Jump to content
silent-one

Challenger 2 any good?

Recommended Posts

Had we pulled back to a less exposed BP (and maybe even reloaded), we could have continued the mayhem quite a bit longer.

That's like saying you could have won the race if only you averaged faster times. But you may have got more kills because perhaps you didn't abandon your precarious position sooner, and that's what got you killed.

If anyone wants to really test their skills with any of the Western tanks, go back and play the original Demo_Attack mission that was included with the original Steel Beasts. I'm not sure I could win that scenario with Challenger 2 tanks, and I know where all the enemy positions are, what their triggers are, where they are expected to be at all times, and it's still extremely difficult because of a nasty time limit imposed.

The Blue player is on the attack and has to travel several kilometers while fighting along the way. You have to play on the run and pretty much win within a razor thin envelope of time remaining. There's not enough time to do anything but start attacking right out of the gate, when you take into account times you have to stop to re-load or to avoid artillery or get into battles with infantry, you have to rush- and that usually leads to mistakes and you start taking losses, even when you know exactly where the threats are coming from and theoretically how to avoid them.

So the Challenger swapped out for the default Leopards would have a difficult time. The Challenger is slower, and in this mission you're not defending open ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original Habighorst Attack turned nastier than it originally was when I designed it due to a few changes in the ammunition balance. But there's also one shortcut to save you some time which at least was rather easy to take in SB1 but has become more difficult with changes in the behavior of computer-controlled units in order to avoid certain obstacle types.

The whole point of the scenario was to give the player a choice to strictly adhere to his mission orders (in which case you have to be really, really good) or to violate them for a short moment with the possible benefit of bypassing some of the enemy, thus to gain more momentum in order to reach your final objective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have played this scenario more than 20 times, I've tried both leaving defined boundaries and attacking up the middle. The time limit is probably the single most critical factor, and either option cuts it close. This isn't even due to play style, you have to move vehicles across several kilometers no matter which way you go. And then you include minefields and pre-plotted artillery to cover the quickest routes. It's with mathematical certainty that time is the enemy in this scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but passing through the water that goes across your attack path no matter what was done with a lot less hassle in SB1 because you could drive right through it. So, at least that was a time saver. We need to get back to the point where a human player can lead a platoon in column formation through water without having to drive every vehicle by himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...