|
 Are both sides supposed to see everything? (Due to the hills, I presume.) Or is it it a mistake?
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2017 10:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 13:45 |
|
|
It seems it wasn't a good idea to script the brigades for bayonet charge when you don't know how the situation is going to look like.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2017 00:43
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:The comedy option is hoping they don't leave a garrison in Q and I can just walk back in when everybody goes to pound on Croissant. Crazycryodude posted:Mon Pere himself is riding front and center at the head of a fresh cavalry brigade - if that's not a dead giveaway that he's a glory hound who'll be riding straight at Croissant in a concentrated charge within the next 12 turns, I no longer have any right to be smug about predicting everything before this. It's getting increasingly harder for me to believe Crazycryodude isn't reading the other threads. Has has predicted basically everything that would happen, and not a single one of his predictions was wrong. Considering the amount of "guesses" he makes, the 100% success rate seems quite suspicious.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2017 09:45
|
|
|
This was very entertaining to watch and read, thanks to everyone for playing and to Trin to doing this. The pace of the game was incredible! To me, this looks like a potentially decisive German victory that got blunted to a minor one / stalemate thanks to good play by the French. So - relatively speaking, and taking into account what could be - it really is a minor French victory. I don't think it's bad to have unbalanced games, quite on the contrary. One of the best LPs I've participated in was the Combat Mission one where we as the Germans were extremely outnumbered and had to slow down the incoming American hordes. Everyone knew we would lose and still we enjoyed it because the setup was good. Preparing asymmetrical scenarios like that is the way to go, as long as everyone is clear on what to expect. You can only play so many meeting engagements, and they never happen to be perfectly balanced anyway. You just need to take the imbalances into account in the final evaluation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2017 10:08
|
|
|
Sixkiller posted:My units cut down most of their cavalry, so XTH should have a easy time. This will be fun to watch. They seem eager to charge the town, and I don't expect xthetenth, of all people, to back away.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
What's the final word on the sight of those cars with headlights on? The players seem to assume that the headlights would help them see, which to me seems strange. The current sight in darkness is 4 inches which is 240 yards. When I drive my car in the night, I can probably see a bit more ahead but those are modern lights... for cars from 1914, I guess those 240 yards sound about right - ie. no improvement over having no lights at all. Or is it just me?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
 Look at all those empty trenches. The Entente really don't have the bodies to fill them (yet), and are thinking of sending all their reinforcements into the Boi de Blob instead. Which might be the correct move because the Germans seem intent on doing just the same.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 11:40
|
|
|
Weren't the Brits supposed to receive cavalry reinforcement companies as well?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 09:13
|
|
|
I hate this mentality. The moment something goes wrong, people on the losing side are DOOMED, DOOMED! and ready to quit. Everyone's only willing to play as long as they're winning. EDIT: At least Flesnok should have resigned just for himself, not for the whole team. But he's basically saying "sorry everyone who still wants to play - tough luck, I don't." markus_cz fucked around with this message at 10:19 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 09:52
|
|
|
I think xthetenth's battle doctrine has become popular after the last battle because everyone just keeps charging blindly. And countercharching. Without knowing what's there or stopping to spot, plan or wait for artillery. Except that little firefight down by the bridge, people seem to have forsaken rifles. It's bayonets all the way... that's why the battle is so brutal and unpredictable. I mean, at the very least I'd expect conditionals like "if the enemy is about half strength compared to us, charge, otherwise stop and use rifles." Nope, it's always charging under all circumstances. Maximum élan!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
The spirit of xthetenth lives on.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Baccaruda's plan: Oh god, it's painful just to look at it. The endless spiral of charging continues.  No conditional orders, no fallback plan, just CHARGE! markus_cz fucked around with this message at 09:48 on Mar 30, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 09:42
|
|
|
By the way, why can't artillery fire into towns?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:Ahaha, my dad just convinced lenoon that he doesn't have to move his artillery pieces back into cover after all. You know, those same pieces that have just been discovered by the Germans to sit within a brisk walk's distance (and probably mortar range) of their hidden northern brigade. This could be good. Nope, lenoon is the southern artillery, the one next to the Bois the Blob. The northern one is controlled by professor_curly and as far as I can tell, he's retreating to the trenches.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
I still don't understand the movement rules while on defence. There's the "if anyone moves, everyone must move" rule (which I can't actually find in the movement rules) and also the "you must use all your movement allowance" rule. Both make sense to me for attacking, as they significantly reduce bookkeeping. By making sure that companies must attack as a group, you're making it easier to adjudicate because otherwise people would come up with ridiculously complex leapfrogging maneuvres etc. But none of the rules make sense to me for defending. I mean - I would expect defending commanders to be able to shuffle units around in the trenches. "I need that machine gun up there! Move it, everyone else stay put!" Or - "People in the first trench withdraw, people in the second trench stay in place." It seems reasonable that commanders should be able to do that. Right now, the British need to reshuffle their defence and are coming up with complicated plans to make sure that everybody moves just for the sake of moving. It's counterintuitive and counterproductive as well because it's actually making adjudication more complicated. See:  (EDIT: I would suggest a rule like: "While on defence, you can shuffle your chits around as long as you're not conquering new territory.) markus_cz fucked around with this message at 10:16 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 10:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 13:45 |
|
|
Thanks for the explanation. I see the logic behind that. But still... the Brits seem to be bypassing your intentions and are actually shifting their men around. In an overcomplicated fashion – they're keeping everyone moving and changing places, even though the end deployment is almost the same, just with chits now occupying each other's spots. However it does get the job done and bypasses the limits. What I'm saying, I guess, is that I'm not challenging your intentions, I'm challenging the rules which don't seem to do a good job of achieving those intentions, and seem to be confusing for the players too. Or am I missing something? Would a rule like this work? "Brigades on defend can shuffle their chits, but only when the brigade isn't spotting an enemy or under fire." This wouldn't prevent you from being flanked. Basically, I'm just suggesting a simplification. The players can still move around, they just have to switch to attack stance and then make sure to move every single chit their full move allowance, then switch back to defend. It achieves the exact same thing in more steps.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 17:51
|
|
