Varied Tactical Approach in Defferent Scenarios

[TOCarroll]

First, I love this game. I have waited patiently aince TAOW 1 came out, bought TAOW2 and WOTY. When I got a PC with Win XP on it, I prayed someone would redo TAOW. Bless you.[&o]

So I'm not stranger to the game, the scenarios, ect. Despite what you may think from my Atavar, I do have a 60+ IQ.[:'(]

There is still a lot I don't get. Specifically, with a system that models war over 150+ years (and middle earth[;)]), the troops, weapons, terrain, and all will vary a lot. So ther are not hard and fast rules (like in some games), "Just load up on Panzers V's and waste everything in sight". I have learned this dont work well in swamps or cities.

Folks here have given me copious loads of good advice for lots of scenarios (indeed, other Matrix games). I also read AAR's, and articles. They help.[&o][:)]

However, I would like to 1) Design my own scenario COMPLETE with AI, and 2) "Peek under the hood" of a scenario to see what makes it tick.

I have read what is in the manual. It appears well written, understandable and logical. So how do you pundits know that in scenario X, you will have to wear down force 2 with lots of low casualtiy attacks, while in sceanario Y, you set all you troops to Kill with no regard to losses? I feel like an idiot. I can usually suss it out by playing a number of times, trying different stratiges. Also, for the most part, a bit of knowledge regarding combined arms tactics, geography and history go a long way. But still.......how do you put the whole very complex picture together?

Example: I have a fascination with North Africa, and would like to do a scenario, simpler than "The Campaign for North Africa 40-43", but a bit deeper than Rommel in North Africa 40-42. Regimental/Battalion Scale. How do you manage to put your "flavor" on it?

How do you tell the engine that "this tactic will work (usually), that won't. Even more difficult: "This works when the Germans do it.....If the Brits try it they get their heads handed to them (untl August, 1942). The Italians can't do it at all, 'cause they have to walk?

Sorry for the long post [>:], but any guidance would be appreciated. I do have the time, and will do the homework---just really don't know where to start.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll

I have read what is in the manual. It appears well written, understandable and logical. So how do you pundits know that in scenario X, you will have to wear down force 2 with lots of low casualtiy attacks, while in sceanario Y, you set all you troops to Kill with no regard to losses?

There is a certain degree to which this depends on having played the specific scenario- or one like it- before. But one can at least get a good idea by looking at the capabilities of the two forces and your objectives. My playing style tends to be similar across the whole range, but there is some variation- particularly when we're talking about decades of difference.

How do you tell the engine that "this tactic will work (usually), that won't. Even more difficult: "This works when the Germans do it.....If the Brits try it they get their heads handed to them (untl August, 1942). The Italians can't do it at all, 'cause they have to walk?

By putting in all the right data, testing, tweaking, testing, tweaking. Five years later and you're done!

Really good scenario design is not fast or easy- but it can be very rewarding. TOAW provides all (or at least most) of the tools you need, and you can ask here or on another design forum when you have specific questions.

[Montbrun]

I'm fascinated with the North African Campiagn, also, but, the TOAW system isn't very "friendly" to this particular campaign. There are so many variables involved, and the "see-saw" nature of the campaign is very taxing for "Elmer." Bob Cross has come the closest to getting a working "historical" North African Campaign, through the heavy use of the event engine. I would suggest picking a particular battle, and concentrating your efforts on that, to start with. Operations "Brevity," Battleaxe," or even "Crusader" might be good places to start, and there is plenty of OoB and ToE information out there for these battles.

Brad

[Catch21]

Tobruk 41 (essentially Operation Crusader) by Daniel McBride is a favourite among players. Using the house rules it gives a good 'feel' IMO for desert warfare. If you look at it I'd be interested in your thoughts on it also.

[TOCarroll]

RE: Tobruk '41:
 
I have not played a full Tobruk '41 game because it was listed as "PBEM Only". I have played "Crusader a lot, and, after I read you post, I went through a (fast) "Hot Seat" game of Tobruk '41. Playing both sides makes it difficult to simulate the low recon & confusion of the actual battle![8|] One solution would be to drink a fifth of scotch first (a tactic favored more by Churchill & Cunningham than Auchlinik and Rommel. [:'(] I'll leave the Italians out of this dig, as their performance depended on the situatin, commander, and morale---much higher when accompanied by AK boys).
 
A sober look at the scenario: It is very well done[&o]! Better than Crusader, and I like Crusader. The author makes excellent use of the game engine, and his modifications are well thought out, and increase the playability. Rather than split hairs over minor historical questions (such as the value assigned Sidi Resigh), I would say that this is an excellent example of using the TAOW system to simulate a battle fought in conditions that were extremely different from most WW2 slugfests. 5 stars! (Bob Cross get 5 too for CFNA 40-43).
 
I really appreciate your drawing my attention to this, as it has oodles of examples of how to customize a scenario to fit the specific conditions of a specific battle. Also the mention of CFNA 40-43, and a re-read of the article about it in SZO illustrates the extreme difficulty of doing an entire campaign.
 
Thanks,
 
Tom OC 

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll

One solution would be to drink a fifth of scotch first (a tactic favored more by Churchill & Cunningham than Auchlinik and Rommel.

And look which of the above were ultimately successful. A clear lesson...

[TOCarroll]

I forgot to ask a question about Tobruk '41. It says PBEM Only, but when I was looking it over, prior to playing both sides, I set the PO to take Commonwealth. They took off like (organized) bats out of hell, and started for Sidi Resig (I know, I can't spell [:(]). I have seen this in varying degrees with other scenarios. It will say PBEM only: In some cases, the PO does next to nothing, and in others, it appears to be a fair opponent. The strangest case is the Rommel in North Africa. The PO lets you go all the way to El Alimen, but then it get very testy. Puts of a hell of a good defense of Alexandria, Suez, and Cairo (which the Germans don't have the force to take anyway). Whats the scoop?
 
Are these cases where the system has a built in PO, but it is not refined enough to competently play an opponent?
 
The reason I ask is I am wanting to set up a good PO for my scenario.....if I every get it done.[&:]

[golden delicious]

Having had a quick look at the scenario, it seems all the formations have objectives defined, but there is only one objective track and this may cause problems later in the scenario.

[TOCarroll]

[&o]'Preciate it. I was just curoius, 'cause I have had the occasion to play a scenario (usually downloaded) where the PO is fair, but a little wacky in places---then I find out that there is not supposed to be a PO![X(]
 
I guess it also points to how much tweeking it takes to get Elmer to work on time.[:'(]

[Catch21]

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll
I really appreciate your drawing my attention to this, as it has oodles of examples of how to customize a scenario to fit the specific conditions of a specific battle.

You're totally welcome. If you want the low recon and confusion of the actual battle, I'd suggest you post for a PBEM opponent. Another option is to join the SZO New Players Workshop where some veterans are trying to guide new players through the minefields of TOAW using a popular Normandy 44 scenario. Or there's El Alamein by the same author, which has a PO, though for which side I don't recall (CW?).

For scenarios beyond what comes with TOAWIII, check Rugged Defence, which has a searchable archive, though you may have to post and ask someone nicely to convert that golden oldie to TOAWIII.

[Catch21]

Given your interest is North Africa, a quick search shows these not already mentioned:

Fedala-Casablanca
Gazala
Operation Compass 1940
Operation Torch
Sidi Nsir 43
Tobruk 41
Tunis 42
War in the Desert

Most if not all of these are TOAWI, so would require conversion and other efforts.