Operation Konrad - Round 3 General Thread

Gorst said:
Ah, you mean player 1 (the player who creates the game). Yes, that is a bit of a problem.
Click to expand...
Right, I meant the second player to complete the purchase :) I guess that's player 1 then.
OnePingOnly said:
but hopefully no one is THAT jerky for this game
Click to expand...
I don't suggest anyone would want to cheat, I just wanted to mention that the issue exists. Could also happen accidentally.
 
On that note I was out last night with Mrs Stache and it’s superbowl Sunday (yes I know I’m British but I discovered the sport and 49ers in 1987 and it wormed its way into my heart) so I doubt I’ll get a turn back until tomorrow @Guardsman.

The good news is I’m off tomorrow so should get the next turn back in the afternoon after I’ve caught some zzzs.
 
Quick question:
What if every battle on the Budapest approaches was a meeting engagement, and every battle had access to some level of mech or armor support, depending on the unit type?
Would that be more fun for both sides?

It’s a significant departure from my original intent, but it does solve a lot of problems - while probably creating some others.

(Thinking out loud here. Don’t shoot me).
 
OnePingOnly said:
Quick question:
What if every battle on the Budapest approaches was a meeting engagement, and every battle had access to some level of mech or armor support, depending on the unit type?
Would that be more fun for both sides?

It’s a significant departure from my original intent, but it does solve a lot of problems - while probably creating some others.

(Thinking out loud here. Don’t shoot me).
Click to expand...
Hmm i think there is nothing wrong with the forces but maybe something with the match setup wat needs to change? Or an increading reinforcment rate up yo 20 or 30% (seeming the city is surrounded) i think first 2 matches where mainly killed by the time. I think there was to less time to engage and move all over the map without weels.
 
OnePingOnly said:
Quick question:
What if every battle on the Budapest approaches was a meeting engagement, and every battle had access to some level of mech or armor support, depending on the unit type?
Would that be more fun for both sides?

It’s a significant departure from my original intent, but it does solve a lot of problems - while probably creating some others.

(Thinking out loud here. Don’t shoot me).
Click to expand...
My initial reaction is surprise that there are a lot of problems in need of solving, with Budapest in particular. Can you elaborate?
 
Oh, I see.

I personally don't enjoy meeting engagements any more than attack/probe games. If anything it's more the opposite. But they are definitely easier to balance. Moving to all meeting engagements and eliminating infantry only formations should ameliorate complaints about getting screwed by the setup, at the cost of variety and realism. This would not be a step in the right direction, in my humble opinion. But I have enjoyed all the games I've played in this campaign so far, which is apparently not true of everyone.
 
OnePingOnly said:
Quick question:
What if every battle on the Budapest approaches was a meeting engagement, and every battle had access to some level of mech or armor support, depending on the unit type?
Would that be more fun for both sides?

It’s a significant departure from my original intent, but it does solve a lot of problems - while probably creating some others.

(Thinking out loud here. Don’t shoot me).
Click to expand...

Not a big friend of this to be honest.

As it is now you get some ME regardless but from a historical point you had the usual attacker/defender scenario most of the time.
Never the less meeting engagements often render games to "rush for the objective" kind of games. Look at the game like @Shady Side has with his oponent (sorry I don´t know who it was). And while I like it in a QB kind of environment we are on a semi historic path here.

Giving all people mechanized forces of some sort probably will solve some balancing problems but to be honest I totally like this approach of yours till now and it probably presents it more realistically. I like that there are infantry only kind of formations even in an attack, that go against mechanized/armored forces.
That is something you don´t see often in Combat Mission and can work though difficult on certain maps for sure.

The commander of each army has the opportunity to decide which formations to use on each tracks. Don´t forget that this should include stupid decisions. So if a commander/ formations leader decides to use an infantry only formation on a bright open map for an attack you should let them.

That would be part of the experience.

However there probably should be a factor that rises mission time WHEN you choose an infantry only force for an attack as they are very slow on the move and tired out rapidly. Maybe give like a +10min timer if "infantry" formations attack or somethign like that.
 
I would like to keep the campaign as is.
We were 'warned' at the start of Budapest that we may find ourselves in unbalanced games, and as players we should accept it.

Although concessions have been made for gameplay, the units involved, campaign maps, terrain, weather, and certain specific battle maps have been chosen based on the historical situation and geography. Therefore, some battles may not be balanced. Some of the battle maps are custom and reflect historical or potential historical locations; others are representative of terrain in the real-world locales.

For myself, in Round 1 I was disadvantaged by the combination of time and terrain. In Round 2 things were just about right, in Round 3 I had an advantage of terrain and force composition. Yes, I enjoyed Round 2 the most so far, but all three games were worthwhile and interesting in some way.
Time can be used as a balancing factor, as @Brille noted, it will just be difficult to find one rule that fits all situations.
 
As I have stated before, the battle time needs to return to 30 minutes. Both sides have a fighting chance, plus it is shorter - 6 months for a round can't happen that way.

Drifter Man said:
We were 'warned' at the start of Budapest that we may find ourselves in unbalanced games, and as players we should accept it.
Click to expand...
More gaslighting. What you did in this round was deliberate and calculated, there is no point in hiding behind the rule set. If your force selection was similar to that from the round 2, the battle would be completely different.

Drifter Man said:
For myself, in Round 1 I was disadvantaged by the combination of time and terrain.
Click to expand...
The only disadvantage from that round was your force selection.
 
Aurelius said:
As I have stated before, the battle time needs to return to 30 minutes. Both sides have a fighting chance, plus it is shorter - 6 months for a round can't happen that way.
Click to expand...

I don´t agree.
While both sides have a fighting chance indeed it is leaning towards the defender this way . With just 30 min on the clock you need to hurry as the attacker which leads to senseless headrushing into the blue. You need to keep moving every turn which also results in casualties that could be avoided.

There is no time for at least some minutes of scouting or resting. So an infantry heavy force is hampered by this too.

And while I understand that the whole premise around this operation is to do a swift and decisive swing to free the forces in Budapest, I doubt that the germans got in heads first without a thought.

I take my first battle as a reference: I guess my plan and forces were a good match for my oponent which enabled me to move rather quickly while not rushing. But still I hit the last objective at the last couple of minutes.

Had I´ve been somewhat delayed a bit more or would have needed to set a new course of action because of to much resistance I probably wouldn´t have managed even that. What Iam trying to say is that 30min don´t allow for any kind of failures. If you don´t match good enough with the oponents forces and plans the game is rigged from the start.

Only thing is that it stretches out the whole operation event further, I give you that. Question is what do you/OnePing want ? A quick to be over event or an event with reasonable results.

One could argue to keep the 30min but shrink the maps a bit and probably also the troopsize....I´m all ears on that.
 
Hello everyone-
Apologies for my inactivity. I tested positive for COVID last Tuesday after symptoms starting in earnest Monday. This was my first time, and it was exactly as billed: BLEAH! High fever, incapacitating headache, terribly sore throat, couch, etc. - like a bad flu. The difference was that it just kept going and going, and seemingly got worse for an entire week until it finally turned around. Also, it rendered me unable to even watch TV more for than 15 minutes at a time - much less take a CM turn (yes, my turns ALWAYS take more than 15 minutes :) ). The "brain pain" was very high. I got on some of the COVID-management medicine ("If it's COVID, it must be PAXLOVID), and that did the trick.
Anyhoo, I'll be trying to catch up over the next few days while still not at 100%.
Thanks to everyone for keeping the turns coming. After a slowish start this round, we are doing well on time.
 
Why can't MY opponents ever come down with Covid brain? ;)

I hope you feel better, Ping!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom