I am against the 'point' constraints to the BGs. If you have it in your BG, you should be able to use it. When the crack German BGs eventually arrive, they will be weakened by the point system...and this will probably cause the Germans to lose this campaign (Steiner brought this up and I agree with him).
It's just an opinion.
Does anyone else agree with me on this?
The points restriction is more of a layer of protection to a public GC. If you do not restrict random public players from choosing (and losing) all the high value units then this could ruin the game for others. Now this hasnt been proven, its just a theory.
That is a good point too mooxe ... I never thought of that.
Also, this campaign already allows any change to the Active Roster (within a point limit) ... which in my opinion favors the German BG's.
Most of the time the Allies are attacking ... and usually from areas of no cover, or from small deployment zones which can be surrounded. Without a points limit, on some maps (like Amfreville, La Fiere, St. Marcouf, etc.) it would be nearly impossible for Allied Airborne BG's to compete with German BG's (armed with many high point assets).
One strategy that might help the German side of the campaign is ... to move their inland BG's forward every strategic move turn, right from the start.
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:36 am Post subject: Re: TLD Multiplayer Grand Campaign proposal
The Allied BG wouldn't be much better off with anything much more than 425 ... for attacking anyway. Maybe take out a rifle team, and put in a 81mm mortar. The one or two DD Shermans for this BG were lost at the beach, but all the Airborne BG's don't have any armor either.
And lastly, look at the starting deployment zone for the Allied attack ... very small and totally surrounded by buildings and hedges.
I can't see any reason for unlimited points, since the attacking side has almost 100 points less ...even as the game originally allocates.
An unlimited points Active Roster also looks very unrealistic in make up.
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:15 am Post subject: Re: TLD Multiplayer Grand Campaign proposal
I understand the arguments that Davidssfx and Mooxe present concerning my previous complaint.
My final comments on this are:
The game is more than just a repeat of history to me.
I like the fact that I can rewrite history playing CC games.
Germans win Kursk...Whoo-Whoo!
Each battle we play in CC is only a very small representation of what really happened in Normandy. When two opposing divisions clashed, I'm sure that each individual battle was not the same with generally the same units...in some sectors an MG battalion trying to hold off tanks, or infantry on infantry or total tank on tank clash. There were varieties, all taking place between these two opposing divisions.
So to make things interesting and allow for more of a variety in tactics, I proposed being able to select any forces available from your battlegroups to accomplish your specific goals on that particular map.
We can argue our cases all day in this aspect. Some like historical, some like balance, some like both. I personally like more 'balanced' campaigns for head-to-head play. I think that the reason many mods are neglected, discarded or never played by many CC players is because they are highly 'unbalanced.'
The points restriction is more of a layer of protection to a public GC. If you do not restrict random public players from choosing (and losing) all the high value units then this could ruin the game for others.
Good point here...I see how damage could be done to a campaign either through indifference or inexperience in managing BGs...
Well, ultimately this is Davidssfx's production- so I retract my earlier complaint and will humbly comply with the point system.
The game is more than just a repeat of history to me.
I like the fact that I can rewrite history playing CC games.
Is there a chance the German side can win this campaign playing with the points allocated by the game?
Maybe someone from Matrix can answer this, or someone who has played through the GC.
If there isn't a chance, then I think there should be an addition to the game in the next patch, or a mod ... that introduces more German BG's (some armored, etc) if the Allies are held back from achieving certain objectives within a specific time line. This would simulate more German forces arriving to the area because of the extra time allowed by the Allies not achieving their goals ... and being pushed back to the sea.
On another subject, I would have liked to see some units of German BG's surrendering after coming under heavy fire for a certain amount of time, from two or more directions. ... they would have to be set with the very lowest morale, experience,etc. ... in order for it to work.
There were many German units like this throughout Normandy that had poor training, very basic weapons, little ammo, and little will to fight ... and surrendered very easily ... partly due to experiencing Air and Naval bombardments, combined with follow-up night Airborne attacks.
I guess for game play though ... it's better the way it is.
Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 6:41 am Post subject: Re: TLD Multiplayer Grand Campaign proposal
Firefrost joined the campaign playing the German side, but will be on the Allied roster from now on.
We had three battles:
First was at Easy Red, where only a MG unit was left defending the map. Still took some losses trying to rush the bunker which concealed them, and also as other Allied units were moving into position to take VL's. Nevertheless the map is now secured ... tough last stand by Firefrost.
Next was Vierville Sur Mer.
I should have waited for a BG with tanks to arrive, before moving to this map ... the Allied deployment zone was one of the worst I've seen so far. But, I knew this ahead of time, and still went ahead with the attack. It was well defended also ... and the Allied BG ended up being disbanded with a total loss of map. My fault on this one ... sorry Allied team.
The Allied BG should have been able to retreat back to the beach map they just came from ... I guess this is a bug that needs to be fixed.
Lastly, off to Pointe Du Hoc.
After we both realized we each had only 9 men, with no command units, we both agreed to truce ... although I suspect the German side may have had the advantage.
Welcome to the campaign Firefrost.
TLD Public GC 1 save 56 debrief.JPG
TLD Public GC 1 save 57 debrief.JPG
Last edited by davidssfx on Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:57 pm; edited 4 times in total
Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:45 am Post subject: Re: TLD Multiplayer Grand Campaign proposal
Hooked up with RD_DD for a return to Merville Battery.
Again, this was only defended by a single German MG (I thnk). It ended as expected, with the Allied units quickly securing the map. It took five battles to get it done.
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:09 am Post subject: Re: TLD Multiplayer Grand Campaign proposal
Had a great bunch of battles vs David. I was Germans.
Hermanville - Started out with a depleted BG. Could not fill all slots. Main effort was to draw him into house to house and attempt to avoid tanks. That worked for the most part and I was able to inflict equal casualties upon his BG. Destroyed one Sherman, could not destroy the Cromwell that was eating my men up in the center cross roads.
Pegasus Bridge - I took DeathDealers deployment and expanded some more. Main effort was right hand side hedge rows. Battle started off shooting and Davids hedge defenders fell quickly. My 20mm car was destroyed by mortars. Battle results in morale failure for Allies and Germans gaining the two VLs shown in the North.
Gold Beach - Germans had two units. I placed my gun behind the center house in the hopes of getting a lucky one shot one kill on a tank. I did get one shot off, then naval came in and destroyed both my teams.
Strategic Moves - I quickly realized Germans were outnumbers BG wise. There is not enough units to keep a solid front. Not much movement in the North aside from FJ unit pulling out of battle and another unit attempting to disengage and make it to friendly lines. Disbanded Point Du Hoc as it had just a single infantry team left. Throughout the remainder of the center and South, BGs repositioned to defend supply depots, will take a few more turns to make this happen. Any unit not in action or moving was put on rest.
Azeville - This is one of my favorite maps from classic CC5. Main effort was to hold the line at the Allied Southern entry point. I placed four mg42s, 81mm mortar, panzerjager, kompanietroop and 75mm ATG down there with orders to hold only. Secondary effort was to contain and eliminate the Allied positions in the North. A stug, mg42 and a few infantry teams were brought up for this.
As the battle started it turned to Night, didn't. The weather indicator showed the sun with clouds. I immidietly started losing my troops positions to attack the house. My mg42 across the street took out most guys on the Northern edge of the house. The stug was firing indirectly. With my losses to the South of house it was looking bad. David suddenly pulled a bunch of men out of the house which was my queue for the mg42 team to cross the street. It took a few minutes to take control of the house after that, more losses for both. Along the East side of the map in the small house, Allies were dueling with another mg42 I had setup, mg42 was losing. I brought my stug around to take care of some rogue Allied infanty in a small shack at point blank range. In the East house along the edge of map an ATG gun lit up my stug. My two remaining men from the mg42 team assaulted the ATG, and with a grenade blew it up!
As this is all happening my mg42s are engaged in a static firefight in the South and winning. Minimal losses for those men, they inflicted max losses to Allies. An allied tank was lit up by my 75mm gun and shortly after my 75mm gun was destroyed by an unknown means. Game ended with morale loss for Allies, and they lost the map. Great result for Germans, helps stabilize the front lines. Major losses for this unit however in termsn of hardware (not soldiers), sometimes you have to eat up the losses to get rid of an enemy BG tho.
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:12 am Post subject: Re: TLD Multiplayer Grand Campaign proposal
Yes, a great series of tough fought battles.
The Allies took too many losses while attacking, but held some ground at Pegasus against a tough BG.
At Azeville: one notable Allied mistake was backing a Sherman out of cover ... without checking for possible enemy AT, and moved right into a waiting ATG's sights. Biggest mistake though was dividing forces ... and another mistake was not moving a command team back to support morale of other units.
Allies lost the map, and suffered another BG disbanding ... due to the TLD retreat bug.
mooxe showed superior skills here.
Also lost a Sherman at Hermanville, after sending it around the perimeter of the map capturing VL's, without keeping an eye on it.
Well played battles by mooxe ... thanks for posting the AAR's and screens.
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 5:36 pm Post subject: Re: TLD Multiplayer Grand Campaign proposal
Battle 63 of the campaign ends an epic battle between two tough, evenly matched, Battle Groups (BG's) ...
The German 919/709 ID and Allied U.S. 502/101 AB.
The campaign started with these two BG's at St. Germaine de Varreville, and their final battle against each other ended with the disbandment of the 919/709 ID at St Marie Du Mont.
The first battle finished with both sides exhausted ... although against the AI. It was soon after decided, that no AI would be allowed.
Three more extremely hard battles between these two combatants occurred before an Allied decision to exchange BG's .. the 502/101 moved back to rest at Exit 2, and the 8/4 took its place.
The German 919/709 held off total defeat during the fifth battle and was moved to St Marie Du Mont on the next strategic turn, in order to try and reach friendly supply and support.
During the same strategic turn, the U.S. 502/101 was also moved to St Marie Du Mont ... to gain closer access to the front.
This turn of fate brought these two BG's together once again.
lorman vs davidssfx
Both BG's entered this map for the first time and deployed at opposite southern corners.
The Allied main priority was to ensure the Vierville exit remained in Allied control ... so as to block the German BGs' retreat.
Another concern was keeping a newly supplied Stuart from being damaged or destroyed. Cohesion also played a major factor, because only one command team remained.
Half the BG was sent to establish a foothold in buildings near the German deployment zone, while other units moved to protect the Vierville exit and scout/capture other VL's
Contact was made, as the two BG's met in the southern center of town. German MG's held back advances from within buildings. This required a cautious move forward with the Stuart, and a call to bring up units from the Vierville exit.
Two rifle teams had worked their way around the perimeter, and eventually met units defending the last German held VL. The advance bogged down under MG fire and mounting Allied losses, so the Stuart was moved further up ... only to go up in flames from an unseen enemy unit. Allied morale was beginning to break, but a final push was ordered as time ran down. This brought about favorable results for the Allies, but at high cost.
Excellent defense by lorman, as a final last stand ... a real nail biter.
1) Feb 04, 2010 davidssfx vs ai - major allied victory
9) Feb 22, 2010 davidssfx vs Priapus - major allied victory
26) Feb 27, 2010 davidssfx vs hOsTyLe - minor allied victory
40) Mar 04, 2010 davidssfx vs RD_DeathDealer - major allied victory
51) Sun Mar 07, 2010 davidssfx vs RD_DeathDealer - minor allied victory
63) March 13, 2010 davidssfx vs lorman - total allied victory
note: I haven't paid much attention to details of specific BG's, but took interest in these two.
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:57 am Post subject: Re: TLD Multiplayer Grand Campaign proposal
Hooked up with mooxe for some more really hard fought battles ...
Dog Red - I lost control of this map as Allied commander last battle. So during the last strategic turn ... another more successful Allied beach BG was moved across to try and finish off the remainder of German defenders.
Although depleted of most units the German BG still had an ATG, a couple of MG's and another unit, perhaps command.
within the first few minutes, a Stuart was spotted and destroyed. The next 10 minutes was spent crawling Allied units into positions for recon and attack ... mooxe was able to watch some TV and get refreshments
I had to be cautious though since this beach had humbled me once before.
Once several units were parallel with the German ATG (camped in a bunker like structure) ... some suppression was put on the gun and smoke laid. the attack failed though as the approaching units were lost.
Time was running out by this time and so a 81mm team was sent running across the beach through MG cliff fire. As they neared the gun ... an MG team, and Command Team were also sent moving fast. several soldiers got near enough for hand to hand combat, and the gun was knocked out in the last few seconds (I think). Not much left of the German BG now anyway. Will sure be glad to be off the beaches.
Hermanville - The most powerful BG I've seen so far entered the map from a central north deployment zone with 948 points.
I was at about half of that so decided on defense only.
I had a couple of tanks at center of town in cross fire hidden angles. Most other units were at back side of buildings away from fire, except for a few in a separate location further west.
Four German tanks moved west across the fields with massed infantry, while going north to south was another tank with infantry support. mooxe carefully crushed the western forces, and then began recon by fire through most of the town buildings which were in front of the approach ways into town.
German infantry attacks were held back for some time, but an Allied tank left too exposed was taken out by precision AT infantry.
With less than a minute left, two German tanks appeared near the center town crossroads. I couldn't resist the chance to go for one, but when I inched the firefly out around its L shaped building cover ... it was hit by another schreck team with had earlier snuck across the road under smoke cover.
Morale broke, when the tank was lost ... and so another stupid move gave the German BG the center town VL's.
There is still plenty of ground left to defend though ... but a better attempt to keep the Allied armor fighting is needed.
Mooxe never had even one of his tanks in a compromising position, and let AT infantry do the major damage.
Pegasus - Allied forces held two VL's on their side of the bridge, as the German BG secured the rest of the map.
Regarding earlier mentioned concerns about German elite BG's being weakened by the point system, it seems the opposite is true ... regarding Hermanville anyway.
The German BG had 948 ... and with the points system, maximum allowed is 950 (five tanks in the active roster, I think).
The Allied BG had 468 ... and with the points system, maximum allowed is 500.
The Allies had two tanks in their active roster ... nine Sherman and two Stuart in their Force Pool.
just noting this for anyone following the points system topic.
Back when we played a lot of CC5 campaigns we just used a vehicle point limit. For exmaple, each side was allowed 6 points. Tanks were worth 1 point, heavy tanks (tiger/panther) were 1.5. Add that all together and it could not come to more than 6 points. For a classic CC5 campaign you would still have to do this as theres no points in the game like there is in TLD.
We also used a basic tank limit. So basic rule was five tanks per side max. This didnt work out to well when shermans came up against panthers, shermans had 0 chance for success. This is why we went to a point limit and heavies being worth 1.5.
The rounding up to the next 50 seems to be pretty good. There are very few German BGs at the moment in this campaign that can match what the Allies bring to the field. So overall it seems balanced IMO.
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 10:41 pm Post subject: Re: TLD Multiplayer Grand Campaign proposal
Before I had this game, I made the post to be switched to a 'casual' player permanently.
I played as 'Allied' for this battle.
Versus hOsTyLe at Bayeux
The battle started as a meeting engagement between the Schnelle BDE and the British 231/50th ID. As soon as the bell sounded, German and British troops were sprinting for VLs through the narrow streets and connected buildings of Bayeux. Forced a crew bail-out of hOsTyLe's StuG by flanking it with a veteran Centaur IV during a 2-on-1 armored exchange. Both sides' infantry fought hard during the intense house-to-house firefights, but ultimately Bayeux ended up under British control.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!