Great game! A few suggestions

[cannedwombat]

First of all, excellent job on the game. Far and away the best game of the genre for the ipad, and is up there with Unity of Command as one of the best wargames released this year.

After getting thoroughly trounced by the AI in the first few games while learning the mechanics, I haven't had a game get past Christmas before achieving victory. This hasn't stopped me from playing, though. Still plenty of strategies to try.

As has been noted by others, the biggest problem the A.I. seems to have is disregard for supply. As the allies, it is relatively easy to surround and isolate the Panzers. I will often see the A.I. take a pass instead of moving units to reinforce a breach, and given how crippling* being out of supply is, it seems a little puzzling.

*Maybe too crippling? In the last game I played as the allies, the lowly 9th Armored CCB closed the gap, trapping two Panzer divisions inside, in a sector adjacent to the CCB. It seems like those Panzers ought to be able to make a breakout against such a small force. Perhaps allow for movement while out of supply, maybe at the cost of strength points, as well as attacks with a negative modifier.

Keep up the good work! Look forward to future scenarios/updates/games.

[Amaranthus]

I agree, this leaves a hole in the AI that a decent human player would never allow to occur. In most wargames I've played, once you go out of supply your movement slows and you start to lose efficiency.

The rules as current work well for Inf, but not for Pz. I suggest here the unit could have 1 turn (i.e. when out of supply, not isolated), lose 1 movement point, and attack with a penalty (e.g. -1). Gives some immediate chance of breakout. Isolate rules could be shifted to out-of-supply equivalent on first isolation turn (i.e. can attack at a greater penalty but not move), then can defend at a penalty but not attack, and finally can do nothing (like current isolated rules).

So, it would go something like this:
Inf/Mech = same as current rules
Pz:
Day 1 out of supply: Can move 1 area, attack penalty -1
Day 2 OOS: no movement, attack penalty -1 (or maybe -2?)
Day 3 OOS: can only defend, penalty -1
Day 4: Isolated

Might need some balance testing, but it seems right in principle (logically)

[Yojimbo252]

So, it would go something like this:
Inf/Mech = same as current rules
Pz:
Day 1 out of supply: Can move 1 area, attack penalty -1
Day 2 OOS: no movement, attack penalty -1 (or maybe -2?)
Day 3 OOS: can only defend, penalty -1
Day 4: Isolated

Not a bad idea but it does increase rule complexity as OOS effects would differ depending on the troop type. I quite like how Shenandoah have pitched BotB as a light/medium weight wargame in terms of complexity which opens it up to non-grognards as well.

I think the better solution would be to try and tighten up the AI calculations around supply as the supply mechanics in their current form work really well for multiplayer. It's simple but effective.

[cannedwombat]

So, it would go something like this:
Inf/Mech = same as current rules
Pz:
Day 1 out of supply: Can move 1 area, attack penalty -1
Day 2 OOS: no movement, attack penalty -1 (or maybe -2?)
Day 3 OOS: can only defend, penalty -1
Day 4: Isolated

Not a bad idea but it does increase rule complexity as OOS effects would differ depending on the troop type. I quite like how Shenandoah have pitched BotB as a light/medium weight wargame in terms of complexity which opens it up to non-grognards as well.

I think the better solution would be to try and tighten up the AI calculations around supply as the supply mechanics in their current form work really well for multiplayer. It's simple but effective.

Fixing the AI in this iteration of the series is certainly the easier solution (and probably best) solution. My problem is that I played Unity of Command a fair bit earlier this year and they handle the supply mechanic so well. Really well. Why-doesn't-every-game-do-this well. But of course it's apples and oranges.