that I can do an 'Operation Orient' scenario covering Bizerte to Bushehr and yet have the scale fine enough so that one can meaningfully fight out an airborne landing on Crete or Cyprus. Right now, the best I can do is 15 km per hex, but I'd love to get down to 10 km -- and would happily look at 5.


_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Legun)
Post #: 357
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 6/21/2008 9:25:25 PM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline 		The game engine needs to be changed so that the “retreat before combat” occurs during the combat phase of the turn, not during the movement/planning phase.

Reference the following thread:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1833849

Regards, RhinoBones


< Message edited by rhinobones -- 6/21/2008 9:28:32 PM >

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 358
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 6/22/2008 5:32:57 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline 		I always considered Rbc's as a form of 'overrun' attack. As overruns are a form of movement, I think they belong in the movement phase. Of course, if 'Rbc' is not 'overrun', then I am completely wrong. But I love overruns!

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 359
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 6/22/2008 8:30:03 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline 		I also like RBCs, but lets be honest, RBC doesn’t always work to your advantage, you have no control on whether the attacking unit advances, the unit attacks before you give it the order to attack and we’ve both seen an opponent chase a weak unit four or five hexes which is NOT a very realistic military maneuver. Good for gamey tactics, but not so good for realism. I just think that units should only conduct combat (RBC included) during the combat resolution phase.

Regards, RhinoBones

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 360
Page:   <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> RE: Occupation Event Triggers Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   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

1.281