Slitherine

Please post here your comments about this scenario.

Starting prestige ~2000. I decided to buy a Tiger and elite reinforce the remaining units, no upgrades.

What surprises me so far is that the US, Soviets, and UK are all mixed. They should have sectors, and defend areas. There was almost no units mixed in WWII, and especially not with the Soviets. The Soviets would be in the north, UK in center, and the US at the south/port area.

Playing on Allied side as standalone scenario: victory at turn nr 9 (Leutnant level).

Yes it is weird the Allied and Soviet units are totally mixed.

15.000 prestige given is a lot, Germans and especially Italians do not have a chance to win!

Starting prestige ~3000, were able to overstrength all my tanks and add a couple of units (Brummbär, Sahariana). Agree with previous postings that mixed allies seems strange and non-historical. Overall, I thought this scenario was too easy, compared with the previous ones (Iraq and Basra). Especially if the enemy airforce is ramped down (looked like this from the scenario text), the ground forces need to be strengthened a bit. Maybe some more Soviet tanks?

Based on the previous comment playing as stand-alone scenario, perhaps this scenario is unbalanced between stand-alone and campaign?

Nice mix of terrain BTW.

Persia
FM level, DV at 14/30
Prestige start: 3,400. End: 4,700. Net +1,300
(Elite replacements to “10” during scenario for core units, unless very badly damaged – those retired and repaired w/Elite in next deployment).

Great map, lots of thinking to do in the first stages. But the allies fold quickly and have little strength. I wonder why there are 30 turns allotted if the map can be cleared in under ½ that? I held back deploying 8 units at start to see where to place them as the first turn or two and recon played out. Of the eight, I probably needed two of them. The other four were overkill, and two I never deployed at all. So it could be tweaked to be shorter, stronger opponents, or fewer units, or all of the above. It was perhaps easier than Alam el Halfa. This was a shame for such a neat map and cool strategic concept.

I also found the allied air to be strangely passive.

On a side note, I was curious whether it should be called "Persia," or "Iran" as a scenario. Turns out that's not really a serious issue, but the history of the name is interesting, and WWII had a role in prolonging the usage of "Persia" instead of the more correct "Iran:"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Iran

(For those into the odd history of such things...)

From British point of view it would be Persia. This is what their command structures are suggesting and since Germany attacks British possessions they are attacking Persia. Of course both names are correct, difference is in perspective.

Oh yes, I agree with you on the name. I was just curious as it was something I did not understand fully and thus "learned" from the game by looking up the history. Others may find it interesting, too.

Very interesting how Churchill actually formally asked the Iranians for an exception to let them continue using the "old" name (Persia) during the war.

General level. Starting prestige 7050, ending 3979. Elite replacements for all units. I was awarded an SE PzIIIL, that I upgraded to a Tiger.

This one is way too easy. Other than the minefields in the south, it was a cakewalk. I took my time and cleared the map by turn 15. Lost 1 recon by being careless. The allied air doesn't seem to activate at all. They seem to remain at their bases. Not only should they be active, but there should be a few more of them.

I agree about the mixed units. I expected Soviets in the north, UK in the middle and USA in the south.

BETA 3
Colonel
start
end 792 prestige
This one was a tuff one. Everything is thrown at you. Allied air is strong.
lost several units.
What makes this tuff, is the clouds. Your air force power is reduced drastically.
Land power is effected too.
The damn mines prevent a player from making first strike.
I had to press on.
Let the Allies counter attack and hit my rear.
I was low on prestige and was reduced to 92 points for most of the game.
I bought two 7.5mm AT's. Ordered the M14/41 to the rear and bought an infantry.
Strategy worked, but I was forced to move my Tiger to the rear to kill the tanks.
Lost allot of units and a plane hero.
Lost my precious 88AT, thought the area was clear near the end but another damn counter attack by three USA tanks. 88 in transport was no match.

DV next to last turn.




I see the map has been fixed since the other betas. Boy, are they in for a surprise.

Encountered a bug, I think.

Playing on General level with the beta 3 patch.

Finished the scenario but got a MV instead of a DV. I had all the victory hexes captured by turn 22 but the scenario would not end. It kept going till the last turn and gave me a MV, but I double checked to make sure I had all the victory hexes, which I did. I'm pretty sure no more than 5 convoys made it through but there was no way to tell.

Perhaps, we can use a pop up test every time a convoy succeeds?

I noticed a text errors during the briefing, it says "...but will create a back door to the Caucausus an opportunity to link our forces in Russia."

I think something like this would be better: "...but will create a back door to the Caucausus, creating an opportunity to link our forces in Russia."

Persia
Ending prestige 1015
Marginal Victory 25/25
Losses: 1x ME4 410

This was a great scenario but a very, very difficult one! I am surprised to see some of the earlier comments that said it was a cakewalk. I think I failed to stop the majority of the convoys and also failed to get the final objective in the far northeast.

There is really a lot going on here, you have to capture objectives that are spread out over a large map, you have American, British and Soviet units together for the first time. You have a counterattack across the Tigris, you have an amphibious assault across the Capsian, this is truly one action packed scenario!

For the first time I felt like my Italian units were not up to the challenge that the scenario presented. I decided to have them face the Red Army in the north while my SS Panzer division would head north toward Tehran and my other Panzer division take the two southern objectives. My losses in this one were abysmal, I probably had higher casualties than any other scenario and my prestige started to get down to critical levels.

To help the Italians, I would recommend making the P-40 available at the start of this battle. Fighting T-34s with M14/41s wasn't very fun. This was a great scenario, but I would recommend perhaps making the convoy trains run a little bit later so that the player can have a better chance to get past the initial opposition and have a chance to destroy them.

monkspider wrote:Persia
Ending prestige 1015
Marginal Victory 25/25
Losses: 1x ME4 410

This was a great scenario but a very, very difficult one! I am surprised to see some of the earlier comments that said it was a cakewalk.

It sounds as though there were some big changes between beta 2 and 3. I am going to replay it in beta 3, using my same deployment (I save all my scenarios at the end of deployment so I can go back and pick up there).

Yes, sending Italian armour north would not work too well! I figured the Russians would be north, and Americans south. So I deployed anticipating that and it worked well.

Kamerer wrote: It sounds as though there were some big changes between beta 2 and 3. I am going to replay it in beta 3, using my same deployment (I save all my scenarios at the end of deployment so I can go back and pick up there).

If you use a save created in the course of a scenario (including the deployment stage), you will not see any changes added to this scenario later, because your save will still contain the old version.

Persia Beta 3
Level: Field Marshal
Starting Prestige: 5,400. Ending: 1,300. Net: -4,100 (Played with “stock” core, not mine)
Result: “Outstanding Achievement” (wth?) at 22/25
Replacements: Regular used.
Losses: (6) - 2 x Bf110, one of the two Ital TD’s, three infantry units. Replacements (4): 2 x Tigers, a Wurfrahmen, and a Fw190.

I re-played this in Beta 3, had to use the 'stock' core since mine was saved in Beta 2 and if I load that it just gave me the same (beta 2) scenario.

Errors:

1) No “Victory Objectives” stated at turn one or on screen between turns – it’s blank.
2) 2 two American(?) tanks – Valentine and Churchill, screening Behshar (east of Tehran). Don’t think that’s what you meant, or what was in Beta 2 - they were British then I beleive.
3) Another American(?) Churchill east of Qum at 32,19.
4) Mines are still detecting units and exerting zoc functions (believe that was going to be fixed?)

Overall:

· A better-suited scenario for such a good map.
· I expected an amphibious component on the first go-around (Beta 2). Glad I kept looking again; if I had not caught them afloat in time to reduce them in transport, it would have been tough; that was a strong counter-attack.
· Definitely a good challenge to achieve objectives with the tougher defenses.


The pop-up messages worked well. Adding the ‘scout’ aircraft to inform of a 2nd convoy and to help track it should help many players. Getting at the 2nd convoy really requires a good air game and mauling it with tactical air and fighters, it is nearly impossible to get at (with the ‘stock’ core). With the two t-34/43s not pinned defending that mtn. Gap at 15,7/16,8 (as in the prior iterations), someone with a stronger core than the ‘stock’ one might get through to block the 2nd convoy with a tank. Ialmost had a Tiger in place, but it was either use it on the convoy, or take some bigger ground losses. I turned it back south and left the convoy to the fighters and (remnant) of my tactical air.

Balance:

As mentioned, I had to re-play this with the provided “core” since my beta 2 saved one would not work with Beta 3. For someone with a good core, the game would be a nice challenge. The stock core is pretty darn weak to take on some of the very unbalanced units in the scenario – the 300+ experience Spitfire and paras in Tehran are rough, and the dearth in both quality and quantity of artillery in the provided core makes it very hard and expensive to fight. Also, allotting only one pioniere unit to the stock core makes it even harder to get through the double-belted minefield.

I’m not sure how concerned developers are with the play from that perspective; or perhaps the idea is to make the stock core a very challenging one to work with.

Is “outstanding achievement” the same as DV when playing a stan-alone scenario and not in a campaign? I have never seen that before. I believe I let three trucks through so did not know until the end, and also there were no victory conditions – or are those not given in a stand-alone scenario?

Kamerer wrote: 4) Mines are still detecting units and exerting zoc functions (believe that was going to be fixed?)

It is fixed and works for me, just double-checked again.

When I played the beta 3 I mentioned above, I was not allowed to fully reinforce a unit that was adjacent to the mines, no other opponent units around. I will double check, also. I started playing in beta 2 until I noticed it was the same; perhaps it was there and not in 3 once I restarted cold. I'll check.

If there are other scnenarios that have changed drastically like this you would like feedback on, let me know. I have not had time to devote to a MP game, but could do that if needed.

Yes, re-opened that Beta 3 game and the mines are inhibiting reinforcement/supply to adjacent units.

I did not notice them spotting as before, but they are exerting that zoc characteristic, which I understood was going to be removed.

Kamerer wrote:I did not notice them spotting as before, but they are exerting that zoc characteristic, which I understood was going to be removed.

Are you sure it is mines which cause the trouble? On desert hexes you only get half supply.