Matrix Games Forums

I don't think that I made it clear that the newest SPWAW campaign, "Flesh and Steel" can be downloaded from the WB Raider HQ.

Or you can just get the scenarios. Some folks were asking so let me let you know where you can find it.

It is a 3-5 battle campaign using USMC light tanks in support of Army grunts in their fight to get to Munda Airfield on New Georgia Island in 1943.

Here is where you find it. Pay us a visit while you are there. Feedback needed and appreciated, no matter what kind it is.

http://www.militarygameronline.com/raiders/

Go to scenarios.

Wild Bill

Howdy

I played this campaign the very day it became available. Quite fun one..small, fast battles. Though I have to say that I've never before had such a small core force
But there was enough troops to give the Japanese a real beating.

Recommended

Voriax

Voriax, nice to hear someone played it,lol.
Small core force? Well, a minicampaign, implies a mini core force
Then, it is not the number which makes a battle hard to figth; everybody who play this campaign will realise soon..
TIP: keep the pressure of your steps on the ground VERY low :rolleyes:

Resisti, I got scores like 2000 vs 100 points...I definitely didn't consider this a hard campaign, but a fun one

Voriax

Even the last battle was easy??
Curious to know, which tactic did you adopt in this one? charging straight ahead, or encrclement movement?

Originally posted by Voriax
Resisti, I got scores like 2000 vs 100 points...I definitely didn't consider this a hard campaign, but a fun one

Voriax

What Preferences do you set?!?!?

Now havn't free time but ASAP I will try this new gift from the riders!
And my objective is to score more then you, eh, eh!

Originally posted by gnoccop


What Preferences do you set?!?!?

Now havn't free time but ASAP I will try this new gift from the riders!
And my objective is to score more then you, eh, eh!

Pretty much the defaults, except C&C and limited intel off, ammo limited and arty vs soft and vs armour at 90.

Oh and Resisti, the score for the final battle wasn't as good as the others but a decisive victory still. I lost one of those 3-man HQ teams to a *knee mortar* indirect fire and that cost me couple hundred points.

Voriax

ps: as I don't really remember what are the defaults, lets say all on except the abovementioned and the reduced squads.

Originally posted by Voriax


Pretty much the defaults, except C&C and limited intel off, ammo limited and arty vs soft and vs armour at 90.

Oh and Resisti, the score for the final battle wasn't as good as the others but a decisive victory still. I lost one of those 3-man HQ teams to a *knee mortar* indirect fire and that cost me couple hundred points.

Voriax

ps: as I don't really remember what are the defaults, lets say all on except the abovementioned and the reduced squads.

Thanks for the information.
I'll try with all the pref at defaults except C&C (I usually play with C&C off).

You might also want to keep the reduced squads off. Afaik, if that setting is 'on' then it overrides the unit sizes that the scenario designer might have set.

WB, any confirmation about this?

Voriax

You are correct, Voriax. Having reduced squads "on" allows the game to override your prior settings.

No, it is not a "hard" campaign but it does have some surprises. The alternate battles, that you did not see, are even more fun. I'm going to post those as separate scenarios later.

Wild Bill
=======================

I've player 2 battle with all preferences at default except reduced squad and C&C off.
first battle: DV (about 1700 - 200)
second battle: DV (about 2100 - 200)

I like this fast and small battles!
And I hate this f***d mines!


Thankyou RIDERS!

Our pleasure, Officer! (G)

The third one will be a little tougher, but your tanks have some experience now and a lot of support. They should do well.

Thanks for the update...WB

I'm still looking forward to feedback on these battles, comrades!

This will help for further efforts. Thanks for those who have sent comments so far.

Wild Bill

I agree that these scenario's werent very difficult.

Of course, there were plenty of nasty mine's which could change the situation significantly, if you happened to have placed your tanks "wrong".

One disparity between the Munda narrative at Wild Bill's Raiders site and the scenarios was the effect of Japanese antitank leg units. These didn't seem to have much importance in the campaign game-play. Perhaps there should have been more of them present, especially in the last scenario.

I played the campaign twice, once with US light tanks (cost 63-67) and a second time with British CS tanks with 3" guns (cost 50) which allowed one additional tank at the start. Since Japanese units had virtually no long range effective anti-armor capability, I found that the Briitish tanks with lighter armor performed quite effectively.

First time I played against the Japanese. I really liked it. I also like the campaigns, and small fast battles also.

I noticed those Japanese antitank units several times prefered to attack the infantry units, not the tanks. It spared me a couple of tanks I suppose.

I also had DV's in every battle, last one I put my main push from the north.

Result, I will definitely choose also Pacific scenarios in the future, not only "theatre Europe". Thanks W.B;)

That means a lot to me, Pete. We'll try to keep them winnable but challenging for you. You did very well. The last one is the toughest and you came through.

I'm sure those Jarhead tankers appreciate you very much. The Sons of Nippon, however...

Wild Bill

Mission accomplished, Wild Bill. Slowly but surely I'm learning to take my foot off the gas pedal and let those infantry catch up. I still get caught up in the moment and send my tanks racing out to flank a fortification or drive into a mortar park, but I'm sure when I've totally finished the mini-campaign, I'll have learned the lesson fully.

Thank you!!

Thank you, Irinami!

I appreciate the report. Yep, that was the gist of the historical situation and you captured it well.

I hope I don't get on the "no respect" list. I think I'm already on a few of them in other places



Wild Bill

Originally posted by Wild Bill
Thank you, Irinami!

I appreciate the report. Yep, that was the gist of the historical situation and you captured it well.
Wild Bill

I was wondering, though, if there are any plans to reverse the roles? I would imagine that, for as many people who don't "get" letting the infantry keep up... there are just as many who tend to panic with their infantry when they see some steel rolling their way.

Originally posted by Wild Bill


I hope I don't get on the "no respect" list. I think I'm already on a few of them in other places



Wild Bill

Knew I missed somebody... on the respect. Always bothered me when I couldn't tell where I stood with someone, so I figured I'd let 'em know.

I have never failed to appreciate the blind, fatalistic courage of Japanese soldiers willing to sacrifice life and limb against the steel of tanks.

I have read numerous incidents where tanks were taken on with even swords. One Japanese officer climbed on top of a Sherman and hammered the turret with his Samurai sword until cut down.

Rifles, pistols, crowbars, magnetic mines, every type of weapon, useful or not, were used against tanks.

Without a doubt, some Japanese soldiers did panic. Others, however, consumed by patriotic zeal, did not.

And you have to admire the courage of any man who encloses himself into a steel box that well may be his coffin. The heat, discomfort and claustrophobic feelings were all issues that those WW2 tankers dealt with.

Heroes on both sides, my friend.

Wild Bill