Free Deploy for TLD?

[davidss]

Hi,

1) Is there a similar way to edit deployment zones like the "Free Deploy" program (for other versions of CC)?

2) Or does Free Deploy work with TLD?

3) If the answer to #1 and #2 is no ... then is there a way to increase the neutral zone size?

The small attacker's deployment zone (and associated small neutral zone) seems to work well is most cases for single player (against the AI), but not so well with multiplayer. On some maps the attacker is left with only one road and a few small fields which can be totally surrounded by the defender ... with not much chance of a balanced battle. A larger neutral zone would help.

Thanks

[davidss]

Can someone please give me instructions about how to increase the attackers deployment zone and/or its surrounding neutral zone?

if possible ... thanks

[Andrew Williams]

It's in the exe


In WaR we tried to give each VL area plenty of cover and Blocks to LOS, I don't know if this was a consideration in tLD.


The reason the Deploy zone is limited is so that if two BG's come in to two VL's that are close together there Deployment areas won't overlap... a reason why Exit/Entry VL's should not be placed too close together.

You may have seen reports of the map divided into 3 equal parts (sort of like CC3) this can happen if the exe can't work out who should control certain areas... when VL's are too close and Deploy areas overlap.

[davidss]

Thanks Andrew for the explanation.
If deployment is somewhat limited (due to possible overlapping) ... then it is still well worth it, due to the ability to have the strat-map game play options.
I guess there are always ways to compensate for opponents who crowd your deployment zone.

[davidss]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Williams

You may have seen reports of the map divided into 3 equal parts (sort of like CC3) this can happen if the exe can't work out who should control certain areas... when VL's are too close and Deploy areas overlap.

Hi again,
After playing a few H2H battles at the start of a TLD GC ... I think something needs to be done with the attacker's deployment zone size ... or maybe force a minimum of two instead of sometimes one.
Maps like La Fiere, Amfreville, Merville Batteries, etc are basically useless for game play. The Allies have one small zone which can be totally surrounded. It's not so bad against the AI, because they distribute among various VL's ... but a human opponent can just surround you. Two options are the available ... wait for the Axis to attack, or take heavy losses trying to advance against impossible odds. Usually when trying to advance in these conditions ... the units will refuse to take orders or fire effectively, due to morale loss or stress (whatever). Bottom line is ... it's not fun or realistic (militarily or historically).

The option of having the map be divided into three equal parts (as you mentioned above) is a better option (IMO) if the game has a problem with deployment zones overlapping. On a map like La Fiere it would actually be more historically correct, since the battle was fought with opposing forces on either side of the river.
If the game defaults to this (3 equal parts)... then I would prefer this option.
If there is no other downside to having larger deployment zones than having a map be divided into three parts (on rare occasion) then please increase the deployment zone size.

also, another option (if possible) would be to force the game to punch out two deployment zones (one normal size and one smaller). I've seen this on a few maps, and it seems to work well.
Having one small deployment zone on a map the size of St Mere Eglise that can be totally surrounded by the defender takes too much away from the better possibilities of this great game.
I hope this can be reviewed and corrected.

Thanks

Also, if possible, please provide instructions for changing the deployment zone sizes ... so a mod can be made and tested.

[davidss]

After seeing many more of the maps, and how crowded some of the VL's are ... there is probably a lot more things to consider than what I've mentioned above. Sorry again for yapping ... I'm sure you guys have it figured out for the best results. [:)]