Battle of Fulda Gap - Wargame: Airland Battle Campaign
- 主题发起人 Dodes
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
Lord Burgess1
I didn't 'pick a fight' I tried to explain to you why your RP reasoning wasn't quite right and you decided to blow it all out of proportion.
But please, back to the game Dodes.
But please, back to the game Dodes.
Hanz
Hey Odyseuss, how come you've been avoiding the Rome 2 thread?
Dodes
Count
So me and Vermillion just finished a game as USSR vs UK, so I'll be tallying that up. It was a draw and for a unique twist we played a total destruction with no time limit. 88 minutes in we called a draw since we lost both of our offensive capabilities. Vermillion had taken my starting zone, but I had my primary income zone and an additional reinforcement zone still under my control.
I know it says I had a minor defeat, but that was because I was the one who surrendered first, rather than an official draw by the game. Also coincidentally the chat log is somewhat useful for insight.
My only regret is that I didn't take enough screenshots, it's easy to forget that in the heat of the moment.
Also, on a somewhat unrelated note, I think I forgot to count my battle as NATO France against Kenobi's PACT Czechs. Will tally this battle and that one with the next battlefield report.
Lastly, two random screenshots of me and Odyseuss playing a practice battle against AI.
So playing a full 1v1 battle got me thinking about my deck so I decided since I am playing the most I thought I'd give myself another deck to choose from, though it's very much along the same lines of the others. I identified some problems with both theming and capability of my current deck and when designing this new one I hoped to fix some of those issues.
So no changes to logistical, but I gave myself an additional AT unit in replacement for an AA unit in the infantry branch. Kept all infantry in unarmored trucks. I noticed that I was using way too much mobile AA in support for offence rather than air defense, so I removed my more advanced mobile flak AA and replaced it with rocket artillery and mortars. Already the armored AA was bugging me, because my theme is motorized infantry, but I think I will manage even with reduced AA defense capabilities. Now that I have long-range indirect fire that I was lacking before, I feel much more like an infantry division, especially since the arty is very motor-esque rather than armored. I didn't change the tanks, though I wanted to but I am already at such a disadvantage with that sector I felt it would be too harsh to give me nothing. If I had more motor-esque options rather than straight-up tanks, I would have chosen them. So I removed the BRDM-2s with more recon infantry in trucks, because those were very mechanized rather than the obvious motorized recon choices I have now. Then the new UAZ options are very obviously motorized too, as well as giving me more mobile support for my ground offence and defense. Last my air-to-ground MiGs have been cut in half and replaced with a version with a cannon to help do some balance.
If anybody has any complaints with this new setup, or wants to make changes to their own, I encourage you all to voice them.
I know it says I had a minor defeat, but that was because I was the one who surrendered first, rather than an official draw by the game. Also coincidentally the chat log is somewhat useful for insight.
My only regret is that I didn't take enough screenshots, it's easy to forget that in the heat of the moment.
Also, on a somewhat unrelated note, I think I forgot to count my battle as NATO France against Kenobi's PACT Czechs. Will tally this battle and that one with the next battlefield report.
Lastly, two random screenshots of me and Odyseuss playing a practice battle against AI.
So playing a full 1v1 battle got me thinking about my deck so I decided since I am playing the most I thought I'd give myself another deck to choose from, though it's very much along the same lines of the others. I identified some problems with both theming and capability of my current deck and when designing this new one I hoped to fix some of those issues.
So no changes to logistical, but I gave myself an additional AT unit in replacement for an AA unit in the infantry branch. Kept all infantry in unarmored trucks. I noticed that I was using way too much mobile AA in support for offence rather than air defense, so I removed my more advanced mobile flak AA and replaced it with rocket artillery and mortars. Already the armored AA was bugging me, because my theme is motorized infantry, but I think I will manage even with reduced AA defense capabilities. Now that I have long-range indirect fire that I was lacking before, I feel much more like an infantry division, especially since the arty is very motor-esque rather than armored. I didn't change the tanks, though I wanted to but I am already at such a disadvantage with that sector I felt it would be too harsh to give me nothing. If I had more motor-esque options rather than straight-up tanks, I would have chosen them. So I removed the BRDM-2s with more recon infantry in trucks, because those were very mechanized rather than the obvious motorized recon choices I have now. Then the new UAZ options are very obviously motorized too, as well as giving me more mobile support for my ground offence and defense. Last my air-to-ground MiGs have been cut in half and replaced with a version with a cannon to help do some balance.
If anybody has any complaints with this new setup, or wants to make changes to their own, I encourage you all to voice them.
Nitpicking for sure but if you do intend to keep writing RP stories for the battles, few pointers:
(A) It's Warsaw Pact, not PACT. Often abbreviated into WP for short. So NATO vs WP is common terminology used both by wargamers, Cold War era soldiers and sometimes historians as well.
(B) Soviet basic maneuver unit is the Motorized Rifle Division. Anything smaller than that would not be operating independently (obviously the game won't allow you to have an entire division in the battle at the same time but meh). Guards is a honorary term afforded to few key units, mostly due to history. Guards Motorized Rifle Division would be equipped with the latest stuff, compared to a normal Motorized Rifle Division. Soviets did have heavy formations, and these were Tank Divisions (note Tank and not Armoured) and Guards Tank Divisions. They had more tanks and less infantry than the mot inf div.
(C) NATO basic maneuver unit is the Combat Command / Taskforce / Brigade. Different NATO countries would use different terms. US divisions have historical names, like 1st Armoured Division or 1st Infantry Division, but they would very rarely fight as a cohesive unit, instead usually broken down into Brigade-sized combined arms units. The TO&E of a division is not always obvious from the name as all American infantry became mechanized after Vietnam, with heavy tank and helicopter support.
That's off the top of my head. Feel free to ignore it all, your thread - just that such details always drive me up the wall. Good luck with the games - if my laptop was more powerful, I'd get the game and join in!
(A) It's Warsaw Pact, not PACT. Often abbreviated into WP for short. So NATO vs WP is common terminology used both by wargamers, Cold War era soldiers and sometimes historians as well.
(B) Soviet basic maneuver unit is the Motorized Rifle Division. Anything smaller than that would not be operating independently (obviously the game won't allow you to have an entire division in the battle at the same time but meh). Guards is a honorary term afforded to few key units, mostly due to history. Guards Motorized Rifle Division would be equipped with the latest stuff, compared to a normal Motorized Rifle Division. Soviets did have heavy formations, and these were Tank Divisions (note Tank and not Armoured) and Guards Tank Divisions. They had more tanks and less infantry than the mot inf div.
(C) NATO basic maneuver unit is the Combat Command / Taskforce / Brigade. Different NATO countries would use different terms. US divisions have historical names, like 1st Armoured Division or 1st Infantry Division, but they would very rarely fight as a cohesive unit, instead usually broken down into Brigade-sized combined arms units. The TO&E of a division is not always obvious from the name as all American infantry became mechanized after Vietnam, with heavy tank and helicopter support.
That's off the top of my head. Feel free to ignore it all, your thread - just that such details always drive me up the wall. Good luck with the games - if my laptop was more powerful, I'd get the game and join in!
Dodes
Count
Had two battles with Kenobi, one a draw and one a victory for me, I played PACT, Kenobi played NATO.
Took some screenshots but they were all just my initial deployment because I thought it would be nice to show you guys how I deploy and my methodology.
And Kenobi and I came to a conclusion that his NATO deck was in sore need of an upgrade so here is a new proposal for a better deck.
Took some screenshots but they were all just my initial deployment because I thought it would be nice to show you guys how I deploy and my methodology.
And Kenobi and I came to a conclusion that his NATO deck was in sore need of an upgrade so here is a new proposal for a better deck.
Dodes
Count
Update: I am moving out of my current place in September 30th, it's looking like the government program I was guaranteed to be working with has fallen through, so am now in transit when it comes to a solid place with internet connection. I might be online sporadically this weekend, will probably be without the first week of October, and then the weekend of the 4-6th I will probably be back again.
So just FYI, I'm not dead.
So just FYI, I'm not dead.
just remembered about this today. Coincidence?
Dodes
Count
British Forces, not pleased with American's choice to attack Soviet Forces, moved in peacekeepers to secure the region and bolster broken Canadian sections. With the primary intent to protect West Germany, the British contingent has replaced the totally beaten Canadian Force that previously assisted in holding the Fulda Gap. West and East German militaries are now reportedly in full mobilization and strategic air strikes along the border have been reported that some speculate to escalate into more practical long-range attacks on larger cities and logistical centers.
The British peacekeepers now follow the Canadian expeditionary taskforce in retreat. British and Canadian sectors are lost, leaving it up to the American and West-German sectors temporarily. It has become more and more obvious to NATO that the PACT are far more prepared, aggressive, and determined than they expected them to be.
The British peacekeepers now follow the Canadian expeditionary taskforce in retreat. British and Canadian sectors are lost, leaving it up to the American and West-German sectors temporarily. It has become more and more obvious to NATO that the PACT are far more prepared, aggressive, and determined than they expected them to be.
