OoB Soviet Corps

[steevodeevo]

I think the Soviet Corps maps are very weak and without fun

should we not be encouraging people to spend their time making custom scenarios for us?

[terminator]

Hi steevodeevo,
you're welcome.

This scenario is now my priority.
You will have the possibility to test the new soviet units (against the new german units) :

DnieperUnits.jpg (693.2 KiB) Viewed 5562 times

You can see :
- M4A2 Sherman
- SU-122
- SU-152

[terminator]

Kursk.jpg (277.5 KiB) Viewed 5506 times

[calmhatchery]

very epic!!!! I like it!!!

[terminator]

very epic!!!! I like it!!!

Thanks for the support

The objectives :

Prokhovka.jpg (200.73 KiB) Viewed 5479 times

Two remarks :
- I hope that the bug with the SU-152 will be quickly corrected (http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 72&t=80793)
- Impossible to buy one Sturmovik

[Fabio3110]

Seems like a very cool scenario drom the pics so far

[terminator]

The Battle of Kursk (Soviet Corps) is released

Kursk(soviet).jpg (93.18 KiB) Viewed 5389 times

The link : http://www.mediafire.com/file/nexka1s20 ... .00%29.zip

[GabeKnight]

@terminator
Just played your "Petsamo v1.07" scenario (with v5.2.3/64bit of the game). The "SU-152 bug" (you reported it in another thread) is really funny, but besides that I decided not to "cheat" and buy my force for the full price.

Concerning the scenario everything worked fine (triggers and popups), except maybe the snow/RP-reduction, I'm not sure. The difficulty was kind of like the early scenarios of a new offical DLC (quite easy in middle difficutly level with the amount of CP and RP), so if you're planning for a campaign, it's suitable.

Overall very well done, had a good feeling to it. I just really missed some kind of a counter-attack in the middle, maybe after taking "Pesamo". There was a tank nearby, so combined with some AT guns and infantry they would form a formidable harassment force at that point. And maybe something like that when approaching "Kolosjoki". I mean, the poor amoured train just got crushed with little resistance (and support).

So thanks, and good work!

[DetlefHarbemeyer]

So I test your scenarios - and must say - very very nice - you do a great job - to play with soviet troops.

[terminator]

Thank you for the encouragements,

@terminator
Just played your "Petsamo v1.07" scenario (with v5.2.3/64bit of the game). The "SU-152 bug" (you reported it in another thread) is really funny, but besides that I decided not to "cheat" and buy my force for the full price.

The SU-152 is really cheap (Requisition Points=50, Command Points=3). Undoubtedly a bug but I did not notice that there was also a bug concerning the availability date. This tank does not have to be on the battlefield in 1939

The difficulty was kind of like the early scenarios of a new offical DLC (quite easy in middle difficutly level with the amount of CP and RP), so if you're planning for a campaign, it's suitable.

I see on the image that you bought one SU-152. It is sure that the scenario can seem easy with this "Beast Killer".

Concerning the scenario everything worked fine (triggers and popups), except maybe the snow/RP-reduction, I'm not sure.

Normally, it works but the effect is light : Resources Income / Turn = 15, Extreme Weather => Resources Income / Turn - 5, Resources Income / Turn with Extreme Weather = 15 - 5 = 10.

Overall very well done, had a good feeling to it. I just really missed some kind of a counter-attack in the middle, maybe after taking "Pesamo". There was a tank nearby, so combined with some AT guns and infantry they would form a formidable harassment force at that point. And maybe something like that when approaching "Kolosjoki".

You can find information on the Battle of Petsamo here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Petsamo_(1939). I am not obsessed by the historicity of a scenario. I prefer a well balanced scenario which allows to take some liberties with the historicity that a badly balanced and little interesting scenario but respecting the historicity. I try to respect the context. In the wikipedia article you can read : "The Finnish troops were greatly outnumbered but managed to contain the Soviet troops due to the extreme terrain and weather". I am not sure to want to add too many Finnish units.

And maybe something like that when approaching "Kolosjoki". I mean, the poor amoured train just got crushed with little resistance (and support).

I admit that the capture of the train is not very interesting. Maybe that by making move itself the train during the game it would be more interesting ? The train could be placed near Petsamo at the beginning of the game and near Kolosjoki in the end of the game.

[GabeKnight]

Actually I had two SU-152 But I remember using them as artillery only, because of the 30 shock and 5-hex range. So I guess I would have used the "Katyusha" instead, and it wouldn't make as big of a difference concerning the difficulty.
To be honest, I'm not really that interested in the historic accuracy - I just want a challenging and fun gameplay. So my opinions about the counter-attacks are just something I got used to playing the official and Erik's (Blitzkrieg) campaigns. And the armored train should definetly be allowed to move! But I see your point about the Finnish being in the defensive position, of course. However that may be, thanks again for the scenario, it was fun either way.

I took a peek at the "Battle of Kursk v1.00" scenario, starting with what I would call a "standard" battle force expecting armoured resistance (using heavy armoured and AT units). That said, the beginning of this scenario was something very different - you warned us about the "most massive tank battle", and I didn't believe you, it seems. Had to stop playing at about the 3rd turn due to a poorly chosen core force on my side, because I feared either really heavy losses (and costs) or maybe even defeat altogether. So a big thanks for that (I mean it!). It's been some time since I underestimated a scenario that much and had to completely rethink my initial tactics. I'll give it another go after all this X-Mas/NewYear stuff is over.

And BTW, I loved the "don't come back if you don't succeed" comments in the briefings of both scenarios!

[terminator]

Actually I had two SU-152 But I remember using them as artillery only, because of the 30 shock and 5-hex range. So I guess I would have used the "Katyusha" instead, and it wouldn't make as big of a difference concerning the difficulty.

No "Katyusha" in Petsamo :

PetsamoArt.jpg (106.16 KiB) Viewed 5231 times

[GabeKnight]

No "Katyusha" in Petsamo :

Alright, alright I forgot.
So I took two 203mm arty this time (and please don't tell me these weren't available either... ) and played at level 5. The second time around I knew I didn't need no AT support, that helped. I attached my core and the result.

The battle went still about the same. The Finns are too static, and because there's basically just one road you don't have to split up your forces up until the very end. So I could concentrate on one frontline and keep my arty close. I had plenty of RP to spare and always "elite" repaired my core units. Maybe a Finnish fighter wouldn't be that bad - as I deployed just bombers. As always, just my opinion. The map/scenario as such is a good one.

PS: I must congratulate you on your mine placement. They get my tanks every time!

[terminator]

Hi GabeKnight,
Thank you for the feedback. Have you a Replay ?

[GabeKnight]

Sure, if it's of any help...
I played this on my parent's computer as I was visiting them during the holidays, so I hope it works, cause I've had problems with replays before...
Happy New Year!

[GabeKnight]

Hi terminator,

Just played the Kursk 1.00 scenario. I "glanced" at it last time, and this time I played for real. And... WOW

It may have been due to my reckless approach, at least in bits, but this scenario had me hooked the whole time. Only during the final drive I had to take a pause, because I forgot about the "30 damage to tanks" sec. objective. I dind't see many tanks left and I was worried that it may be unachievable already. (I was wrong... )

The incoming airplanes were a welcomed harassment, and there was always some kind of action. Very well done IMO. This time I have nothing to add, everything worked as it should (but I think the concrete bunker at hill 241.6 didn't attack), the turn limit was good, the 50 RP's were needed, and the mines... always the mines.... The enemy's income was adequate, and the 300 RPs for the supply depot worked like a charm. I mean for me, the whole timing of the scenario went like clockwork.

I had to revise my tactics, of course, because If this was part of a campaign, I would have "elite" repaired my core forces more often, and wouldn't use them as "bait" or even let them be destroyed. But this was so much fun, I didn't mind actually. Also I'd never use conscripts or such weak units usually. But my initial plan was to make them cannon fodder at the beginning (with heavy AT support) to soften up the big tanks and to replace them with marines or heavy infantry later on. This second part of the plan just wasn't needed.

The bottom line: I can recommend this scenario to everyone, it's fun and challenging. A big thanks for this one, very well done!

I'll attach a replay, if interested (this time I checked, I don't know why, but there's something wrong with the enemy plane's movement and attacks around turn 15. I shot them all down by turn 20 or so, except the one on the airfield)

PS: And please don't tell me that the SU-152 wasn't available here either...

[terminator]

Hi GabeKnight,
Thank you for the feedback

First remark :

It may have been due to my reckless approach, at least in bits, but this scenario had me hooked the whole time. Only during the final drive I had to take a pause, because I forgot about the "30 damage to tanks" sec. objective. I dind't see many tanks left and I was worried that it may be unachievable already. (I was wrong... )

Why did you buy a Strategic Bomber (Ilyushin Il-4) ? Maybe not the best choice ?
I said in the briefing that Tactical Bombers are needed but maybe in a rather explicit way :

TacticalB.jpg (52.97 KiB) Viewed 5089 times

You have the possibility of buying a good Tactical Bomber (Pe-2) :

Pe-2.jpg (75.36 KiB) Viewed 5089 times

Second remark :

I'll attach a replay, if interested (this time I checked, I don't know why, but there's something wrong with the enemy plane's movement and attacks around turn 15...)

It looks like you found a rare bug. This bug arises exactly during the tour 14.

Third remark :

This time I have nothing to add, everything worked as it should (but I think the concrete bunker at hill 241.6 didn't attack)...

Bunker at Hill 241.6, AI = Static Defense. It seems to me that you bombarded this bunker with your strategic bomber before, unit strength turns yellow (?)

I am going to replay second time the replay. To be continued...

[GabeKnight]

Bunker at Hill 241.6, AI = Static Defense. It seems to me that you bombarded this bunker with your strategic bomber before, unit strength turns yellow (?)

True, but still. And I think it was just one arty hit. I had to move the AT gun there to protect the other units, and I remember being angry at myself to have to do that, because I feared unnecessary losses to the SU-unit. And ... nothing. Although the bunkers can attack without being attacked back.

This behaviour's something I noticed after the latest v5.x updates to the AI lately. It's kind of as the AI only attacks if it's sure to cause at least 1 damage or something like that. I remember the concrete bunkers to be overall more aggressive and a real threat if not on real low efficiency.

[terminator]

Although the bunkers can attack without being attacked back.This behaviour's something I noticed after the latest v5.x updates to the AI lately. It's kind of as the AI only attacks if it's sure to cause at least 1 damage or something like that. I remember the concrete bunkers to be overall more aggressive and a real threat if not on real low efficiency.

I also have this impression.
If the bunkers can attack without being attacked back, why would not the bunker attack every time it is possible ?
Maybe that more we move forward in the time less the bunker is effective ?
Maybe we should have various models of bunker as for the infantry (Bunker '39, Bunker '40, Bunker '41...) ?

[terminator]

The Battle of Kursk (Soviet Corps) 1.04 is released

New mod called ZOMBIE ARMY

Zombie(1).jpg (160.31 KiB) Viewed 3126 times

If your answer is YES :

Zombie(2).jpg (179.04 KiB) Viewed 3126 times

The link : http://www.mediafire.com/file/vmobbs7f3 ... .04%29.zip
I did not have time to test the scenario completely. Waiting for feed back with replay.
(Message to GabeKnight : strength Minefields 10 -> 5 )