It's out now. I'm not exactly sure of the changes, but it seemed as though one of the main efforts that caught my eye was their going through something of a re-pricing, but, oh, I was wrong.
If you're familiar with the product, one of the OOB advantages was when you picked forces. In SPWAW if you wanted to check the difference between the HE shot of the PZIB and the PZIIC, you had to exit the force selection, click on the encyclopedia and go through pages finding yoor unit. If it was a cmmon tank for example, that was simple enough. With SPWW2 you at least got the unit 'number' so that finding it in the encyclopedia was fairly easy.
I was wondering why with the new version I was no longer getting the unit numbers on the purchase screen. I was thinking perhaps you had to go over the SPWW2 notes to see hoe to set that up, as it may not come out that way default. I was a bit mystified that a patch would override this, as none of the prior ones had before.
Good news! It's gone for a reason. Now, when you in the purchase screen you can go DIRECT to the encyclopedia, in what is called a "unit data" button and get the unit you're examining for purchase; a MAJOR improvement. I've been asking for this sort of thing for CL, and if it's there, it's really a breathe of fresh air.
Spww2 V6.0
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
Charles_22,
For what its worth, there is also another excellent feature for use when playing solo or PBEM. While in the tactical screen and you have a unit selected and you go into the unit info screen (either by right clicking on it or using the space bar) there is now a new button called Information, when you click on this button you get the encyclopedia data for that unit.
These are both very excellent features that the Camo team has added.
Not sure if or even what code changes the Matrix group will do for SP WaW 7.2 but one of the best features of SP WW2 (version 6) is that it is continuously supported and upgraded both with code fixes and oob data from newly found research material.
For what its worth, there is also another excellent feature for use when playing solo or PBEM. While in the tactical screen and you have a unit selected and you go into the unit info screen (either by right clicking on it or using the space bar) there is now a new button called Information, when you click on this button you get the encyclopedia data for that unit.
These are both very excellent features that the Camo team has added.
Not sure if or even what code changes the Matrix group will do for SP WaW 7.2 but one of the best features of SP WW2 (version 6) is that it is continuously supported and upgraded both with code fixes and oob data from newly found research material.
DGL
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
dlazov: Really? That might had been in 5.6, because there was something I noticed that was marginal from my viewpoint, since I didn't see using it too much at that point, alongside some more signifigant improvements which I noticed, and I thought that was it.
One of those improvements was when in the force selection screen while you're upgrading, instead of as in the past just picking a tank and upgrading it somewhat blindly (I say somewhat blindly because you could've just written them down on paper if you wanted) you could actually pull that unit up and see the usual information, so that if you wanted certain crews with the best, first, it could be easily done.
What I spoke about earlier is really a blow-away great relief. I thought about what you said here, and generally I don't have a whole lot of use for seeing stats while I'm going through a battle which the ease for such information is better placed in force selection screen, though it's nice to have it everywhere, but one thing really blows me away now that I think about it, and maybe they've done this, but what about right-clicking an ENEMY unit and seeing it's encyclopedic stats? It'll be interesting to get home and see if they did that. Now, if they did that, and they did what you said, wow. It reminds me of the game Over the Reich which would actually let you pull up one of your units and an enemy unit on the same screen, thereby making for real easy comparing.
There's so many options with SPWW2 campaigning now that it's almost difficult to take it all in. I keep having the feeling that there's just something else that I don't know about.
One thing that ends up working nicely is the HQ reassignment portion. In the past, what I'd often do is buy a medium tank company and substitute one or more platoons with tanks of a different type (maybe PZIV'c for PZIIB's). What happens to the substituted platoon into that company, is that it no longer is in command of that company, but instead goes to A0 as commander. While that may not seem terribly signifigant in itself, if the prior SPWW2's and SPWAW"s weren't showing you your command for each platoon, and I never noticed it, then anyone who would do what I did would end up with all sorts of platoons under the A0. This can really be a problem when you buy individual platoons not even thinking they have the possibility of being under the same company command because they fit into the vacancy of the deleted platoon. Knowing who they're under, in the upgrading screen, and then being able to reassign them there too, leaves you, if you so desire, with little or none of the force under the A0, but under something else. There couldn't be much worse a situation command-wise than to give 2 or 3 platoons of tanks to a infantry-wise unit like the A0 if you were unaware that any platoons bought by themselves were going under that HQ. Such a thing may not make a whole lot of difference with GE, but with somebody like the USSR it could be critical.
One of those improvements was when in the force selection screen while you're upgrading, instead of as in the past just picking a tank and upgrading it somewhat blindly (I say somewhat blindly because you could've just written them down on paper if you wanted) you could actually pull that unit up and see the usual information, so that if you wanted certain crews with the best, first, it could be easily done.
What I spoke about earlier is really a blow-away great relief. I thought about what you said here, and generally I don't have a whole lot of use for seeing stats while I'm going through a battle which the ease for such information is better placed in force selection screen, though it's nice to have it everywhere, but one thing really blows me away now that I think about it, and maybe they've done this, but what about right-clicking an ENEMY unit and seeing it's encyclopedic stats? It'll be interesting to get home and see if they did that. Now, if they did that, and they did what you said, wow. It reminds me of the game Over the Reich which would actually let you pull up one of your units and an enemy unit on the same screen, thereby making for real easy comparing.
There's so many options with SPWW2 campaigning now that it's almost difficult to take it all in. I keep having the feeling that there's just something else that I don't know about.
One thing that ends up working nicely is the HQ reassignment portion. In the past, what I'd often do is buy a medium tank company and substitute one or more platoons with tanks of a different type (maybe PZIV'c for PZIIB's). What happens to the substituted platoon into that company, is that it no longer is in command of that company, but instead goes to A0 as commander. While that may not seem terribly signifigant in itself, if the prior SPWW2's and SPWAW"s weren't showing you your command for each platoon, and I never noticed it, then anyone who would do what I did would end up with all sorts of platoons under the A0. This can really be a problem when you buy individual platoons not even thinking they have the possibility of being under the same company command because they fit into the vacancy of the deleted platoon. Knowing who they're under, in the upgrading screen, and then being able to reassign them there too, leaves you, if you so desire, with little or none of the force under the A0, but under something else. There couldn't be much worse a situation command-wise than to give 2 or 3 platoons of tanks to a infantry-wise unit like the A0 if you were unaware that any platoons bought by themselves were going under that HQ. Such a thing may not make a whole lot of difference with GE, but with somebody like the USSR it could be critical.
Charles_22,
I have been playing 5.6 since last Dec and the "new" Information button down in the tactical screen is new. It was introduced in SP MBT 2.0. Also, you can select the 'i' key and get info on your opponents units during battle. The reason these are both helpful is lets say you purchase stuff and then you wait a day or so for your PBEM friend to send your turn. You get the turn and last say on turn 8 you spot his tanks, you can use the i key to find out there thickness and find out your main guns max penetration right there on the spot. You don't have to key out to the encyclopedia.
Regarding the HQ screen what I really like in SP WW2 is you can see which units are attached to the A0 unit. For example lets say you have a rifle coy and the B0 is the coy HQ you can see platoons 1-3 as C0, D0 and E0. In WaW All you see is the B0 and its subordinate units (B0, B1, B2).
Word of caution on transferring units, don't allocate out the 0 unit, keep him its better to have more leaders around. For example lets say you have G0, G1 which are FlaK units and H0 and H1 which are panzerfaust teams and I0 and I1 which are sniper teams, its better to mix them up like this:
G0, H1
H0, I1
I0, G1
this way helps in rallying and command and control.
I have been playing 5.6 since last Dec and the "new" Information button down in the tactical screen is new. It was introduced in SP MBT 2.0. Also, you can select the 'i' key and get info on your opponents units during battle. The reason these are both helpful is lets say you purchase stuff and then you wait a day or so for your PBEM friend to send your turn. You get the turn and last say on turn 8 you spot his tanks, you can use the i key to find out there thickness and find out your main guns max penetration right there on the spot. You don't have to key out to the encyclopedia.
Regarding the HQ screen what I really like in SP WW2 is you can see which units are attached to the A0 unit. For example lets say you have a rifle coy and the B0 is the coy HQ you can see platoons 1-3 as C0, D0 and E0. In WaW All you see is the B0 and its subordinate units (B0, B1, B2).
Word of caution on transferring units, don't allocate out the 0 unit, keep him its better to have more leaders around. For example lets say you have G0, G1 which are FlaK units and H0 and H1 which are panzerfaust teams and I0 and I1 which are sniper teams, its better to mix them up like this:
G0, H1
H0, I1
I0, G1
this way helps in rallying and command and control.
DGL
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
dlazov:
It may be a while before I actually see an enemy unit, as one of my favorite parts of the game, the purchasing, is so much more a joy to use now. There's no trying to remember between campaign starts just which piece of artillery gave you the most distance and bang. Given the thoroughness, if you are to be believed, and I see no reason not to do so, that they have instigated in even touching on getting encyclopedic entries for enemy units on the spot, I'd imagine it's even possible on the upgrade screen with the 2nd battle and beyond. How refreshing.
Of course you're talking PBEM, which I don't do. It wouldn't surprise me, given that information, if the same is true for the playing against the AI. Actually if what i'm thinking is happening, is, it is accessing the encyclopedia but only in a limited way such that it will show only the unit given the I. I'm curious how this will work out, because I was picturing that if it worked for enemies that you RMB the unit and it would show the data we're used to seeing with that function, but that in that window it would also have a "unit data" button and that would be your pathway into that unit's encyclopedia entry. Hmm, I wonder if while in the purchase screens, if this 'I' key will work, or if you'll have to click the "unit data" toggle instead. One's slightly easier than the other, but both really good. I haven't seen my 1st enemy unit yet, nor have I tried hitting the 'I' while purchasing, but I sure will.Also, you can select the 'i' key and get info on your opponents units during battle. The reason these are both helpful is lets say you purchase stuff and then you wait a day or so for your PBEM friend to send your turn. You get the turn and last say on turn 8 you spot his tanks, you can use the i key to find out there thickness and find out your main guns max penetration right there on the spot. You don't have to key out to the encyclopedia.
Yeah, there's just so much there, but I do enjoy seeing all that's attached to A0 even more, as it's dreadful the thought of all those individual platoons getting stuck with them if you didn't know. I was wondering in SPWAW why it was it seemed there was more A0 rallying involvement than seemed logical.Regarding the HQ screen what I really like in SP WW2 is you can see which units are attached to the A0 unit. For example lets say you have a rifle coy and the B0 is the coy HQ you can see platoons 1-3 as C0, D0 and E0. In WaW All you see is the B0 and its subordinate units (B0, B1, B2).
It may be a while before I actually see an enemy unit, as one of my favorite parts of the game, the purchasing, is so much more a joy to use now. There's no trying to remember between campaign starts just which piece of artillery gave you the most distance and bang. Given the thoroughness, if you are to be believed, and I see no reason not to do so, that they have instigated in even touching on getting encyclopedic entries for enemy units on the spot, I'd imagine it's even possible on the upgrade screen with the 2nd battle and beyond. How refreshing.
true for the playing against the AI
Yes
Hmm, I wonder if while in the purchase screens, if this 'I' key will work, or if you'll have to click the "unit data" toggle instead
This is not necessary due to the fact that while in the purchase screen you can just click on the info tab to show the data for the "current unit". I liken this to figuring out which is better for my purchase a 251/9 or a 251/10 for example.
The whole other point I was discussing is in the situation of PBEM or versus the AI when you have say some Pz II's, Pz III's and a Pz IV. Lets say you are up against some T-34. Now you can go to one of each of your Panzers and hit space bar to view the unit info and then select the new "information" button to see the main gun's data (i.e., the penetration values) then you can mental figure if its worth it to shot the 20mm at it, 37mm or the 75 to try to get a kill. Or what a lot of my opponents and me do is to let the AI select our forces for us and then we play. In these situations it may be a Italian vs. Greek 11/40 game and I have no idea of what the Greek capabilities are, now during the battle I can access the information on the particular unit on the spot. One used to be able to this by only going back out into the encyclopedia (in both games WW2 and WaW).
As far as rallying goes in WW2 its somewhat complicated but the programmers explained that it works like this:
I am also assuming that WaW does basically the same thing as far as rallying is concerned.Command link status is determined at your move start.
Command link can be traced to your company level HQ, or the Battle Group HQ if the platoon HQ is not available - so these are useful units to place along the line of a major rout. Even if not all the retreaters pass individual rally calls, if they are counted as being in contact (command control) radius of some superior then they will not have the extra Suppression possibilities of failing the out of contact internal check.
DGL
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
dlazov: Yeah I understood how unit depends on platoon HQ, how platoon on company HQ, company HQ on battalion HQ, and battalion of force HQ, but my main problem with platoons being all directly under A0 are twofold. Firstly there is no company HQ they can spounge off of, and perhaps more importantly is that any of these units within distance of A0 soak off it's rally attempts. The A0 should be preserved, in my view, as much as possible to itself, so that when rallies that fail for HQ's fail, they might pick up the slack. If your first platoons are direct to the A0, and you always go from first unit to last in the order they're picked, for example, you'll often find those 1st three have soaked off all the rally attempts that could be used for failed company rallies instead.
The opposite end of that, is if you have some of these loose platoons assigned to companies you thought they'd ordinarily not be a part of, you spread out the number of units possibly covered to get a rally success. IOW, if a platoon is directly to the A0, it cannot get any rallies possible from any company or battalion HQ's. IN SPWAW with CC on, having virtually all individual platoons, accidentally or otherwise, assigned directly to A0, will make these sort of problems even more profound.
The main task of A0 in my book is to try to have it relatively close to my forward observer(which I never use forward) and the point of anything being assigned directly to A0 serves no purpose unless it's in it's general vicinity, because to do otherwise is to possibly have A0 fail to rally on a probable insignifigant unit, whereas it could be taking up for a company HQ that failed elsewhere. Naturally, if you're not diligent, and I know I'm not, you could still use up A0 rallies on units that don't really need it, because you took to rallying units that weren't in a very bad way first. So from that angle to assign an infantry squad to A0, instead of an infantry company HQ that it 'might' end up being in it's same general vicinity is a better deal. Not only can that company HQ rescue it, but also A0.
I hope I'm making sense. I'm thinking the command chain is much better served when all the plstoons you bougth individually aren't left as-is, but are each assigned some sort of company or battalion command.
The opposite end of that, is if you have some of these loose platoons assigned to companies you thought they'd ordinarily not be a part of, you spread out the number of units possibly covered to get a rally success. IOW, if a platoon is directly to the A0, it cannot get any rallies possible from any company or battalion HQ's. IN SPWAW with CC on, having virtually all individual platoons, accidentally or otherwise, assigned directly to A0, will make these sort of problems even more profound.
The main task of A0 in my book is to try to have it relatively close to my forward observer(which I never use forward) and the point of anything being assigned directly to A0 serves no purpose unless it's in it's general vicinity, because to do otherwise is to possibly have A0 fail to rally on a probable insignifigant unit, whereas it could be taking up for a company HQ that failed elsewhere. Naturally, if you're not diligent, and I know I'm not, you could still use up A0 rallies on units that don't really need it, because you took to rallying units that weren't in a very bad way first. So from that angle to assign an infantry squad to A0, instead of an infantry company HQ that it 'might' end up being in it's same general vicinity is a better deal. Not only can that company HQ rescue it, but also A0.
I hope I'm making sense. I'm thinking the command chain is much better served when all the plstoons you bougth individually aren't left as-is, but are each assigned some sort of company or battalion command.
Voriax,
Yes I am a cross-gamer and am not ashamed to admit it (lol). I like having the following directories:
C:/SPWW2v5
C:/SPWW2v6
C:/SPMBT1
C:/SPMBT2
C:/SPWaW
C:/SPWaWH2H
IMHO all of the above each have their own strengths and weakness.
Charles_22,
There was another post from the programmers that got even more confusing. Basically IIRC, it goes that the Platoon leader will attempt to rally "his" squad first, if he fails then the Company Commander will attempt, if he fails then the Battle Group Commander will try. So in effect you don't burn out your A0 unit unless you assign a bunch of platoons to him (as opposed to assigning a bunch of companies-which really means that during the purchase phase you buy companies).
The cool thing about the SP series if one has the time is you can run several tests to prove or disprove this.
Set up with A0 and a bunch of platoons and then try with only companies.
Yes I am a cross-gamer and am not ashamed to admit it (lol). I like having the following directories:
C:/SPWW2v5
C:/SPWW2v6
C:/SPMBT1
C:/SPMBT2
C:/SPWaW
C:/SPWaWH2H
IMHO all of the above each have their own strengths and weakness.
Charles_22,
There was another post from the programmers that got even more confusing. Basically IIRC, it goes that the Platoon leader will attempt to rally "his" squad first, if he fails then the Company Commander will attempt, if he fails then the Battle Group Commander will try. So in effect you don't burn out your A0 unit unless you assign a bunch of platoons to him (as opposed to assigning a bunch of companies-which really means that during the purchase phase you buy companies).
The cool thing about the SP series if one has the time is you can run several tests to prove or disprove this.
Set up with A0 and a bunch of platoons and then try with only companies.
DGL
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
dlazov:
Hilarious, now I know I was confusing, because that's what I was saying, that to buy individual platoons and not re-assign them from the A0 wasn't good. It's not buying companies that's so important, though having at least two is wise (in my case an infantry and tank one), but that the platoons not under a company (IOW under A0) need to be assigned to some of the companies you have, which, can be easily done whilst going over upgrades and what not.
So in effect you don't burn out your A0 unit unless you assign a bunch of platoons to him (as opposed to assigning a bunch of companies-which really means that during the purchase phase you buy companies).
Hilarious, now I know I was confusing, because that's what I was saying, that to buy individual platoons and not re-assign them from the A0 wasn't good. It's not buying companies that's so important, though having at least two is wise (in my case an infantry and tank one), but that the platoons not under a company (IOW under A0) need to be assigned to some of the companies you have, which, can be easily done whilst going over upgrades and what not.
Hilarious, now I know I was confusing, because that's what I was saying,
LOL, so we are saying the same thing in a different way. No biggy.
In my PBEM games we usually go with between 1200-2400 points and usually agree on companies only (the platoons or batteries okay).
The only solo for all 4 games I do is a couple of turns of test (I do more WaW scenarios that are small for testing, I look at some of the WW2 scenarios (they are now at 203 scenarios-yeah) and I mostly solo only do campaigns).
Right now in v6 I have 3 campaigns going on, and 2 PBEM games. In MBT I have 2 PBEM games and in WaW I have 1 campaign (not that interested in) and 2 PBEM games going on. In H2H I have 1 PBEM game going on.
DGL
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
dlazov: Here's something you can try if you already haven't. SPWAW adjusts the AI for the size of the screen you pick, as you must know, but one thing it doesn't do on increased map size is adjust your core amount. this leaves you unfortunately with trying to figure out what is a good game, should you wish to use the expanded size as I do. I suppose there might be soem sort of mathmatical calulation to figure it.
In my case in any pre-'41 campaigns I've done with it, I'm using the 200X160 size. This is quite fun. You just don't know how much more tenuous commanding the battlefield gets when you have things more spread out, in response time alone if nothign else. What I'm doing is picking 3300 pts. as the core value and 200X160. I'm usually coming up with between 105-120 core units, and you'll need every last one of the on the defensive to figure out what the AI is doing. It's surprised me quite a bit. Oh, I pick the tank heavy option for the AI as well. To think I used to have around 90-100 core units in the maximum SPWAW screen size of 80, and now I'm 2 1/2 times that with roughly a 20% increase in core size.
Of course, one of the really great things, is if I ever feel that my core-to-map-size ratio isn't high enough, I can add in a platoon or two of units.
In my case in any pre-'41 campaigns I've done with it, I'm using the 200X160 size. This is quite fun. You just don't know how much more tenuous commanding the battlefield gets when you have things more spread out, in response time alone if nothign else. What I'm doing is picking 3300 pts. as the core value and 200X160. I'm usually coming up with between 105-120 core units, and you'll need every last one of the on the defensive to figure out what the AI is doing. It's surprised me quite a bit. Oh, I pick the tank heavy option for the AI as well. To think I used to have around 90-100 core units in the maximum SPWAW screen size of 80, and now I'm 2 1/2 times that with roughly a 20% increase in core size.
Of course, one of the really great things, is if I ever feel that my core-to-map-size ratio isn't high enough, I can add in a platoon or two of units.
Charles_22,
I have not done that much Campaigning with SPWaW, but in SPWW2 the AI is based off of your points values plus their increase in experience. For example if a platoon was 100 points and then all of the units in the platoon were veterans then it would be 150 (I don't know the exact points) then the AI totals up your core force value and buys off of that number. In general SPWW2 is a different pricing system, so that a 1200-2000 battle is quite big (read that as 2-3 infantry coys, 1 tank coy and support). The map size does not play a part other then where or where not the AI may deploy.
I have just upped from 80x80 maps to 100x100 maps in WW2. Is there a relationship equivalent in SP WaW?
I have not done that much Campaigning with SPWaW, but in SPWW2 the AI is based off of your points values plus their increase in experience. For example if a platoon was 100 points and then all of the units in the platoon were veterans then it would be 150 (I don't know the exact points) then the AI totals up your core force value and buys off of that number. In general SPWW2 is a different pricing system, so that a 1200-2000 battle is quite big (read that as 2-3 infantry coys, 1 tank coy and support). The map size does not play a part other then where or where not the AI may deploy.
I have just upped from 80x80 maps to 100x100 maps in WW2. Is there a relationship equivalent in SP WaW?
DGL
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
dlazov:
Incorrect, sort of. One of the improvements of V5.6 was their adjusting the AI to the size of the board. IOW, if I'm understanding it correctly, it's normal when making wider larger maps that the AI doesn' t think of covering but the territory it was instructed to cover, like 80 hexes. That's my guess anyway, but they did word it as that they had programmed the AI to deal with every possible map size.The map size does not play a part other then where or where not the AI may deploy.
Not on the fly there isn't. I've been told how to do it before, that is widening a previous campaign battle and all (and having to do that with each and every battle), but couldn't get it to work, and because the visibility was so bad at times I decided I'd rather play the SPWW2 with maps on the fly where the visi. is logical and I can play with easy to make larger maps.I have just upped from 80x80 maps to 100x100 maps in WW2. Is there a relationship equivalent in SP WaW?
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
dlazov: Oh, btw, in case you think, as I probably did once upon a time, that a larger map experience can be felt by just using smaller maps with less units, it doesn't work that way. It sure sounds true, but the fact of the matter that despite achieving the same unit-to-hex ratio doesn't account for the distance. Fire brigades and/or having something off towards the rear are a lot more important the larger the map. Very simply it's because it takes longer for your fire brigades to move to the fire. In SPWAW I routinely would set up at least three or four platoons to have their objectives at the polar opposite of the board, in case one sector was overran while the other wasn't touched at all. With the common 40-80 hex height of SPWAW that in a lot of cases means getting help in 3 or 4 turns. With 200 hexes you might as well forget the quiet flank reinforcing the hot flank, because it probably takes 10 turns or more. Instead the mid areas have to reinforce the flanks and the quiet flank moves some or all of it's stuff to the middle. Of course I used to do some mid-to-flank reinforcing in SPWAW, but so often that area has at least enough fighting, sooner or later, that you have to keep at least half of that force there. It does make for some interesting challenges, and for the 3-5 battles I've played V5.6 I've been flanked at least twice. The wider the map, the more sense of some of your units being "out on their own" comes to the forefront. Numbers can make up for some things, but it can't make up for how long it takes to move a unit in order to reinforce. Of course, when you get down to visibility getting under 10 or so, the immensity of the 200 hex map and the smaller ratio of units to it (in my case 105-120 core units) makes things even more crucial.
Charles_22,
Those are all interesting points. I could see the logic behind it in a delay or defend. But in most of my PBEM's (mostly 5.6 and now v6) we are doing meeting engagements and yes there is the flanking maneuver if one were to let that happen. I have a different tactic that I seem to use with some success. if the enemy out flanks me I can rotate fairly easily (unless I tried to out flank and he out flanked my holding flank). I don't like splitting up my stuff, I like to keep it concentrated and in support of each other. I have had the most success doing this, it does mean at some points inf units are moving slow as dogs as well as the tanks. But they usually arrive at the same spot in sufficient force to offset flanks and overrun poorly held sectors.
This works no matter what map size, although in WaW in the small maps this works really well.
Just my observations.
Those are all interesting points. I could see the logic behind it in a delay or defend. But in most of my PBEM's (mostly 5.6 and now v6) we are doing meeting engagements and yes there is the flanking maneuver if one were to let that happen. I have a different tactic that I seem to use with some success. if the enemy out flanks me I can rotate fairly easily (unless I tried to out flank and he out flanked my holding flank). I don't like splitting up my stuff, I like to keep it concentrated and in support of each other. I have had the most success doing this, it does mean at some points inf units are moving slow as dogs as well as the tanks. But they usually arrive at the same spot in sufficient force to offset flanks and overrun poorly held sectors.
This works no matter what map size, although in WaW in the small maps this works really well.
Just my observations.
DGL
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
dlazov: Thanks. I suppose I've adopted soemthing of the broad front mindset. Not so much because I believe in it, but a lot of times because it's just more challenging that way, though I'm certainly not againsy swinging a force on the defensive, but as I look at it, especially on a narrower map, that's the job of my relatively stationary middle ground to do 'just swinging', but as the maps get wider there's much quicker decision making to be done.
This is my 1st campaign battle under V6.0. I've been surprised by the enemy AI before, but this battle may just have taken the cake. There's enough of the Polish armored cars in enough varied positions during his advance, that if there's a highly concentrated attack area I haven't found it yet, as I've seen no tanks or infantry. The deal is, there's either 2 or 3 east/west roads. For a great deal of the most southern hex, there is a road. I sent some 8-rad AC's advancing down the road hoping to make it to the enemy rear. Le Problem! They've ran into at least 3 platoons of AC's down there, and I started a fighting withdrawal, destroying one and immobilizing another. Another two turns of this, firing and withdrawing ensued with maybe an odd kill or two. One of those turns I sent my southern-most tank, a PZ38t down there and the next turn another from the same platoon (yes I will send them piecemeal to an relatively unimportant area, as any en masse charge by him on say line 170, could be real trouble). It looks like I'm going to hold this unimportant sector (the south is a very long way from the most southern objective) with this small amount, but what a gas, what an AI. Truly unpredictable on the attack! Oh how I love it trying to outflank me, EVEN ON THE VERY BOTTOM SET OF HEXES! I've seen it do that before in another game, but in the other case there was no road there and it was just a section of FT-18's.
This is my 1st campaign battle under V6.0. I've been surprised by the enemy AI before, but this battle may just have taken the cake. There's enough of the Polish armored cars in enough varied positions during his advance, that if there's a highly concentrated attack area I haven't found it yet, as I've seen no tanks or infantry. The deal is, there's either 2 or 3 east/west roads. For a great deal of the most southern hex, there is a road. I sent some 8-rad AC's advancing down the road hoping to make it to the enemy rear. Le Problem! They've ran into at least 3 platoons of AC's down there, and I started a fighting withdrawal, destroying one and immobilizing another. Another two turns of this, firing and withdrawing ensued with maybe an odd kill or two. One of those turns I sent my southern-most tank, a PZ38t down there and the next turn another from the same platoon (yes I will send them piecemeal to an relatively unimportant area, as any en masse charge by him on say line 170, could be real trouble). It looks like I'm going to hold this unimportant sector (the south is a very long way from the most southern objective) with this small amount, but what a gas, what an AI. Truly unpredictable on the attack! Oh how I love it trying to outflank me, EVEN ON THE VERY BOTTOM SET OF HEXES! I've seen it do that before in another game, but in the other case there was no road there and it was just a section of FT-18's.
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
Slight update:
That straight line southern-most set of hexes? Turns out there's a recon company, an AC company, and possibly even a tank company down there. I haven't lost an AFV yet, but one of the now 5 PZ38(t)'s I have down there has had it's main gun knocked out. Uh-oh, with my being crammed to a small space behind some woods I could be facing infantry any minute. I might just poke someone's head out of there and see what turns up. I do have those expendable section of 8-rad AC's I could use for that, though they have been helping in the defense.
In the far north meanwhile, I'd say line 30 or so (no radical line 1 attacks there) in a thickly wooded area a good sized armored attack is ongoing. So many fire fights. If this battle weren't me being GE and the AI being PO, and it instead being me GE and AI, USSR, I'd be in such severe trouble if he had many T34's. To make matters worse in one of the mid-sectors that is becoming dicey, a lone PZIVB squad is running out of ammunition and/or been damaged (though a now quiet area has sent a couple of tanks to arrive shortly). To make matters worse I pulled an ammo truck, unseen, just behind a couple of them, providing for some relief, however, the AI has decided to bombard that area as well ("Unload supply to the last man" is my orders!).
One of the other areas the AI decided to bombard, where I've been bombarding with two 75IG's non-stop, I have my only other ammo truck. The AI sure does look smart at times.
That straight line southern-most set of hexes? Turns out there's a recon company, an AC company, and possibly even a tank company down there. I haven't lost an AFV yet, but one of the now 5 PZ38(t)'s I have down there has had it's main gun knocked out. Uh-oh, with my being crammed to a small space behind some woods I could be facing infantry any minute. I might just poke someone's head out of there and see what turns up. I do have those expendable section of 8-rad AC's I could use for that, though they have been helping in the defense.
In the far north meanwhile, I'd say line 30 or so (no radical line 1 attacks there) in a thickly wooded area a good sized armored attack is ongoing. So many fire fights. If this battle weren't me being GE and the AI being PO, and it instead being me GE and AI, USSR, I'd be in such severe trouble if he had many T34's. To make matters worse in one of the mid-sectors that is becoming dicey, a lone PZIVB squad is running out of ammunition and/or been damaged (though a now quiet area has sent a couple of tanks to arrive shortly). To make matters worse I pulled an ammo truck, unseen, just behind a couple of them, providing for some relief, however, the AI has decided to bombard that area as well ("Unload supply to the last man" is my orders!).
One of the other areas the AI decided to bombard, where I've been bombarding with two 75IG's non-stop, I have my only other ammo truck. The AI sure does look smart at times.
Charles_22,
Interesting.
That being said, in some cases you dont have too much choice. For example last night I started up the St. Lo campaign (not in release in 6, but is available to download, just ported it over). Its small (I think the pricing needs tweaking for v6) you get like 652 points Just enough for me to by 2 U.S. Inf coy and a section of M4's with one extra 81mm mtr attached. For support I think it was like 150 points (I don't remember) but I bought a platoon of 75 (onboard) arty. I jammed up the middle (its are really narrow map - remember Squad Leader?) and walked into dug in FJ squads/pzfsts and a 75 ATG. pretty nasty (did I mention the mines?). Well I had to regroup two platoons to help the trapped platoon to dislogde the Huns from the hedgrows. The massed firepower did the trick.
Funny we are talking about SP WW2 v6 and this is a WaW forum.
I am still going to do a long campaign for v6, just need to figure out how big I want to do it in. In 5.6 I got up to the end of France. I started with 1 coy pzgren mech, 1 coy med tanks and 1 MMG pltn. I increased the units buy adding in a eng platoon and upgrading the pz II's to pz 38/35's. All in all it was:
1 PzGren Kp gep - mech with 251/1's
1 Panzer Kp (le) (Pz IV's and Pz I's)
1 Pionier Zug
1 MMG Zug
1 GrW Zug
I am just starting to play with making a campaign based on the SS at Kursk I have 4 scenarios that I have created for it and am testing out the scenarios before I create the campaign. I want to make it a close points campaign and keep it all at tank vs tanks.
So far in the first battle (the Germans have one coy of SS med tanks /22 (I upped one platoon to Panther D's). I gave the Russkies about a battalion of stuff. Pretty nasty so far up to turn 11, I lost the Panther Leader about 2 turns ago and one platoon has two main guns out due to T-60/70's fire. One pz IVg is imb, and I just lost a another pz IVg.
Pretty fun stuff.
Interesting.
My axiom is "He who defends/attacks everything defends/attacks nothing".I've adopted soemthing of the broad front mindset
That being said, in some cases you dont have too much choice. For example last night I started up the St. Lo campaign (not in release in 6, but is available to download, just ported it over). Its small (I think the pricing needs tweaking for v6) you get like 652 points Just enough for me to by 2 U.S. Inf coy and a section of M4's with one extra 81mm mtr attached. For support I think it was like 150 points (I don't remember) but I bought a platoon of 75 (onboard) arty. I jammed up the middle (its are really narrow map - remember Squad Leader?) and walked into dug in FJ squads/pzfsts and a 75 ATG. pretty nasty (did I mention the mines?). Well I had to regroup two platoons to help the trapped platoon to dislogde the Huns from the hedgrows. The massed firepower did the trick.
Funny we are talking about SP WW2 v6 and this is a WaW forum.
I am still going to do a long campaign for v6, just need to figure out how big I want to do it in. In 5.6 I got up to the end of France. I started with 1 coy pzgren mech, 1 coy med tanks and 1 MMG pltn. I increased the units buy adding in a eng platoon and upgrading the pz II's to pz 38/35's. All in all it was:
1 PzGren Kp gep - mech with 251/1's
1 Panzer Kp (le) (Pz IV's and Pz I's)
1 Pionier Zug
1 MMG Zug
1 GrW Zug
I am just starting to play with making a campaign based on the SS at Kursk I have 4 scenarios that I have created for it and am testing out the scenarios before I create the campaign. I want to make it a close points campaign and keep it all at tank vs tanks.
So far in the first battle (the Germans have one coy of SS med tanks /22 (I upped one platoon to Panther D's). I gave the Russkies about a battalion of stuff. Pretty nasty so far up to turn 11, I lost the Panther Leader about 2 turns ago and one platoon has two main guns out due to T-60/70's fire. One pz IVg is imb, and I just lost a another pz IVg.
Pretty fun stuff.
DGL
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
An army of rabbits led by a lion, will beat an army of lions, led by a Rabbit. Napoleon
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
dlazov: Yep.
Actually I'm not to sure whether my broadfront attack/defense is deliberate or not.
When you mentioned tweaking the pricing, I wonder if your referring to the default for core value for campaigns? Because that is adjustable. As I say, I use 3300pts. and 200X160 map. This sports me somewhere between 35-45 tanks. When you face a foe with a lot of cheap but fairly good stuff liek the Poles, you can have quite a little war there. I will end up fighting this battle my usual the enemy shall fight/run to the last man strategy and maybe not even lose a single AFV (which would really be unusual considering so much of that early fighting was with 8-rad AC's) but it's still a blast. Like I said, if this had been a stronger enemy, this would've been a real duel. As it is he's just surprising me a lot, and indeed I totally smashed his southern offensive by sticking an AC's nose beyond the woods, only to find him routed with some infantry marching to the front with some slow FT-18's. My only worthy opponent down there seems to be that I'm running out of armor-piercing rounds. I'm going to have to speak to the supply officer about maybe doubling our supply trucks the next time around. I play sort of a Rommel style (he's my force commander too), as I'm just trying to sense when the moment is perfect to start a sector counter-offensive. It seems most of the time I'm wrong in the timing, but down south, this time, it worked out perfectly. The enemy wished to roll me in the deep south, and now it shall be he that will be rolled.
Funny when you think about it, but in order to stop some of the threatened areas I had to deplete platoons from other sectors, now, however, I'll have to deplete yet again in order to provide momentum to the south.
I can see why you believe, at least in the described battle, in a real concentrated attack, because you don't have enough to do otherwise. With my force I can make probably two or three concentrated attacks at the same time if I so choose. One thing I think this game and SPWAW might do well to address, and that's studying the gameplay aspects of how large the map is compared to the objectives, and how large the force compared to the objectives. IOW, especially when you have the three frontal clusters of vp's in SPWAW all the time, and you have a tremendous force and/or map, then the objectives a lot of times can be real easy to defend. I'm just wondering whether with larger maps and/or larger forces, if it wouldn't do the games good to add more objectives? In SPWW2 this isn't 'too' much of a problem because of the objectives ocassionally going the scattered route, but when they're clustered together it may play better to have more clusters for the conditions I mentioned.
It may need it, but that was one of the things that V6.0 did. I'm pretty sure either 5.0, 5.2, or 5.6 (starting to lose count and the versions probably aren't good guesses) did one too.(I think the pricing needs tweaking for v6)
Actually I'm not to sure whether my broadfront attack/defense is deliberate or not.
Ah, now maybe my broadfront makes a little more sense now. Often enough, my driving force isn't so much to defend or attack something, but rather to annihilate the enemy. If you don't attack everywhere sooner or later, you can't annihilate him. Interesting because in the old days I would play somewhat the opposite, as I would be striving for a win (and back in those days you could see the score in progress [Panzer Strike etc.]). Now I care little for the win, though it's usually not too much trouble, but instead to tally up a high number of kills. It's mainly a matter of fighting bitterly alongside trying to get the experience up for the inevitable USSR.My axiom is "He who defends/attacks everything defends/attacks nothing".
When you mentioned tweaking the pricing, I wonder if your referring to the default for core value for campaigns? Because that is adjustable. As I say, I use 3300pts. and 200X160 map. This sports me somewhere between 35-45 tanks. When you face a foe with a lot of cheap but fairly good stuff liek the Poles, you can have quite a little war there. I will end up fighting this battle my usual the enemy shall fight/run to the last man strategy and maybe not even lose a single AFV (which would really be unusual considering so much of that early fighting was with 8-rad AC's) but it's still a blast. Like I said, if this had been a stronger enemy, this would've been a real duel. As it is he's just surprising me a lot, and indeed I totally smashed his southern offensive by sticking an AC's nose beyond the woods, only to find him routed with some infantry marching to the front with some slow FT-18's. My only worthy opponent down there seems to be that I'm running out of armor-piercing rounds. I'm going to have to speak to the supply officer about maybe doubling our supply trucks the next time around. I play sort of a Rommel style (he's my force commander too), as I'm just trying to sense when the moment is perfect to start a sector counter-offensive. It seems most of the time I'm wrong in the timing, but down south, this time, it worked out perfectly. The enemy wished to roll me in the deep south, and now it shall be he that will be rolled.
Funny when you think about it, but in order to stop some of the threatened areas I had to deplete platoons from other sectors, now, however, I'll have to deplete yet again in order to provide momentum to the south.
I can see why you believe, at least in the described battle, in a real concentrated attack, because you don't have enough to do otherwise. With my force I can make probably two or three concentrated attacks at the same time if I so choose. One thing I think this game and SPWAW might do well to address, and that's studying the gameplay aspects of how large the map is compared to the objectives, and how large the force compared to the objectives. IOW, especially when you have the three frontal clusters of vp's in SPWAW all the time, and you have a tremendous force and/or map, then the objectives a lot of times can be real easy to defend. I'm just wondering whether with larger maps and/or larger forces, if it wouldn't do the games good to add more objectives? In SPWW2 this isn't 'too' much of a problem because of the objectives ocassionally going the scattered route, but when they're clustered together it may play better to have more clusters for the conditions I mentioned.