RE: Assault rule changes

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: Assault rule changes

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] >> John Tiller's Campaign Series >> RE: Assault rule changes

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 7 [8]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Assault rule changes - 8/18/2008 8:06:55 PM

Jason Petho

Posts: 15009
Joined: 6/22/2004
From: Terrace, BC, Canada
Status: offline

Sending it to Matrix today or tomorrow.

Jason Petho

_____________________________

CS Vietnam

More info: Facebook & CS Legion

(in reply to sztartur2)

Post #: 211

RE: Assault rule changes - 8/19/2008 1:14:30 AM

blue jay

Posts: 5
Joined: 7/31/2008
Status: offline

Excuse a dumb question,

Having only installed patch 1.03, will 1.04's optional 'assault rules' require an earlier patch as well e.g 1.02?
thanks
Jay

ps: how big is patch 1.04? Not on broadband here

(in reply to Jason Petho)

Post #: 212

RE: Assault rule changes - 8/26/2008 6:28:03 AM

Arkady

Posts: 1262
Joined: 5/31/2002
From: 27th Penal Battalion
Status: offline

Is 1.04 patch supposed to fix bug with 0 assault value units ?

blue jay: patch is 225.54 mb

_____________________________

(in reply to blue jay)

Post #: 213

RE: Assault rule changes - 8/26/2008 1:56:43 PM

Jason Petho

Posts: 15009
Joined: 6/22/2004
From: Terrace, BC, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arkady

Is 1.04 patch supposed to fix bug with 0 assault value units ?

Yes, it does.

Jason Petho

_____________________________

CS Vietnam

More info: Facebook & CS Legion

(in reply to Arkady)

Post #: 214

RE: Assault rule changes - 8/26/2008 1:57:42 PM

Jason Petho

Posts: 15009
Joined: 6/22/2004
From: Terrace, BC, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: blue jay

Excuse a dumb question,

Having only installed patch 1.03, will 1.04's optional 'assault rules' require an earlier patch as well e.g 1.02?
thanks
Jay

The 1.04 UPDATE is cumulative. It includes all updates.

Jason Petho

_____________________________

CS Vietnam

More info: Facebook & CS Legion

(in reply to blue jay)

Post #: 215

RE: Assault rule changes - 8/26/2008 2:20:32 PM

junk2drive

Posts: 12907
Joined: 6/27/2002
From: Arizona West Coast
Status: offline

I thought the 1.04 Beta at 200+mb was cumulative and the 1.04 Official at a few mb's was not?

(in reply to Jason Petho)

Post #: 216

RE: Assault rule changes - 8/26/2008 2:50:15 PM

Jason Petho

Posts: 15009
Joined: 6/22/2004
From: Terrace, BC, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: junk2drive

I thought the 1.04 Beta at 200+mb was cumulative and the 1.04 Official at a few mb's was not?

At this point, the 1.04 UPDATE will be cumulative as to not to cause confusion with the various UPDATES. That's what I was told by Matrix.

Jason Petho

_____________________________

CS Vietnam

More info: Facebook & CS Legion

(in reply to junk2drive)

Post #: 217

RE: Assault rule changes - 8/27/2008 7:08:28 AM

Arkady

Posts: 1262
Joined: 5/31/2002
From: 27th Penal Battalion
Status: offline

ok I checked it on second install, read document about assaulting...it seemsthat it works as designed

alone AT gun was overrun 8 times out of 10
two succesfull tank assaults was needed to wipe out battery of 122mm howitzers
0 defend and 0 assault units was overrun without problem

mortars was hardest to beat in assault, 0 assault value but defense 3 and they were able repulse two waves of infantry, they got disrupt status though and were eliminated in third assault

....
and one experience from current 1.03

surrounded stack of german units in chateu hex, 2 commanders, 1 disrupted battalion HQ, 1 undisrupted MG (with lowered morale), 1 disrupted MG and 2 disrupted rifle platoons (at half the original strength) and 1 disrupted engineer platoon(strength cca 4SP) captured by two full canadians infantry platoons with Commander (level 3), I don't think that this assault could had chance to succeed in Talonsoft's version of assaults

_____________________________

(in reply to Jason Petho)

Post #: 218

RE: Assault rule changes - 8/27/2008 7:24:53 PM

TAIL GUNNER

Posts: 1152
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: Los Osos, CA
Status: offline

quote:

and one experience from current 1.03

surrounded stack of german units in chateu hex, 2 commanders, 1 disrupted battalion HQ, 1 undisrupted MG (with lowered morale), 1 disrupted MG and 2 disrupted rifle platoons (at half the original strength) and 1 disrupted engineer platoon(strength cca 4SP) captured by two full canadians infantry platoons with Commander (level 3), I don't think that this assault could had chance to succeed in Talonsoft's version of assaults

there was a bug in 1.03 where units with leaders present in the hex were easily steamrolled, regardless the condition of the defending unit(s).

_____________________________

"If you want peace, prepare for war."

(in reply to Arkady)

Post #: 219

RE: Assault rule changes - 9/2/2008 3:59:38 PM

1925frank

Posts: 1039
Joined: 6/20/2006
Status: offline

I finally downloaded and installed 1.04, and I reviewed the article by Jason and Wyatt on how the new assaults work.�

I remember in the old Talonsoft manuals, an author recommended you'd probably be better off with two assaults at 2-to-1 odds than one assault at 4-to-1 odds.� I think that'd be even truer with the new assault rules than with the old assault rules.�

If I understand correctly, 25 percent of the time the assault result will be completely independent of the odds.� Fifteen percent of the time the attacker has a chance of winning regardless of the odds, and ten percent of the time the defender has a chance of winning regardless of the odds.� If this is true, then an attacker takes a risk of putting all his eggs in one basket, because in 1 out of 4 instances, the superiority of the assaulting force is irrelevant.� The assaulting force is probably better off making�a couple�assaults at lower odds or perhaps even multiple assaults at unfavorable odds.

I've read posts where players have tried desperation assaults and won much to their surprise, and I've read posts where players have been thoroughly frustrated because there was no conceivable way the assault should have failed. The above would explain both.

< Message edited by 1925frank -- 9/2/2008 6:30:04 PM >

(in reply to TAIL GUNNER)

Post #: 220

RE: Assault rule changes - 9/2/2008 10:13:07 PM

borsook79

Posts: 477
Joined: 6/29/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1925frank

I finally downloaded and installed 1.04, and I reviewed the article by Jason and Wyatt on how the new assaults work.�

I remember in the old Talonsoft manuals, an author recommended you'd probably be better off with two assaults at 2-to-1 odds than one assault at 4-to-1 odds.� I think that'd be even truer with the new assault rules than with the old assault rules.�

If I understand correctly, 25 percent of the time the assault result will be completely independent of the odds.� Fifteen percent of the time the attacker has a chance of winning regardless of the odds, and ten percent of the time the defender has a chance of winning regardless of the odds.� If this is true, then an attacker takes a risk of putting all his eggs in one basket, because in 1 out of 4 instances, the superiority of the assaulting force is irrelevant.� The assaulting force is probably better off making�a couple�assaults at lower odds or perhaps even multiple assaults at unfavorable odds.

I've read posts where players have tried desperation assaults and won much to their surprise, and I've read posts where players have been thoroughly frustrated because there was no conceivable way the assault should have failed. The above would explain both.

But is this really a good idea? Should there be a chance to win the assault no matter what? I am not really sure whether this makes sense... esp at such a high chance.

(in reply to 1925frank)

Post #: 221