[WarInEur] Combat results oddity
Don Lazov
dlazov at comcast.net
Tue Aug 26 21:22:35 EDT 2008
Kent,
I edited all the images and have already created those. I sent them to
Karl last year and he did not include them cause we did not have time to
create the templates and test them.
Don
Kent & Sue Haunschild wrote:
> Well not at the moment with CWIE2. We can't create our own units as
> easily as we did in CWIE1. I need to find some one who can edit the
> image file and add the 2-4 Fr, 2-4 Mtn Ru, the 2-4 Mtn It, and the 2-4
> Mtn Bu. Also a number of optional units in the DG rules aren't
> supported either.
>
> Another reason that France is so tough to crack in War in Europe is
> that there are 8 IRP and 8 MRP on the Reinforcement Track that arrive
> by 3-5-40. They are there primarily so that the French can replace
> units if the Germans invade in 39, but they accumulate if there is no
> attack in 39. In the 1940 campaign these are omitted and the French
> start with none. So at a minimum, you can delete these other wise
> these amount to about a 15% increase in the number of units.
>
> You can edit the units file and change the values for the French units
> but the will still display as a 3-4. But maybe that would be a good
> thing create a new unit with a 3-4 face but with 1-4 or 2-4 values.
> It looks impressive, but disintegrates in its for exposure to combat.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Gary Krockover <mailto:cmbb at garykrockover.com>
> *To:* Kent & Sue Haunschild <mailto:kentsue at cox.net> ; Eric Gerber
> <mailto:cgerber at socal.rr.com> ; Warineur
> <mailto:warineur at mailman.halisp.net>
> *Cc:* akrockover at sbcglobal.net <mailto:akrockover at sbcglobal.net>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 26, 2008 3:13 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [WarInEur] Combat results oddity
>
> Yes, this is exactly what we are finding. I did strip all of the
> colonies and shipped those troops home; I questioned myself at the
> time wondering if France had done this as well, and if not, why
> not - and you've provided that answer.
>
> Are there any optional rules or balances that can be used to bring
> France into line more historically?
>
> GJK
>
> At 02:51 PM 8/26/2008, Kent & Sue Haunschild wrote:
>> Your discovering one of the flaws in the simulation for
>> yourself. France is too strong militarily speaking.
>>
>> There are several reasons for this in the game. One, there is no
>> down side to stripping the French colonies of troops. The
>> reality is that the forces that France ststioned in the colonies
>> were more of a garrison to keep the "natives" from revolting than
>> to defend them from outside agressors. Two, the French Infantry
>> are represented as a uniformly trained force of 3-4's. However
>> this was not the case. Many units lacked manpower and equipment.
>> There were a lot of ill trained reserve and newly formed units.
>> I'd guess that 50% or more of the units on map in 1940 should be
>> 2-4's and all the reinforcements should be 2-4's.
>>
>> It takes a down grading of that magnitude to give the Germans a
>> chance, not a certainty, of defeating France within a historic
>> timetable and with reasonable casualties. This is especially
>> true when the historic rules are not used. The entire German
>> Production system "presumes" a historic 1940 campaign, when it
>> takes longer or costs more, then it derails the invasion of
>> Russia and the Axis goes down in 44 not 45.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Gary Krockover <mailto:cmbb at garykrockover.com>
>> To: Eric Gerber <mailto:cgerber at socal.rr.com> ; Kent & Sue
>> Haunschild <mailto:kentsue at cox.net> ; Warineur
>> <mailto:warineur at mailman.halisp.net>
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 12:11 PM
>> Subject: RE: [WarInEur] Combat results oddity
>>
>> In my pbem game (me as the Allies), Germany is having a heck
>> of a time defeating France; it's the 3rd week, 8th cycle, of
>> 1940 and he's just now barely reaching Paris. We can't
>> imagine that Russia would ever have a chance of falling.
>>
>> The sad part of it is, that as the Allies, I've rarely
>> counter-attacked because the best that I can muster is a poor
>> 3:1 attack that would more times than not be more detrimental
>> to me, so I just fortify and sit there which takes away from
>> the enjoyment factor a bit.
>>
>> Again though, we are both new to the game, so perhaps there's
>> some tactics or approaches that are unique to the game that
>> we need to learn.
>>
>> GJK
>>
>> At 01:55 AM 8/25/2008, Eric Gerber wrote:
>>> The original game was about making lots of 3-1 attacks.
>>> This is what allow you to push the line until it broke.
>>>
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: warineur-bounces at mailman.halisp.net [
>>> mailto:warineur-bounces at mailman.halisp.net]On
>>> <mailto:warineur-bounces at mailman.halisp.net%5DOn>
>>> Behalf Of Kent & Sue Haunschild
>>> Sent: August 24, 2008 10:57 PM
>>> To: Warineur; Gary Krockover
>>> Subject: Re: [WarInEur] Combat results oddity
>>>
>>> The the board game CRT has been coded into CWIE2 so
>>> they are identical. Normally, I never make low odds
>>> attacks because they are so adverse for the attacker.
>>>
>>> However, the attrition option almost requires the
>>> use of low odds attacks to soak off the ememy
>>> strength. It was while playing a hotseat game that
>>> it occurred to me that when the defender is flipped
>>> he always has the option to retreat but the attacker
>>> doesn't. Which given the rules regarding flips
>>> always have the retreat option seemed odd. So I
>>> brought it up for comment.
>>>
>>> One of the reasons the Static division were given
>>> the attack factor of one was so that it could
>>> participate in a low odds attack and hope for a both
>>> retreat result and maybe retreat out of a pocket
>>> Otherwise they are just about helpless
>>>
>>> Expanding on this idea and modifying the CRT by
>>> adding some Ar results and allowing the Attacker
>>> the retreat option if flipped by a Ae or Aex result
>>> "seem" to be an expansion of that idea and should
>>> give the Allies and Soviets some more combat options
>>> when on CRT4.
>>>
>>> For example-
>>>
>>> Maybe the 1:2 odds which is now all Ae would be
>>> changed to Ae, Ae, Aex, Aex, Ar, Ar. So there would
>>> be a 1/3 chance for complete dietruction of the
>>> attacker, a 1/3 chance of an exchange result with a
>>> flip and attacker retreat option following and a 1/3
>>> the the attacker would be forced to retreat or flip
>>> to hold the hex.
>>>
>>>
>>> Other columns woul be similiarly modified but you
>>> get the idea. Players have complained that the
>>> Allies and Soviets have such crappy CRT's that it is
>>> impossible to make an attack. This or a similiar
>>> change would rectify that to a certain extent.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Gary Krockover
>>> <mailto:cmbb at garykrockover.com>
>>> To: Kent & Sue Haunschild
>>> <mailto:kentsue at cox.net> ; Warineur
>>> <mailto:warineur at mailman.halisp.net>
>>> Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 11:48 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WarInEur] Combat results oddity
>>> I'm new to the game, but along these lines I've
>>> noticed that the CRT's are very defensively
>>> balanced (i.e., very non-"bloody"). A 4:1 or
>>> 5:1 attack even only does a DR on a 5 or a 6
>>> with the rest of the results being adverse to
>>> the attacker. This just means that you really
>>> have to plan and coordinate your attacks (using
>>> air support and optimal combined arms attacks).
>>> Is this normal in the boardgame version as well
>>> (I'm coming from the CWIE2 beta-tester point of
>>> view)?
>>> GJK
>>> At 11:29 PM 8/24/2008, Kent & Sue Haunschild wrote:
>>>> On combat results of 1/2ex, Ex, or De if
>>>> either unit is eliminated it can flip and
>>>> retreat. If the Result is a Dr or Br the
>>>> defender can choose to flip and hold the
>>>> hex and the attacker can choose to flip and
>>>> advance on a Br. However, if the result is
>>>> a Ae or Aex the battlegroups cannot
>>>> retreat. Seems kind of odd.
>>>>
>>>> [11.32] At the moment that a unit is
>>>> reduced to its Battlegroup, the Battlegroup
>>>> has the option to retreat one hex. In some
>>>> cases, this will save the unit from being
>>>> Overrun in the Enemy Mechanized Movement
>>>> Phase.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
>>>> "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
>>>>
>>>> [12.63] Whenever a Kampfgruppe or a
>>>> Battlegroup is formed as a result of
>>>> combat, that unit has the option to retreat
>>>> one hex. This retreat must be made
>>>> immediately during the Combat Phase, before
>>>> any other combat is resolved.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here are two rules from the DG living
>>>> rules. Why don't they apply to Ae or Aex
>>>> results. Also how come there is no Ar. It
>>>> seems to me that it is more likely that a
>>>> attacker will retreat rather than suffer
>>>> elimination.
>>>>
>>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> WarInEur mailing list
> WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.halisp.net/pipermail/warineur/attachments/20080826/a82b0ff4/attachment-0001.html
More information about the WarInEur
mailing list