Page 5 of 33

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 5:41 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's the NW of Stalingrad now-a-days.

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 5:45 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's what it looks like north of Moscow:

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 7:02 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's what the SW of Stalingrad looks like now.

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 7:47 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's the results of a JU-87 strike on some Soviet boats.

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 8:37 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's how the air war is going in T50:

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 10:19 am
by larryfulkerson
I finally completed the pocket west of Moscow. Now to reduce the perimeter.

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 2:46 pm
by larryfulkerson
Here's Moscow in T52:

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 7:52 pm
by larryfulkerson
Here's the front lines in T53:

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 8:28 pm
by Michael T
Is there a link to the latest version of this somewhere?

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 10:49 pm
by larryfulkerson
TGW.zip is attached to this post. Just truncate the dot txt off the filename to make it a zip file again and unzip it. I'm
including the equipment file for this scenario. Lemme know if you have problems.

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 12:28 am
by Michael T
Got it. Thanks[:)]

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 1:19 am
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: Michael T
Got it. Thanks[:)]
And now for the small print. Acceptance of the scenario by downloading it automatically binds you to agree to keep Steve
Sill and I in the loop about your progress and your observations. You're a playtester now. Thanks for your interest.

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 1:52 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's what Stalingrad looks like now. I'm opening branch offices all over the map. Business is booming.

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 2:11 am
by larryfulkerson
Here's a close-up view of the Rostov area now. I've captured the bridge intact and I'm pouring units across it.

Image

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 4:18 am
by Michael T
My first question is why do the Soviets have HQ's but not the Axis. Unless I don't see them.

RE: Steve Sill's new TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 8:04 am
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: Michael T
My first question is why do the Soviets have HQ's but not the Axis. Unless I don't see them.
I'd like to know the answer to that one myself. My theory is that Steve Still has a design philosophy that less is more. If the unit
doesn't contribute in a material way to the playability of the game then it isn't represented in the game. The arty that the HQ unit
had has been broken out into separate arty units so that the HQ unit had no useful purpose and isn't included in the mix. In other
words, we'll have to ask Steve.

RE: TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 8:12 am
by sPzAbt653
My first question is why do the Soviets have HQ's but not the Axis.

Reducing number of units by consolidating some, in this case the artillery units. The Germans were organised into convenient ArKo and HArKo units [Artillery Command and High Artillery Command]. The Soviets had no such equivalent that I could find, so their Army level artillery assets are organised into Army HQ units. Similarly, Soviet Front engineer assets are consolidated into their Front HQ's.

The file you have is the first draft which Mr. Fulkerson is running thru to test everything. I've already run it thru to the end, so many changes have been made since the first draft. If you are interested in looking it over or playing it yourself, I should send you the latest.

@Mr. Fulkerson - I haven't sent you this latest file yet because I am still working on a few things. Mainly the Soviet PO. So in the meantime your testing is still valid as you may find something I haven't yet. Also, I got to a point where the PO was taking an hour to complete a turn. I think this might have to do with the objective paths I created [not sure though] and that is what I am working on now. So if you get to a point where the PO is taking too long, you may want to shelve it and wait to restart when I get done making the adjustments.

RE: TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 8:37 am
by Michael T
But HQ's give adjacent units supply benefits don't they?

It would seems the Soviets would be gaining an advantage if they have HQ's and not the Axis.

RE: TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 11:07 am
by sPzAbt653
That's taken into account with the overall Force Supply Levels.

RE: TGW playtest

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 12:37 pm
by larryfulkerson
Here's Moscow in T54. I'm thinking that it's possible to reduce the Moscow pocket before winter hits. And then once the
supply collapses I can move the men back to where the supply is, having converted all the Moscow railroads etc.

Image