Muncheberg

[fuselex]

German major defeat. Held 1 VP. Thought I did ok , I was looking at losing all VP`s.
Will have a couple more goes at this .
The highlight was 2 AFV`s were involved in CC . 1 initiated by the comp and 1 by myself
No crashes in this scenario on my comp , but I always save just in case.
I have never played the agony of doom scenario , so this is totally new to me , others who have tried it out may
have a different opinion , but I enjoyed it

[rico21]

I bet you moved your tank hunters in the first few laps![:(]
They must be kept in reserve, ambushed enemy armor and use to counter-attack in the last turns.[8D]
And as always a bit of luck!
Besides those who spend their time talking to us about AI, I do not name them are friends![:D]
They'd better be interested in the importance of luck in a game like TOTH.[:)]

[slaphappypappy]

First try as Germans on Hard setting, lost decisively.
Went up the right side of map with my panzer V's and got slaughtered from the Russian taking the hill.
Second time went for the 3rd level hills as fast as I could with the Panthers and slaughtered the Russian AFV's and got Major victory.
The old axiom of taking the high ground is applicable to this scenario.

[rico21]

What scenario are you talking about?[&:]
There is no hill and panther in the Muncheberg scenario.[:(]
Watch out Fuselex hates being laughed at him![:D]

[slaphappypappy]

My bad!
I was thinking of Hube's Pocket.
Oh well, there is my review on Hube's Pocket.

Muchberg as Russian on hard.
Got last VP on left of map an last turn, but AI could've advanced into melee with me and didn't on it's last turn.
Took lots of casualties.

[UP844]

The Germans had some C&C issues (Rico, this is an issue shared by many of your scenarios: a very scattered deployment causes great trouble when playing with C&C on: most of my losses were squads who were out of command and were killed by 122mm fire from the Russian AFVs, with not a chance to use their PF/Psk) but managed to obtain a Major Victory (even though it wouldn't last long, since they only have suffered very severe losses, remaining with two Jagdpanthers with no HE ammo and 3 1/2 broken squads remaining with no leader)

P.S. Just to continue harassing the whole community with my ramblings, more than once the AI moved adjacent to my units and didn't fire in the Advancing Fire segment. It is a well known fact that the meeks will inherit Earth, but I doubt they will survive long enough to enjoy it.

[slaphappypappy]

My bad AGAIN.
I never even got to the bottom victory point and never even saw the Jagdpanthers, but heard them on last turn.

[slaphappypappy]

After replaying the German side of "Munchberg", it was interesting to see all the different units the Russians had.
Caught me completely off guard!
I know the "Elders" here know this, but for newcomers like me, if this is true......
The AI in determining the different units and entry point for the opposition make playing both side of scenarios enjoyable, effectively doubling the amount of scenarios to be enjoyed.

[fuselex]

just on the C&C comment. I understand what is said , and realise it is there to make the game more challenging .
But the scenarios as far as I know ( correct me if I`m wrong ) are generally made on normal difficulty ?.
The scenario maker in that case will then try to balance the game on that difficulty .
A flanking move set up by the designer can all of a sudden stall due to a loss of an officer and the C&C rules kicking in.
The HMG guarding a vital point can suddenly take a tea break ( British only )
The one and only 88 takes a couple of turns to scrounge up a few more rounds during the main Russian AFV assault .
My experience only , but there has been numerous scenarios where the enemy has gone out of C&C which has allowed my troops to take important points which maybe
would not have been possible.
Normal mode I think is the way to play the scenario as the maker designed it . Some scenarios may not have enough officers , spread out to far etc,
But on normal those faults are not an issue , my 4-6-7 squad with a lmg can still sneak though the woods to hit that AT unit .

And as I sneak the Russian entrenched HMG is still there . No chance of waltzing past him because he is out of C&C.

Just a little observation about very hard mode . Are you ppl insane , nothing like assaulting a position with
C&C rules imposed upon you

[Peter Fisla]

ORIGINAL: fuselex

just on the C&C comment. I understand what is said , and realise it is there to make the game more challenging .
But the scenarios as far as I know ( correct me if I`m wrong ) are generally made on normal difficulty ?.
The scenario maker in that case will then try to balance the game on that difficulty .
A flanking move set up by the designer can all of a sudden stall due to a loss of an officer and the C&C rules kicking in.
The HMG guarding a vital point can suddenly take a tea break ( British only )
The one and only 88 takes a couple of turns to scrounge up a few more rounds during the main Russian AFV assault .
My experience only , but there has been numerous scenarios where the enemy has gone out of C&C which has allowed my troops to take important points which maybe
would not have been possible.
Normal mode I think is the way to play the scenario as the maker designed it . Some scenarios may not have enough officers , spread out to far etc,
But on normal those faults are not an issue , my 4-6-7 squad with a lmg can still sneak though the woods to hit that AT unit .

And as I sneak the Russian entrenched HMG is still there . No chance of waltzing past him because he is out of C&C.

The game was designed to play against the AI with C&C rules (so HARD or VERY HARD difficulty setting). NORMAL was modified as some beta testers wanted to create scenarios and test the AI behaviour without C&C rules. Playing on VERY HARD difficulty means that human forces will use C&C rules though AI will always be in command.

[UP844]

Are you ppl insane , nothing like assaulting a position with C&C rules imposed upon you

Have you ever counted how many times you fire at the AI units and how many times the AI fires at you? Try playing the tutorial scenarios and take note on a scrap of paper.

Since the AI seems to be as aggressive as a bunch of drunk lambs, the only way to introduce a minimum of balance in the game is to somewhat penalise the human player (which has the huge advantage of having a working biological brain against a mass of electronics [:D]).

[rico21]

The level of difficulty really succeeds in increasing the difficulty, I am not persuaded of that.
Sometimes it allows you to activate all your units and therefore is not a gene.
Sometimes it turns off the unit that was going to fall into a trap and allows it to be defeated by another unit that reveals the danger.
For me the difficulty lies in ignorance of the positioning of the enemy forces that makes any random starting plan and of course this damn luck factor.

[UP844]

In my opinion, being unable to have all of your units always doing what you want actually increases the level of difficulty.

I also think it leads to a more realistic game (no plan survives contact with the enemy [:D]) and reflects the nature of the various armies: try doing some fancy manouvering with Russians and you end up with a series of uncoordinated small attacks.

[Hailstone]

UP844, you would probably like the Close Combat series where squad moral at time of issuing orders makes all the difference of having them follow commands or just sit there and piss you off.[;)]

[Big Ivan]

ORIGINAL: UP844

In my opinion, being unable to have all of your units always doing what you want actually increases the level of difficulty.

I also think it leads to a more realistic game (no plan survives contact with the enemy [:D]) and reflects the nature of the various armies: try doing some fancy manouvering with Russians and you end up with a series of uncoordinated small attacks.

+1

Good point Carlo,

Some boxer once said (I think Tyson?) "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth!".

I play a lot on normal because I want to see the A/I behavior in a given scenario. Sometimes it surprises me, sometimes its very predictable. It seems in the larger
unit density scenarios with more turns the human has a better chance of wearing down the A/I and achieving victory. Vice versa lower density scenarios with few turns the A/I has
the advantage only if on defense. It doesn't appear that the A/I handles attacking very well. In other games like Campaign Series the same holds true. But that engine has
one redeeming factor PBEM (play by e-mail). Playing a turn based scenario against a real opponent via e-mail or a LAN connection has endless possibilities. Maybe someday we TotH fans may have
the ability to play H2H over a common server connection. I don't believe PBEM will ever be possible because of the nature of all the phases within a turn in TotH.
Too cumbersome to be bouncing back and forth across e-mail with the phases. It would take a lot of time to complete a turn.

But until those days of a server connection we have the A/I and for TotH its not bad![:)]