Allied advances in the West are silly

[glenhope]

I'm in Oct 44 in the silly end play of the no-early-end '41 campaign as Germans v AI. The Western allies are marching across France against a W TB garrison of over 4 million men, 43k guns, 7.3k tanks, & 8k aircraft. There are 220+ German divisions with buckets of SU's. The allied progress is beyond silly. They would not even have established themselves ashore against such a garrison.

The march up the Italian peninsula against 1.2 million men in the Italian TB is also silly.

The way the scripted allied events work is broken. I get allies advancing events in the same turn as I get "campaign delayed - events moved back" events

The soviets are have no NSS' remaining yet they just advanced into Norway using their Northern TB troops who have been isolated for 6 months!

[Kursk1943]

No surprise, see my comments to your other post. They just removed the early end conditions, but changed nothing else.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Kursk1943

No surprise, see my comments to your other post. They just removed the early end conditions, but changed nothing else.

what do you expect to have happened?

the scenario was created at speed for those who for some reason find it essential to run every last Soviet unit into the ground, as in previous replies, the VP system is not an add on but a core part of the design. Take it out and odd (& untested) things happen.

Ignoring everything else, to make the events conditional on on-map circumstances is a lot of work and very liable to generate unexpected outcomes. I had a lot of experience in reworking the event chains for AGEOD's PoN and getting such conditions both technically right and able to respond to a wide range of circumstances is exceptionally hard.

[glenhope]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Kursk1943

No surprise, see my comments to your other post. They just removed the early end conditions, but changed nothing else.

what do you expect to have happened?

the scenario was created at speed for those who for some reason find it essential to run every last Soviet unit into the ground, as in previous replies, the VP system is not an add on but a core part of the design. Take it out and odd (& untested) things happen.

Ignoring everything else, to make the events conditional on on-map circumstances is a lot of work and very liable to generate unexpected outcomes. I had a lot of experience in reworking the event chains for AGEOD's PoN and getting such conditions both technically right and able to respond to a wide range of circumstances is exceptionally hard.

What do I expect? I expect it to be now known by the developers & players how no-early-end plays out. This is feedback.

[Kursk1943]

ORIGINAL: glenhope

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Kursk1943

No surprise, see my comments to your other post. They just removed the early end conditions, but changed nothing else.

what do you expect to have happened?

the scenario was created at speed for those who for some reason find it essential to run every last Soviet unit into the ground, as in previous replies, the VP system is not an add on but a core part of the design. Take it out and odd (& untested) things happen.

Ignoring everything else, to make the events conditional on on-map circumstances is a lot of work and very liable to generate unexpected outcomes. I had a lot of experience in reworking the event chains for AGEOD's PoN and getting such conditions both technically right and able to respond to a wide range of circumstances is exceptionally hard.

What do I expect? I expect it to be now known by the developers & players how no-early-end plays out. This is feedback.

1+.