Matrix Games Forums

Well just spent my 30 quid to get the new version and a disk.

But really, 2011 - this game is designed to turn people off.

Manual - a joke. Look up the word "tutorial"

I bought TOAW - ACOW a few years ago, got as far as Arrancourt and Crete and gave up. Thought another five years would improve things.

Come on, what is about wargames?

Spend at least 1000 hours playing the game, and then another 500 religiously following board discussion and poring over old threads.

It's the only way.

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　████████████
　　　　　　　　　　████░░░░░░░░░░░░████
　　　　　　████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░████
　　　　██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
　　　　██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
　　██░░████░░░░░░░░░░░░████████░░░░░░██
　　████　　████░░░░░░░░██　　　　██████░░░░██
████　　　　████░░░░░░░░██　　　　　　████░░░░░░██
████　　　　　　██░░░░░░░░██　　　　　　　　██░░░░░░██
██░░████████░░░░░░░░░░██████████░░░░░░██
██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
██░░░░████████████████████████░░░░░░░░██
██░░░░░░██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██░░░░░░██
　　██░░░░██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██░░░░██
　　██░░░░██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██░░░░██
　　　　██░░██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██░░░░██
　　　　██░░░░██▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██░░░░░░██
　　　　　　████░░██████████████░░░░████
　　　　　　　　　　████░░░░░░░░░░░░████
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　████████████

ORIGINAL: altipueri

Well just spent my 30 quid to get the new version and a disk.

But really, 2011 - this game is designed to turn people off.

Manual - a joke. Look up the word "tutorial"

I bought TOAW - ACOW a few years ago, got as far as Arrancourt and Crete and gave up. Thought another five years would improve things.

Come on, what is about wargames?

Playing wargames is always a steep learning curve and even the hardest seasoned veteran here always discovers something new. I strongly recommend to give my 'superior' tutorials a try. You can find them at the Gefechtsstand. The slides took me hours, lot'sa cans of cheap lager and a box of f@gs... Give it a try mate!

Klink, Oberst

Thanks guys - I looked at Colonel Klink's gef whatsit - thank you.

Maybe I'll try and write an idiots AAR for Arrancourt as I recommended that scenario for another person who was struggling. Then you can all really laugh at me.

I'm very generous to Matrix:

Advanced Tactics
Forge of Freedom
Crown of Glory EE
and others including the Slitherine ones.

But then Paradox and AGEOD have my money also, and Battlefront - gosh in fact I am a one man support fund for the gaming industry. Forests have been felled for printing manuals.

Luftwaffe (or was it Luftpost) delivered my nice box and disk straight from Germany to UK - hey a manual too.

Now I've installed the game and it's version 3.2 which presumably ties in with the manual.

Should I leave it at 3.2 or upgrade to 3.4 and find that manual and game diverge - or is there not much difference to a beginner, apart from graphic look?

Kamerad!

Update to 3.4 -> http://www.matrixgames.com/products/317 ... of.War.III

And give ye'ole Oberst's tutorials a try Thanks mate!

Klink, Oberst

Thanks again Oberst.

Incidentally, my disk is especially engraved with my name on it - I bet a lot of Matrix customers didn't know that. Something to treasure for the years to come.


Incidentally (2), I agree, Carthago delenda est.

I don't get why new players find the game difficult to play. Difficult to master yes, difficult to play? I don't think so, at least at a basic level. I mean, you move units around and attack. Where is the difficulty in that? X for infantry, ellipse for armour etc.

Have you tried Anonymous Heroics (Red PO) by James Mathews. There is a 16 page walk through that I found very helpful.

TomC

Thanks for your suggestions guys.

I found a couple of tutorial articles by Bill Wilder and Glenn Saunders that I printed out about five years ago and so read through them.

I'll follow up other suggestions too, so thanks again.

For game mastery, read articles, AAR's and ask questions here. This forum is pretty friendly to beginners. There is not as much traffic here as before, but it's still enough.

ORIGINAL: altipueri

Well just spent my 30 quid to get the new version and a disk.

But really, 2011 - this game is designed to turn people off.

Manual - a joke. Look up the word "tutorial"

I bought TOAW - ACOW a few years ago, got as far as Arrancourt and Crete and gave up. Thought another five years would improve things.

Come on, what is about wargames?

Not my experience. When I got the demo in '99 it was an epiphany "Ah. This is what I wanted". Played ten turns of Korea about a dozen times. Then bought the game.

Of course, it was hard going for a while there. But eventually got good at it.

Same here guys, I still don't use all the bells and whistles in the game but when playing by email it allows me the feeling of not rushing the turn for some reason.  It seems that when I play the computer I want to get the turn done, just psychological I guess.

Thank you TomC. I found the Anonymous Heroics scenario and played it disastrously; then found on the web the 16 page walkthrough (thanks to whoever did that - Pascal ??) and then played it again with much more success. Many points in that walkthrough could easily have been put in the manual to supplement the useless page 141.

Also, I now find there is a list of scenarios which includes the number of units - at least a rough guide so in your first or second game you don't find 500 units attacking you as soon as you press begin - and then sit for a couple of minutes with a blur of tokens and banging going on leaving you to wonder WTF that was all about.

ORIGINAL: altipueri

...to supplement the useless page 141.

?? The manual only has 78 pages - only 73 of which have page numbers. Furthermore, the "16-page tutorial" for Anonymous Heroics is included with the game. In fact, all four tutorial scenarios have their own associated documents included with the game. You can access them with the "document" button, when the scenario is selected (this was explained in the "What's New" document).

Also, I now find there is a list of scenarios which includes the number of units - at least a rough guide so in your first or second game you don't find 500 units attacking you as soon as you press begin - and then sit for a couple of minutes with a blur of tokens and banging going on leaving you to wonder WTF that was all about.

If you'll look in the "Articles" thread, you'll see that I have an article about scenario sizes, that even sorts the scenarios by complexity. And I don't know what settings you have for movement delay and detailed combat reports, but play against the PO can be slowed down so that you can tell what's happening.

alti - send me a pm if you use instant messenger and I can help you go through it.

Thanks to all of you who have posted help or sent me a pm.

I'll shut up now.



@Curtis - found those spreadsheets - thank you. Plenty to do at the smaller end. How you guys play the big ones beats me. 600 units - spend just one minute thinking about each unit and ten hours slip by.

Seriously, does anyone know what page he was talking about? Is there some alternate version of the manual I'm unaware of other than the .pdf document?

It's the e-book pdf manual on the disk that came with the game. 32 mb - so too large to pm you.I haven't checked to see if there's a downloadable copy.

But, whilst I'm here, having just about defended Singapore.

1. If using artillery to attack is it right you might as well always put "ignore losses" because it's one way traffic ?
2. Are scenarios generally designed to be historical, or balanced to make an even game?

ORIGINAL: altipueri

It's the e-book pdf manual on the disk that came with the game. 32 mb - so too large to pm you.I haven't checked to see if there's a downloadable copy.

But, whilst I'm here, having just about defended Singapore.

1. If using artillery to attack is it right you might as well always put "ignore losses" because it's one way traffic ?
2. Are scenarios generally designed to be historical, or balanced to make an even game?

1. Each loss level means one more round (10% of the turn) used up. So usually yes, but if you're shooting for as many rounds as possible and are confident of getting them, it might be worth holding back.
2. It depends on the scenario. Some are designed with a focus on historical accuracy, some for an interesting game. There's really no need to sacrifice balance in either case, as one can just move the goalposts to let the better player win on points even if the battle is lost. If a scenario is not balanced it's almost certainly because it hasn't been properly playtested.

Frankly, producing a scenario which is both realistic and playable is a hugely challenging and time consuming exercise- and this increases exponentially with the size and scope of the scenario concerned. The majority of scenarios are churned out at breathtaking speed and as such are often problematic by any measure you care to name. Of course it's often hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. Perhaps the best impartial indicator is the completeness of design notes, and especially if there's a version history. This latter suggests the designer went back and changed elements of the scenario on the basis of playtesting.