TGIF 2016: scenario list, discussion, and house rules

[Colebrook]

Blue Co for me!

[Colebrook]

Lol, the briefing of the mission is changing every time i click on the mission,is happening to someone  else?

Edited August 27, 2016 by Colebrook

[Gibsonm]

Thanks for the game.

 

Managing 20+ units without enemy updates is getting very "old".

 

I think I'll find something else to do on "Fridays" until either we get enemy updates back or 8 people aren't asked to manage four companies in the attack.

 

Enjoy.

[Volcano]

Some scenarios will have full map updates, some not. I guess the answer is that no one person should be assigned that many units (with no enemy map updates), especially mech infantry type - kind of got screwed over there.

[Colebrook]

Well, i think your company was 4 platoons with 3 players, that makes 5-6 vehicles per player and you always can keep 1 platoon in reserve and  is only 1 platoon per player. If you put less vehicles at the middle of the mission you will have a lot of players without vehicle just observing in the f8 view. And if you activate the enemy map contacts you make the arty too powerful, and infantry becomes useless because the are insta killed by arty.

Anyway changing the enemy map contacts on or off would not change the outcome of the mission, the main problem was that teams were unbalance,we should do the  draft for next missions.

Edited August 27, 2016 by Colebrook

[Gibsonm]

51 minutes ago, Colebrook said:

Well, i think your company was 4 platoons with 3 players, that makes 5-6 vehicles per player and you always can keep 1 platoon in reserve and  is only 1 platoon per player.

 

Well not quite.

 

4 platoons, 2 players. So that's 3 x 12 units (when the Infantry get out) plus 1 x 4 units = 40 units + plus 6 in the HQ.

 

I gave two Platoons to Wiglif (so he had potentially 24 units to control) I had the other 22.

 

then add the need to control half the recce screen (6 units quite apart from the Company)

 

then add the need for the Company commander's vehicle to drive somewhere else because the Air Defence guys were needed several km away from the Company's position.

 

Basically when I was fighting though Etting with 20+ units it took most of my attention and of course no surprise when I looked back elsewhere and the HQ and most of the screen is gone.

 

Then someone complains that I'm not spending my time babysitting some Javelin unit.

 

There was no Reserve, we had a Company task and we fought the Company. If you drip feed the Company in a Platoon at a time it wont achieve what is required. But next time happy to park 75% of the Company and just fight one Platoon at a time if that's what you as the CO direct - just don't give me 4 concurrent tasks.

 

I'm just fed up with missions that have masses of units and bu**er all people to command them.

 

Sure two people can fight a Tank Company, esp. if you keep most of it parked and "crew" one vehicle at a time. But Mech Inf needs double that as the number of units effectively triples when the Infantry get out.

 

51 minutes ago, Colebrook said:

Anyway changing the enemy map contacts on or off would not change the outcome of the mission.

 

I beg to differ.

 

If there are no red icons in say Etting I could have focused on the screen, i.e. put my attention where needed.

 

You can manage more because you aren't needed everywhere at the same time.

 

No map updates means you have to jump from unit to unit to see what the hell is going on (usually arriving just in time to die).

 

Anyway I'll just load the mission beforehand from now on and if there aren't map updates, I'll do something else.

 

Edited August 28, 2016 by Gibsonm

[MDF]

FWIW, I'm in favor of keeping enemy map updates off but playing smaller missions.  I created the "FEBA Madness" mission specifically to indulge my preference for 1-player-per-vehicle style missions.  Maybe I'll get cracking on some new small missions to nominate for TGIF.

[Gibsonm]

3 minutes ago, MDF said:

FWIW, I'm in favor of keeping enemy map updates off but playing smaller missions.  I created the "FEBA Madness" mission specifically to indulge my preference for 1-player-per-vehicle style missions.  Maybe I'll get cracking on some new small missions to nominate for TGIF.

 

Sure.

 

I'm not sure it has to quite go the other end of the scale (i.e. multi crewed vehicles, or one person per vehicle) but tailoring the size of the mission to match who turns up would seem workable.

 

E.g. from "Friday" 8 players per side (roughly) so.

 

1. Blue only plays two of its Companies (CO's Choice?).

 

2. Red only plays 50% too.

 

3. The playable map is also say halved.

 

Then we just need to work on reporting. There is a reason for having grids on maps. "Tanks in front of me!" tells no one anything useful.

[Apocalypse 31]

21 minutes ago, Gibsonm said:

tailoring the size of the mission to match who turns up would seem workable.

 

 

You can never predict the turnout, and that puts a lot of last minute pressure on the mission editor  - this could also lead to missions erroneously being broke due to last minute changes.  

 

My two cents - limit these events to Company v Company.

1. I have observed that most players are overwhelmed with managing a Platoon or more vehicles. 

2. Steel Beasts shines at the vehicle/crew level

3. Worst case scenario is that you have vehicles multicrewed - which isn't bad at all - see #2.

 

Just my opinion after playing this game for 10 years. 

 

Edited August 28, 2016 by Apocalypse 31

[Gibsonm]

6 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

You can never predict the turnout, and that puts a lot of last minute pressure on the mission editor  - this could also lead to missions erroneously being broke due to last minute changes. 

 

I agree there might be an issue with COs developing plans beforehand that are no longer viable.

 

As to the design of the scenario, you could just have Triggers.

 

Coy A playable if Trigger 1

Coy B playable if Trigger 2

Coy C playable if Trigger 3

Coy D playable if Trigger 4

 

CO turns up, see the manning and selects the Triggers they want.

 

The only issue might be the need for a Boundary on the map which is in effect if only 50% is playable (no need to remove it). So if all four Companies in play, use entire map, if only two Companies in play, stay East of Boundary X (or similar).

 

6 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Just my opinion after playing this game for 10 years.

 

Get some time up.

 

Edited August 28, 2016 by Gibsonm

[Volcano]

2 SEP scenario:

 

TF Deutschland 1978-4000

 

This is a big one, battalion vs. regiment (West German vs. East German with old-school 1978 era equipment and ammo) and it will really stress test 4.0 as it is one of the largest scenarios in the TGIF rotation. Ideally there should be a CO for Blue and Red, and each side should have 3x company (BLUE) and 3x battalion (RED) COs.

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

• No draft unless either side cannot muster enough people to even out the teams.
• We need at least 18 players for this one. If we don't have enough then we will play something smaller.

 

NOTES:

• Avoid studying the enemy's side; only gather intel from the briefing and exposed enemy unit icons (enemy intel), and briefly looking over both sides to figure out which one you want to CO. Anything beyond that ruins the fog of war element.
• To avoid passwords, open the scenario in Network Session as HOST and choose the side you want to play and go to planning phase. You may briefly look at both sides like this to see which side you want to play or CO on. As CO, once you choose a side, go to that side and create your plan.
• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com community rules.

 

[Lt DeFault]

Right on. I should be able to make it to this one.

[Lt DeFault]

Which version are we using tonight?

[Zaphod]

better be the 4.004

[Gibsonm]

Probably.

 

Guess you'll find out in 15mins or so.

 

Edited September 3, 2016 by Gibsonm

[Lt DeFault]

Looks like I won't be able to make it. I don't have the required Windows update and my computer is taking forever to install it. I'll try to make it if I can, but if I don't...have fun.

[Bond_Villian]

Great game today gents, awesome scenario well played! I look forward to doing that one again.

Edited September 3, 2016 by Bond_Villian

[AlphaOneSix]

Anybody get the AAR in a place I can download it?  Somewhere around the midpoint my game hung (not terribly unusual) and didn't come back after waiting almost 10 minutes (unusual), so I had to quit for the evening.

[Zaphod]

3 minutes ago, AlphaOneSix said:

Anybody get the AAR in a place I can download it?  Somewhere around the midpoint my game hung (not terribly unusual) and didn't come back after waiting almost 10 minutes (unusual), so I had to quit for the evening.

oy , mine is 1.3 gigs

[Bond_Villian]

 In Teamspeak, right click on the 'in game red' channel and look in the file browser, theres a copy of the AAR in there courtesy of cavgunner

[Zaphod]

28 minutes ago, AlphaOneSix said:

Anybody get the AAR in a place I can download it?  Somewhere around the midpoint my game hung (not terribly unusual) and didn't come back after waiting almost 10 minutes (unusual), so I had to quit for the evening.

 and here i am uploading my blue side winning aar ......taking for ever .... good thing i zipped it

[Hedgehog]

That was fun. 

[Zaphod]

What a long ass upload 

TF_Deutschland_1978-4000_090216FENDERJAZZ-P2227.rar

[Gibsonm]

Thanks for the links to both AAR files.

[Volcano]

Thanks all that participated. It was good to see that, for the most part, 4.0 can still handle the "Red Tide" sized scenarios over WAN.

 

I did notice some logical issues with mission end-if conditions that I fixed. It should probably be a little tougher on Red next time, specifically as far as the 150 min sudden-death termination goes, and I also corrected some minor scoring issues, removed some confusing event messages, and clarified the text in the briefing about the time limt.

 

Not sure if these changes would have altered the outcome on Friday, but either way I think Blue only had to destroy about 10 more Red vehicles and it would have ended in a victory - so either way, it was very close indeed.

 

That said, whoever COs Red next time should have an easier time of it as there are now more pre-plotted routes that can be used to bring up the reinforcements (which is probably the most annoying thing about CO'ing Red).