Matrix Games Forums

I just started trying to play the Operation Torch scenario and, a major frustration point.

All the allied units are organized into groups with various beaches as their designation on the map, and you can find all these beaches named on the shore line.

But, none of these beaches have any anchorage symbols, and as hard as I have searched through the manuals and help, I cannot find any way to land units on beaches that don't have anchorage symbols.

I DLed version 1.2 of the scenario from Rugged Defense figuring the problem would be fixed but, it's not.

So, what's bugged here, the scenario or my understanding on how to conduct amphibious operations??

Thanks,

DiT

ORIGINAL: DeadInThrench

I just started trying to play the Operation Torch scenario and, a major frustration point.

All the allied units are organized into groups with various beaches as their designation on the map, and you can find all these beaches named on the shore line.

But, none of these beaches have any anchorage symbols, and as hard as I have searched through the manuals and help, I cannot find any way to land units on beaches that don't have anchorage symbols.

I DLed version 1.2 of the scenario from Rugged Defense figuring the problem would be fixed but, it's not.

So, what's bugged here, the scenario or my understanding on how to conduct amphibious operations??

Thanks,

DiT

Move your units on turn one, then debark them at sea on the second turn, then just move them, as normal, onto the land.
Erik faled to mention that he looked at amphibious assaults differently than most scenarios, in his documentation.

It's OK. Just load the troops up, ship 'em right next to the beach, wait one turn, disembark next turn and move them ashore. The timescale is 6 hour turns so this is OK. The embarked units will have to endure a turn of enemy fire  though. [:(]

Veers & Leslie are correct.
The landing beaches do not have anchor symbols and the ports themselves have exluded zones that are lifted on turn-2.
This is to give the Vichy coastal batteries a chance to pound the invaders.

I've added this info to the briefing, thanks for pointing it out.
BTW, make sure you play v1.2 wich was released after the last patch.

Erik

OK, I tried debarking at sea but didn't think to wait a turn so, will try that. Hmmm, yeah, IMO the shore batteries will wreck havoc on that landing party. Will have to pound them from range to start out.

Erik, since you are reading this thread... a minor problem with v1.2 that you uploaded to Rugged Defense... the scenario name has a v1.2 while the graphics folder, eqp file and the bmp file, all have v.1.2 which is the format you used in your other scenarios. So, when you bring v1.2 up you get 'invalid eqp file' and all the ships have zero attack, etc. I just renamed the sce file to have the v.1.2 in there and everything worked fine.

Edit: Oops, the sce file is the one that uses the v.1.2 while the graphics folder, eqp file and bmp file had the v1.2, and these are the files I put in the v.1.2 NOT the sce file.

DiT

P.S. Oh, for anyone... a quick question... when bombarding, any advantage to being closer to the target as opposed to being at max range?

ORIGINAL: DeadInThrench

OK, I tried debarking at sea but didn't think to wait a turn so, will try that. Hmmm, yeah, IMO the shore batteries will wreck havoc on that landing party. Will have to pound them from range to start out.

If you stack naval units with your embarked troops then they will suffer much lighter losses.

Ok, where can I get V1.2? Thanks.

ORIGINAL: cesteman

Ok, where can I get V1.2? Thanks.

Rugged Defence, the premier TOAW scenario depot.

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: DeadInThrench

OK, I tried debarking at sea but didn't think to wait a turn so, will try that. Hmmm, yeah, IMO the shore batteries will wreck havoc on that landing party. Will have to pound them from range to start out.

If you stack naval units with your embarked troops then they will suffer much lighter losses.

Ben is right, note that most land formations have the historical naval escorts included in the formations.

Also, the Allied naval vessels had orders not to perform a pre-bombardment since there was some hope that the French would not resist the invasion. But the ships were on stand-by to support if the French fired, wich they did.

Thanks.
 

Ya know, I really don't understand why there is not a direct link to Rugged Defense here in this forum like the links to The Wargamer, etc. I am new to TOAW3 but it looks like Rugged Defense was THE place for TOAW scenarios, opponents wanted (and it concentrates on JUST TOAW), etc, etc, until the Matrix edition came out and without the direct link things have slowed down there and IMO that is kinda sad. Would be benificial to both parties if there was a direct link from here to there.

DiT

ORIGINAL: DeadInThrench

Ya know, I really don't understand why there is not a direct link to Rugged Defense here in this forum like the links to The Wargamer, etc. I am new to TOAW3 but it looks like Rugged Defense was THE place for TOAW scenarios, opponents wanted (and it concentrates on JUST TOAW), etc, etc, until the Matrix edition came out and without the direct link things have slowed down there and IMO that is kinda sad. Would be benificial to both parties if there was a direct link from here to there.

DiT

Agreed, mostly.
I, personally, think GameSquad is more active and a betetr place, therefore, to get opponents, but RD is most certainly the place for TOAW scenarios. Visit the place and you'll easily see its advantages over Wargamer. I think it was erroneous and misguided to choose Wargamer over RD. However, I don't know the reasoning behind the choice, so maybe they had a good reason.

Maybe Matrix has some sort of arrangement worked out with The Wargamer but not with other sites. The Wargamer points here to Matrix for Matrix games forums, but other sites, like RD, have their own forums, so maybe that is why Matrix won't point to them <g>.

Uh, a pointer to RD wouldn't be in lieu of the pointers they have to The Wargamer, but something in addition.

DiT

Just a quick question that I am sure someone can answer for me. Downloaded V1.2 and placed the .egp file in the graphics folder and the scenario file in the scenario folder. Load the game and I get a message that I am playing with the wrong .egp file? V1.1 is still in the graphics folder could this be messing things up? thanks.

I mentioned this to Erik here in this thread but maybe he missed it.... there is a problem there that he needs to fix.

What you can do.... is replace the v1.2 in the folder in the graphics folder, and the same in the filenames in there for the eqp and bmp files, with v.1.2 and then things will work.

Erik used the format with the dot after the 'v' in all his other scenarios and in the sce file here, but for some reason the dot got dropped out of the folder in the graphics folder, and in the filenames for the eqp and bmp files... and if you put it back in then things work fine.

DiT

So just add the dot? I can do that.

tried the dot thing and it's still not work... strange but when I looked, the dot was already there for v1.2. It reads like this for v.1.2 for both the .sce and .egp. Thanks for any help people.

ORIGINAL: cesteman

tried the dot thing and it's still not work... strange but when I looked, the dot was already there for v1.2. It reads like this for v.1.2 for both the .sce and .egp. Thanks for any help people.

Sorry about your trouble getting this to work.
The scenario name, folder name with files all needs to have identical names.

If you're willing to wait I plan to update Torch soon with improved ship-equipment (multiple gun ranges) and maybe add submarines if I can get hold of the OOB for these.

Erik

Yes I am willing to wait. I see from my above post I can't spell as well! Please keep us posted and thanks again for the reply! Cheers.

cesteman....

Erik has instructions in his scenarios as to how to set them up (all of em in fact) to work in TOAW3. If you unzip the zip file you get into the TOAW scenarios folder, then you must move the folder that gets created there, with the name of Erik's scenario, into the graphics folder.

In the case of Torch, the scenario file is named correctly but it is the folder and the .bmp and .eqp files in that folder that are missing the dot. So, in the case of Torch, after you unzip into the TOAW scenarios folder, and then move the folder that is created in there (Operation Torch 1942 v1.2) into the TOAW graphics folder, all's you need to do is replace the v1.2 in the folder name, and in the .eqp and .bmp files in that folder, with v.1.2

DiT

P.S. Erik, if you get a chance, please see the AAR I am going to post in the AAR forum on DE-RS. Not there yet but am gonna do now.