Slitherine

I've played the first four scenarios of the 1939 campaign. I'm on the Colonel difficulty level. Prestige seems about right. The AI seems to be different, a bit more aggressive. The Polish cavalry has caused me some trouble! Overall, I'm very favorably impressed. This really bodes well for the future of this game.

I like that idea. Use the resulting missions to gauge difficulty.

Would be cool if the editor had the ability to apply an "if" to unit placement - ie. "if" the player beats the last mission in less than 10 turns, then this unit is included, otherwise it isnt.

Kerensky wrote:

mrgolf wrote:Kerensky-

I didn't have any problems on the retry on lieutenant level. I think it was just me. Don't consider it a bug. I think I'm the bug! Anyway, replaying Campaign '39 on the lieutenant level, I did manage to get a marginal victory, but considering I got decisive victories on the next 2 scenarios, either scenario 1 and 2 s/b switched, or scenario 1 s/b made easier, IMHO. Too many objectives to take in too few turns to get a decisive victory for an opening scenario.

Interestingly enough, Poznan design is 100% intentional. If you get a decisive victory in Poznan, the first scenario, the following mission actually becomes harder (Danzig South). A marginal victory, however leads to an easier alternative (Danzig North). So don't feel bad that you got a minor victory followed by a decisive victory, this is absolutely the intention, and will be so through-out DLCs to come.

That is, players who achieve minor victories are not penalized (they still continue on relatively the same path) but players who achieve major victories are subject to harder content. Think of Poznan as our way of measuring the player. How well did you do, you completely destroyed the content? Fine, here's something harder for you. Did you manage to complete it, but not decisively so? Okay, we can accommodate you, we won't crush you with a hard scenario, but give you an easier alternative (giving you more time to learn and increase the strength of your core) before you return to the main 'track'.

I am on the third(or fourth[lost track]) scenario of the 1940 campaign, in the Netherlands. At hex 25,5 there is a Dutch Matilda tank on the lake. I had no idea the Matilda could float. Should a tank be on a lake hex??

parusski wrote:I am on the third(or fourth[lost track]) scenario of the 1940 campaign, in the Netherlands. At hex 25,5 there is a Dutch Matilda tank on the lake. I had no idea the Matilda could float. Should a tank be on a lake hex??

There is a bridge over that lake.
The fatty Matilda might be blocking the bridge graphic, but the roads above and below the hex should be indicators that there is a bridge over the hex.

Okay so you get this out before one has a chance to assess the final 1.01. Gee-wiz, before some were complaining you all were to slow!!!! (just jesting, you all).

First off, right away, I want to say this campaign('39) is really nice. The maps have a great feel to them, much more open and realistic. I don't feel like like you designers contrived the senario to see how hard it could be made. I know you will not agree with that assessment, but that's my feel. I think also because the computer units are not given 150 points(yea ,yea I know just a little over-the-top) of entrenchment right off on turn one. I always had the feeling that the allies knew the Axis was coming in Poland, in 1st senario of France, and Russia.

I'm going to try to answer some questions in this feedback area. I have been playing 39 on col. setting, and because of my above comments, I find these senaios more engroossing, more enjoyable!! I was very late last night eating dinner!! I find the gameplay intriguing because of some of the varible objectives, like in one of the Norway ones, where you had to sink the Br. aircraft carrier. Nice rinkle . I always felt in the old PG and yours, copied so well, that to much emphasis wa splaced on just objectives. When in real wars you take objectives by defeating the opposing army(s). The presitge seems okay, except during some missions not enough, some to much, depending on how many city, or other types of objectives. The computer seems to fight okay, but not real good combined arms; sometimes it will plane bomb, then attack with a infantry, somestimes artillery, then infantry. But if all three available, doesn't use them all. I was wondering about the experience accumulating; first 2 stars come pretty quick, long before you get out of Poland, I'm now in Wassingny and I have some units with 3 stars. this is okay, because there are so many senarios with these new campaigns. I liked the ferry crossings in a senario or two back, allowed me to get in the allies rear and take out artillery, before beginning frontal assault. I have found for the most part, the senario briefings are sound. I may change that assessment, if I can't figure out Wassingny!!!! Overall these new campaigns are head&heals better than first, even with 1.01. I'm going to now comment om some improvements I'd like to see.

Through all of the time being involved in these betas, and I would say the same things about PG, in many of the same areas, also. First off, I just think the combat results of the following combinations are way out of line & unrealistic, especially in the years 39,40, & 41. #1, tank vs AI inf(cav).I have lost more tank in this combination than I care to count. I don't understand what your program computes in this situation. If the infantry is entrenched in a city, or a fortified square, I know you don't send in the tanks first!! I'm talking about, what you are representing, 2/3 rifle-infantry, with maybe also grenades are going to take down IVD tank in the open filed???? Just not realistic, in my mind. As I started writing this part, I have been trying to remember if I lost any tanks to tanks. Can't recall, except for those crazy senarios late in Russia(44/45). Also, my tanks/inf. vs AI artillery, or Inf vs AI anti-tanks. It just takes to many units to many turns, most of the time, to take out. These were very lightly manned and lightly armed units , that in these cases, should be overruns!!! They just seem more like camouflage infantry. And yes, my comments, mean you'd have program these units to be more guarded than just throwing them forward because they fight hardly different from other units. I also say this in reverse, my infantry against AI tanks!!! Axis grenediers(spelling) might or should be able to do some damage, but not rifle companies. Okay, enough citicism. However, I have seen some say they don't like artillery being able to move one sq. in deplaoyment mode. Don't take this away, please. It's great!!

I have some other questions for you.

#1) Are these new campaigns going to be intergrated into original game or will it remain separate??

#2) Could there some designation, colorwise or whatever, for support troops?? In the heat of battle it's combersome to have search to see which unit you might want to get regular reinforcements vs elite, if presitge is tight.

#3) When one is using a stagetic bomber in it starts to bomb, a notice comes up with "neutralized" along with little white banner. What does this mean?? What effect??

#4) When a plane goes to a hidden hex and there is a unit in it, why does one have to unclick, then reclick in order to attack?

Anyways guys I really am enthralled with these new campaigns. I hope any other furthur ones will be of very similar. Great, great work!!

To many games, not enough time.

JMK

Kerensky wrote:

parusski wrote:I am on the third(or fourth[lost track]) scenario of the 1940 campaign, in the Netherlands. At hex 25,5 there is a Dutch Matilda tank on the lake. I had no idea the Matilda could float. Should a tank be on a lake hex??

There is a bridge over that lake.
The fatty Matilda might be blocking the bridge graphic, but the roads above and below the hex should be indicators that there is a bridge over the hex.

I did not see your message until I completed the scenario. Still, i do not recall seeing a bridge, but I will start another game and look.

I,m playing the 39 campain on the col setting. Just finished Poland so far its a great.

The balance of the game is good and the senarios intresting.

Especialy like the new features like the additional objectives and gaining enemy equipment.

Also the Duel against the Russians after defeating the Polish.

I've had no problems with the Beta to report back.

Right off to attack Norway now. I will post feedback once I've finished

Thanks a lot for a great game and expansion pack

so far so good, just getting into it now

I'm doing Poznan - pretty tough to get all the objectives but foable- and I notice that, after moving an aircraft over a target, you must select it again to attack.

If the target was previously unseen, that's right. If you can already see it the plane will attack without reselecting it.

Yeah, my bad. Sorry.

Since the first scenario, on lieutenant level, I've been breezing through the rest of the scenarios with either a marginal or decisive victory. It really is a little bit too easy for me, but the right difficulty for the level that I'm on. I will have to retry at the colonel level, now that I have a better feel for the game. Anyway, no bugs or problems or lockups until I got to the Spoils scenario against the Ruskies. All of a sudden the mouse froze up during one of the early turns. I could hit escape and use the tab key to move through the menu, but I couldn't save the game or exit. Cntl-Alt-Del wouldn't get me out of the game either. So I had to shut off my machine manually. Anyone else reporting mouse lockups? I was surprised by this Spoils scenario. Will it be in the finished version? It is fun to see how the Germans would do against the Ruskies in '39, but is more hilarious than historical. It never would have happenned. Hitler would never have taken on Russia w/o dealing with France first. Still interesting though.

Which beta version are you playing, mrgolf?

Downloaded the revised DLC and resumed my campaign. Just finished Oslo. I really like the variety added to the missions. Save the Blucher was very interesting. These changes are really enriching the game experience. I haven't encountered any issues yet. I'm playing on colonel and have more than ample prestige. So I agree that the prestige can be dialed back a bit. I haven't had to make any hard choices regarding upgrading or re-strengthening.

All in all a real winner so far. I'm looking forward to the later years DLCs.

A request for the Russian front DLC - can we have a "Drive to the Urals" scenario or scenarios? I really think the Soviets wouldn't have surrendered until the factories in the Urals were captured.

Almost all under 1.01. Now running 1.02.

Glad to see I've been upgraded to a Lance Corporal, and at least I have a tank icon now. Is there anyway to convert these rankings from Marine to either Navy or Air Force? I served in both and am retired Air Force. To be honest, I have no idea what the equivalent rank is in the Air Force.

We know that AA guns could effective against armor but did the Poles know that? Is thee evidence that the Poles used AA against armor?

bis wrote:We know that AA guns could effective against armor but did the Poles know that? Is thee evidence that the Poles used AA against armor?

I think this is adequately represented considering Polish AA units cannot voluntarily attack tanks or other ground units.

Just curious why the 88 PaK 36 is available from 27th May, 1939. I thought the Germans didn't realise it could be used as an AT weapon until they turned them against Matildas in France (1940). Does it cause problems for switching ability of the AA variant? If so, wouldn't a second AA variant, without switching up to 1940 be more historical, or isn't that a concern?

I rather like the early 88. Gives the player a chance to pick it up early and get good experience with how it works best in the two modes (not to mention introduces players to the concept of dual purpose) and having it early means more opportunity to gain unit experience, medals, and leaders.