MP Franco-German scenarios

[AEWHistory]

Okay, I have now played all four of the French and German MP scenarios multiple times as the French (each one at least four times and some much more). I haven't managed to win a single one.

I wrote a much longer follow up to this, but instead I'd like to ask other people their impressions of these scenarios. Has anyone even seen the French win?

[iswain]

Hey, I think the scenarios as Allied (French) are admitedly more difficult than the German side, however they are still winnable. I have set up two games where I will play Allied. The password is CHARBIS if you would like join

[AEWHistory]

Hi Iswain, thanks for the response. Yes, I'd like that. I don't mind losing although I suppose I sound whiny--I just want a fighting chance before I get my @ss handed to me...

Question: the scenario winner is who has the most VPs at the scenario end, right? I wanted to clarify because I have based my (losing) strategies on the need to rush into forward positions before the Germans could secure a VP majority and settle into a defensive posture. It has seemed to me that the Anglo-Allies are better off on defense than offense, but rushing forward is disastrous for the allies as well. This is what has led me to wonder what options there are for them.

In any event, thanks for setting up the games, I will go start them now.

[glenghiscan]

Personally I think st remy Crenwick and hannut are far easier for the French havnt played the other yet

[AEWHistory]

Hey Glen, thanks for the response. I haven't finished any of cave hobbit's scenarios yet, but I've started two and they seems really neat. My complaint, such as it is, is with the original Slitherine MP scenarios for the 1940 Anglo-allied campaigns (I lazily refer to The French as a quick shorthand but there is also an English scenario I believe).

In any event, would you like to play St remy or cren? I've enjoyed our games glen and would like to play again. If you're inteested glen I started a ST Rmy scenario with my handle (aewhistory) as the password.

[glenghiscan]

Picked it up I prefer the multiplayer games to be honest can't remember the last time I played AI

[AEWHistory]

Im starting to prefer the AI games way more. The more I play MP the more I realize that players simply employ weird game exploits that undermine the game. For example, suppressed Italian units moving forward to recon and/or draw fire from active units. Bullsh1t! This not only defeats the entire purpose for the suppression mechanism but is outside the simple bounds of reality.

This is not to say I haven't enjoyed any of my MP games, but for the most part.... Bleh.

[AEWHistory]

Id like to amplify my issues with MP: I was just playing a MP player game and had a French tank next to a German tank, facing forward at full morale. I had missed my shots so on the following turn the opposing player simply drove around to my rear and shot into the rear of my tank. No defensive fire, no reaction.... nothing. I have seen episodes like this so often I am nearly ready to resign all my games.... Just not enjoyable.

[glenghiscan]

Infuriating beyond belief I've a feeling I know which games your talking about that's why I don't like armour heavy games ! Try and keep infantry close by then they'll cover your tanks there's a lot of good scenarios out there,try urban armour , woods, fast and sneaky etc etc

[pipfromslitherine]

It's important to remember that tank visibility varies quite a lot, but that generally they will react much less to movement to their sides and rear. As stated, screening them with infantry is pretty essential - or have them watch each other's backs

Cheers

Pip

[AEWHistory]

Infuriating beyond belief I've a feeling I know which games your talking about that's why I don't like armour heavy games ! Try and keep infantry close by then they'll cover your tanks there's a lot of good scenarios out there,try urban armour , woods, fast and sneaky etc etc

Hey glen, thanks for the reply. I do think part of my frustration is that I have wanted to play the 1940 scenarios and they just don't seem well designed compared to some others from what I am hearing. After playing Iswain I can see how the Killing Field and Town Fight are workable, albeit still with a German lean. However, River Line is completely screwed from what I can tell. For example, the flamethrowers the Germans have can eliminate two inf units EACH per turn. That's poor game mechanics IMO. Against units in a pillbox I think that BA has it right to make the flamethrower badass, but against units in the open, in the forest, behind walls, etc? Not so much. Flamethrowers were so effective against small fortifications because they could drain the air of oxygen, push fire into small crevices, and burn a lot of men in a small area, and so on. But when the guys aren't all jammed into a small concrete box (or small steel box) the flamethrower just wasn't anywhere near that devastating.

I definitely think I am going to bite the bullet and buy the PC version so I can create some scenarios. I have the BA2 prerelease purchase, but I haven't DLed it yet. I don't suppose the scenario builder there is backward compatible, is it? Cuz I just don't need BA1 for the PC except to make scenarios.

[AEWHistory]

It's important to remember that tank visibility varies quite a lot, but that generally they will react much less to movement to their sides and rear. As stated, screening them with infantry is pretty essential - or have them watch each other's backs

Cheers

Pip

Hi Pip, thanks so much for the reply. I think what you're mentioning is a game mechanism that is definitely frustrating me. For example, in the example I described above I had either a tank or 8rad, can't recall at the moment, parked nest to an enemy unit. But the unit was directly in FRONT of me. I had full morale and a defensive shot. When my opponent went he moved toy side and then my rear, but he started in front of me.... So how does the game figure reaction? Is it assumed that because the opponents first move was to my side that my reaction likelihood is based in a side reaction even tho the unit started in front of me? I guess this makes quite a bit of difference.

In any event, I was dumbfounded when my guy just sat there for two moves while someone literally drove a half circle
around him and shot him in the back. Meanwhile I never fired. After all, the unit that killed me was what I had just driven towards and fired at.... But when they fire back I didn't react? That doesn't sit well with me. If I missed then I get it, my boys were too slow and couldn't aim... But they didn't do ANYTHING! This sort of stuff is really hindering my enjoyment of BA. I can't help but feel like you guys have an amazing game but it needs a little something that I cannot put my finder on it. I wish I still had my old copy of Squad Leader so I could compare the two and maybe give me an idea why I am frustrated because I never felt this way with SL.... Or maybe I just don't recall feeling that way.

[AEWHistory]

Here is another game mechanics issue: scouts: they are supposed to see two areas over? I am moving one area at a time thru a town so I am assuming that my scout can see not just the area next to him but the building past that, no? Well, I just started a game of town fight, I move my French scout, and wham.... On my last move my scouts get surprised by German infantry right next to them. Right before I moved the map showed nothing in any of the squares around me AND the square after the square after the one I wanted to move into was supposedly empty as well. As soon as I move German infantry appear and attck my scouts. Why? I just don't get it. I even suspected that a German inf unit was there and wasn't going to move further until I checked with my scouts. Again, this is frustrating. Is there some sort of mechanism here I am missing?

[glenghiscan]

Did you press the eye button ? It dosnt sound like it because you can't move after you've pressed it (took me months before I realised that )

[pipfromslitherine]

It's important to remember that tank visibility varies quite a lot, but that generally they will react much less to movement to their sides and rear. As stated, screening them with infantry is pretty essential - or have them watch each other's backs

Cheers

Pip

Hi Pip, thanks so much for the reply. I think what you're mentioning is a game mechanism that is definitely frustrating me. For example, in the example I described above I had either a tank or 8rad, can't recall at the moment, parked nest to an enemy unit. But the unit was directly in FRONT of me. I had full morale and a defensive shot. When my opponent went he moved toy side and then my rear, but he started in front of me.... So how does the game figure reaction? Is it assumed that because the opponents first move was to my side that my reaction likelihood is based in a side reaction even tho the unit started in front of me? I guess this makes quite a bit of difference.

In any event, I was dumbfounded when my guy just sat there for two moves while someone literally drove a half circle
around him and shot him in the back. Meanwhile I never fired. After all, the unit that killed me was what I had just driven towards and fired at.... But when they fire back I didn't react? That doesn't sit well with me. If I missed then I get it, my boys were too slow and couldn't aim... But they didn't do ANYTHING! This sort of stuff is really hindering my enjoyment of BA. I can't help but feel like you guys have an amazing game but it needs a little something that I cannot put my finder on it. I wish I still had my old copy of Squad Leader so I could compare the two and maybe give me an idea why I am frustrated because I never felt this way with SL.... Or maybe I just don't recall feeling that way.

The code looks at where the unit is moving to, not from. So going front to side would use the side reaction chance. Your unit had the chance to fire at him when he move TO the front tile

Cheers

Pip

[AEWHistory]

Did you press the eye button ? It dosnt sound like it because you can't move after you've pressed it (took me months before I realised that )

No, I didn't, although I am thinking I have the opposite problem in that I rarely use that function and I think this might be leaving me blind a lot. I thought that scouts automatically viewed two squares away, but am I wrong about that? I also thought they could see THRU one building into another, but after last night I'm not sure. Is there a place I can go to find these sort of rules clarifications?

As an aside, I haven't gotten a chance to look into placement for our next scenario glen, but I'll try to get that going this evening. Best, Aaron

[AEWHistory]

Ah! So because I had gotten so close I set up a situation where my first chance to react was to a side movement. I get it. Where can I find out what the likelihood of a unit retuninrng fire is? I think getting some idea of how likely a unit is to respond to fire would be helpful.

As an aside, I think the turn review function needs the following: a play/pause and forward/rewind button set. Also, it would be nice to see the stats as they change during the review. For example, being able to track how many shots a unit has remaining so you can get a better feel for the when and why of certain units fighting. In essence, I suppose what I'm looking for is a bit more feedback.

One other thing that would be nice: in the force losses area it would be nice to have a force listing your own assets AND losses so you know immediately if you have a certain asset type remaining. Another neat idea would be to have a list like that for your opponent that would build as you discover their units. So when you discover, say, an 88 it would be listed as an enemy asset until it is destroyed, where it would be moved, say, a column over to the destroyed enemy asset. This would be super!

It's important to remember that tank visibility varies quite a lot, but that generally they will react much less to movement to their sides and rear. As stated, screening them with infantry is pretty essential - or have them watch each other's backs

Cheers

Pip

Hi Pip, thanks so much for the reply. I think what you're mentioning is a game mechanism that is definitely frustrating me. For example, in the example I described above I had either a tank or 8rad, can't recall at the moment, parked nest to an enemy unit. But the unit was directly in FRONT of me. I had full morale and a defensive shot. When my opponent went he moved toy side and then my rear, but he started in front of me.... So how does the game figure reaction? Is it assumed that because the opponents first move was to my side that my reaction likelihood is based in a side reaction even tho the unit started in front of me? I guess this makes quite a bit of difference.

In any event, I was dumbfounded when my guy just sat there for two moves while someone literally drove a half circle
around him and shot him in the back. Meanwhile I never fired. After all, the unit that killed me was what I had just driven towards and fired at.... But when they fire back I didn't react? That doesn't sit well with me. If I missed then I get it, my boys were too slow and couldn't aim... But they didn't do ANYTHING! This sort of stuff is really hindering my enjoyment of BA. I can't help but feel like you guys have an amazing game but it needs a little something that I cannot put my finder on it. I wish I still had my old copy of Squad Leader so I could compare the two and maybe give me an idea why I am frustrated because I never felt this way with SL.... Or maybe I just don't recall feeling that way.

The code looks at where the unit is moving to, not from. So going front to side would use the side reaction chance. Your unit had the chance to fire at him when he move TO the front tile

Cheers

Pip

[AEWHistory]

Here is another game mechanics issue: scouts: they are supposed to see two areas over? I am moving one area at a time thru a town so I am assuming that my scout can see not just the area next to him but the building past that, no? Well, I just started a game of town fight, I move my French scout, and wham.... On my last move my scouts get surprised by German infantry right next to them. Right before I moved the map showed nothing in any of the squares around me AND the square after the square after the one I wanted to move into was supposedly empty as well. As soon as I move German infantry appear and attck my scouts. Why? I just don't get it. I even suspected that a German inf unit was there and wasn't going to move further until I checked with my scouts. Again, this is frustrating. Is there some sort of mechanism here I am missing?

Okay, I figured I'd follow this up. I found the game wiki and have been reading it. It says that scouts can see an enemy unit two tiles away, right? This is the assumption I have been operating under, but in the situation described above that simply did not happen. I had a scout two tiles from an enemy infantry unit and my scout saw nothing. Why? We were both in building tiles and there was a building tile between as well, but I don't recall that being an issue in the past. Is there some sort of % chance of this happening? Can scouts not see thru some things? And while I am on the subject, what about hedgerows?

EDIT: well, I just quit yet another game out of frustration over this issue. Playing as the French my scout failed to see two tiles away and yet in another game of the SAME EXACT scenario I have seen the SAME EXACT French scouts routinely see two tiles away. Either there is a game flaw or there are game mechanisms that are poorly documented. I do not want to waste hours playing to find out what the game functions are peeps. Can a scout see into a building? Can it see thru them? Etc. Is this something that requires a "check" or is it automatic? Scouts can apparently see thru forest tiles, right? Does this apply to other vision blocking items or no? Even the wiki doesn't answer all of this stuff.... Why?

[AEWHistory]

More examples:

1. "Your men do not fight to the death. Every time a unit is shot at its morale drops. When their morale drops below 50 they are suppressed and will not fire their weapons. When their morale drops to 0, they will surrender if shot at by an enemy on an adjacent tile. Once their morale drops to -100, they will rout and never recover. Morale recovers if the unit goes through an entire turn without suffering any morale loss. It pays to retreat suppressed units to let them recover."

I was just playing a game where I pulled up to an inf unit in a house with my APC and shot at it. It's morale went below 0 and it stayed. I shot it again and it went lower but retreated. Do you see my problem? I am actually using your docs and finding they are wrong! Isn't the exception to this rule supposed to be units in a fort? Is a house a fort now? WTF?

2. Does your own movement affect how you react? I'm told that your chances of reacting during your defensive phase will be modified by whether you've moved at all and whether that movement was fast or "hunting". Near as I can tell "hunting is supposed to make your units harder to detect, right? But does it really change your chances of reacting after your movement is done? And how much of what has how much of an effect?

Am I relly the first person annoyed by this? I used to play Squad Leader peeps and never felt this frustrated. It was a helluva lot to learn but the rules were there so you knew what you were doing..... I don't feel like that here. It feels like you have to experiment and hope youre doing the right thing. Between BA and BA2 now I've got over $100 into this game so I feel like being let "in" on how the game functions has been paid for, no?

[pipfromslitherine]

I believe that we tweaked the surrender logic to prevent infantry in cover from surrendering to non-armoured units. This was to combat a MP 'gamey' tactic people were using.

If you have hunted, you avoid the penalty to reaction which is usually applied after moving. If the target is both hunting (or stationary) and has not fired, it is harder to react to.

Cheers

Pip