Voir la version complète : Cherche joueur(s) PzC
Je me ferai bien une petite partie de pousse-pions. Des amateurs pour un Smolensk ou Karkhov 42 (ou autre)?
A voir si scénario ou campagne selon le nombre de participants.
:cf:
un karkhov me dirait bien :clin:
moi aussi un bon Karkhov .
je suis dispo si il y a une multi sur smolensk avec une place restante chez les russes.
On cherche donc un 4eme larron sur Kharkov'42 et zou :sourire:
Moi ça me dit, peut importe le camp.
un karkhov me tente bien. camps indiferent, campagne, scenario moyen ou court, au choix. :sourire: (haaa, le premier PzC auquel j'ai joué...)
pour karkhov : je prends n'importe quel camp aussi.........( la branlée ça me connait :Rire: )
Zut on est 5 :Rire:
Nico t'es arrivé trop tard je crois.
Sachant que je souhaite prendre 1 place bleue, il reste 2 places rouges et 1 place bleue.
Répartissez-vous.
oui pareil ,pour le choix du camp ...comme pour me faire tauler...en ce moment c'est pas la joie :Rire:
Je souhaite une place allemande au sudd, si c'est pas possible, une place rouge au nord, et à défaut au sud.
donc arnaud et laurent : axe
bedo et moi : rodina
c'est ok ? :clin:
oui pareil ,pour le choix du camp ...comme pour me faire tauler...en ce moment c'est pas la joie :Rire:
Sois explicite pour le camp :clin:
dommage. :pas content:. d'un autre coté, comme çà, j'evite le camps russe au sud. :Rire:
Je propose la version Alt, ça vous va ?
avec les alt, karkhov est quasiment-injouable coté russe...........:sourire:
à titre perso, je préfère sans les alt pour les pzc du "front de l'est"
ok pour la rodina , le nord le sud ,c'est égale
Vous jouez la campagne?
Parce que la campagne de K42 au sud,ca devient vite compliqué pour le russe... :Rire: :hammer:
oui sans les alt moi aussi je prefere.
Je parle de la version Alt, pas des Alt...
c'est quoi la version alt ( à télécharger sur the blitz je pense ) ? :clin:
C'est la version Volcano.
http://volcanomods.com
The following is a list of changes to Volcano Man’s Alternate K42 scenarios
(These scenarios have “Alt” at the end of the filename).
Intended optional rules used with these alternate scenarios:
**Note: explicit supply may be selected in the alternate campaign scenario**
Below is a list of changes made to the original scenarios.
Changes
v.V
-Corrected an error in the formula used to determine hard attack values for artillery units. The previous formula was slightly inconsistent with the way that the soft attack values were calculated. The correction yields higher hard attack values for most guns of 105mm and greater caliber. Some guns, particularly the British 25-pdr Field Gun, now have decent hard attack capability to better help cause fatigue or disruption to armored units, especially in the early war period.
-Corrected a calculation used to determine towed AT gun defense. The net result is a +4 defense strength to all towed AT gun units. Now the average towed AT gun (between 50mm to 75mm) is 16, which is the same average defense of infantry.
-Added the ability for the German 389th Infantry Division (17th Army) to be able to attach to a corps formation. It begins in the 17th Army Reserve and should be reassigned from that organization as needed.
-Raised German air availability from 20% to 30%. This was done to reflect both the close proximity air fields located in Kharkov and because, at the time, this was the Luftwaffe’s height of power.
-Split Luftwaffe airstrikes into 12 plane staffel to add greater flexibility and to make it consistent with other PzC titles.
-Completely reworked air availability in scenarios (stock versions are mostly not functioning with AVAL without NO AVAL or vice versa).
-Adjusted allied and axis air interception rates to be consistent with more recent PzC titles covering this period.
-Corrected scenario #18-Friderikus_Alt to use the McNamara based OOB (it was previously using an old OOB file).
-Corrected a 2x minefield at hex 135,197 in the campaign scenarios. It was previously a penetrated trench hex.
-Added missing German air strikes to the campaign scenarios. These missing air units consist of level bomber “KG” units of He-111 and Ju-88 aircraft. The additional German air strikes increases the historical accuracy and helps to demonstrate the Luftwaffe’s high water mark. Thanks to Blitz member Kevin Hankins (Kuriltai) for the research.
-German StG 2 has been removed (total of nine Stuka air strikes). This was done because, historically, Luftflotte 4 only had four Stukagruppe (12 air strikes) instead of the original seven (21 air strikes).
-Reworked air units of sub scenarios. Now all “first day” (May 12th) sub scenarios have no German air units because all German aircraft was at Crimea at this time. Only single engine fighter aircraft were available when the Soviets attacked. Thanks to Blitz member Kevin Hankins (Kuriltai) for the research.
-Added some KG level bomber units to a few sub scenarios. This was done only for the scenarios in which StG 2 was removed as noted above.
-Standardized Pillbox and Bunker defense and modifiers (depending on the period and front of the war) to be consistent with IP and Trench modifiers. Basically, the Pillbox and Bunker modifier is identical to Trench, but where they differ is in the defense value. It makes no sense to have a Bunker or Pillbox have a modifier lower than the Trench modifier, considering that a Bunker is simply a Trench that has overhead cover. The Pillbox simply adds more protection to this concept.
v.IV
-Corrected an issue with air strike ratings. An incorrect formula was used in determination of values. Most ratings have remained unchanged as they were correct already, but a few ratings have changed slightly.
-Corrected German mixed PzIII/PzIV unit ratings (the PzKw IVf2 was not factored in).
-Shortened some unit names to prevent text overflow from unit info box.
-Added Alt version of the #03-Campaign-1stHalf_Alt scenario.
-Relocated (one hex) several axis units that were obstructing rail movement.
v.III
-Updated the suggested optional rules selection image at the top of this document.
-Added Weather.dat file to scenarios. Programmed Weather optional rule is now available for play (including chance for STORM and frozen conditions in the weather).
-Added winter Russian portraits to #01-BarvenkovoW_Alt scenario.
-Factored halftrack ratings into armored infantry units. The halftrack ratings have been divided by two which mostly resulted in a decimal number that was added to the infantry units rating. The result is a small factor increase that helped to round some factors up by 1.
-Standardized Russian and Russian-Guards unit quality ratings. Russian line units are given D quality and Russian-Guards units are given C quality. For the most part this is already true in all PzC titles with the exception of a few units, usually given B quality for play balance purposes. With the McNamara OOB based changes, this is no longer required. Obviously, the quality standardization results in some Guards units changing from B to C but it also resulted in just as many Guards artillery units (and other supporting units) changing from D to C. It also resulted in many Russian units changing from E to D. This was all done for several reasons. Firstly, it is a logical assumption that a Guards division distinguished itself in battle, therefore it should be rated higher. More often than not, Soviet units had high casualty rates so instead of some divisions being high quality, the organizations as a whole remained at a standard level but unit leaders (HQ units) would be higher rated if it was a “good” unit. The other reason it was done is to remove the feeling of uniqueness within the Red Army (where, before, some units would be good quality and some would be terrible quality). Instead the emphasis is placed on quantity, the “horde”, individual unit ratings (of the formidable Russian medium and heavy tanks and their artillery), and HQ unit ratings.
Several books (such as von Mellenthin’s “Panzer Battles”) make the observation that the Red Army lacked individualism which is characteristic of western armies. This lack of individualism produced an almost automaton adherence to doctrine without any creativity whatsoever at the tactical level. The real strength of a unit was in how it was wielded at the strategic level. The individual fighter in the Red Army was, either intentionally or not, submerged into the “crowd” or “herd”. To that end, there is no real justification for Red Army units to be of sporadic quality levels between B and E but, rather, a standard average quality of C and D for combat units and varying quality levels ranging from excellent to terrible for individual HQ, based on their ability. These quality levels for HQs affect many variables and, given that “out of command” or “detached” units produce realistically severe effects (ie. artillery spotting by detached units get reduced artillery strike effectiveness and detached units gain less replacements), these individual HQ ratings can thus be extremely important. As mentioned above, this standardized quality approach takes focus off of individual unit’s (battalions) effectiveness and instead treats them as a collective.
Finally, it is said that even in 1944 the German soldier knew and felt that his unit was superior to his Russian counterpart. However, German divisions were like tiny stones in the midst of a vast ocean of endless Red Army troops. It should be noted that Russian troop quality, as a whole, was indeed improving gradually from 1942 to 1944, but this is inherently reflected in the fact that the number of Guards divisions were increasing as these divisions proved themselves and the organizational changes that improved over time (more artillery, air superiority etc). Records show that German units could stand their own ground even when outnumbered 6:1 but when Russian units are given high quality (B) this becomes impossible. By taking away emphasis of a few “good” units it encourages a Russian player to play with a “horde” mentality.
-Changed recovery rate, to allied 2% axis 4% (from allied 1% axis 2%). There are several reasons for this: The Red Army was notorious for low strength return. Specifically, units did not bother with any sort of personnel branch; when replacements were needed they simply requested so many men at one time and perhaps they would receive some, and perhaps not. More often than not, men were instead used to create entirely new divisions and soviet units frequently operated at lower than organizational strength levels. The result (in ALT scenarios) is that a historical flat rate approach will now be taken for the Russian strength return levels (2%) and the German strength recovery rate will fluctuate depending on the period. Conversely, the fluctuation depends on the draining pool of manpower over the years, but benefits from a highly effective personnel branch and organization. Replacement levels also vary depending on the situation and theater location, of course.
-Instituted the McNamara standardized database. After years of research, the unit ratings used in Talonsoft’s old Campaign Series was taken and, through a mathematical formula, the data was converted into a database relevant to the Panzer Campaigns system.
Many vehicles and guns were more or less the same ratings but where it differs is in the hard attack strengths of later war tanks and the defense strengths of some units and the overall lower assault ratings for armor (making infantry more powerful assets, vital for successful assaults). Most of the deviation from the stock values begins to occur in the middle and late periods of the war. For example, turret-less tank destroyer vehicles are now almost impotent in assaults, however they are stronger defensively.
Here are a few observations from play testing (general observations from several PzC titles):
Combat is now more of a ranged affair. Artillery is no longer the indirect fire capable anti-tank guns that they were before; you had better check your firing unit’s hard attack rating before you waste it on a hard target. It is better to conserve your artillery for infantry or light skinned vehicles instead of the habit of just bombarding everything you see (which was a viable tactic before). This contributes to bolster the strength and survivability of tanks on the battlefield as a whole, making them really only vulnerable to air strikes, anti-tank guns and other armor.
Also, as a veteran PzC player, you will have to unlearn a lot of things you may have grown accustomed to doing. One example is with the new hard target halftracks defensive rating. The defensive rating is now at a realistic level to where mechanized infantry cannot feely go zooming around the battlefield in their armored shells when there is a presence of enemy armor or anti tank guns in the area. I have witnessed many cases where mechanized infantry in the stock games were left in their halftracks to suffer fewer casualties, or where someone used them as a vanguard for their forces. While it is still possible to remain in T mode for armored protection, you will have to take more into consideration such as air strikes or AT gun ambushes. An entire column of halftracks can now be totally obliterated (along with the infantry inside) if a careless player advances without reconnoitering the area first. This is pretty accurate considering that up to ten troops were carried by each halftrack as well as two crew members. So, for every ten men eliminated in a volley on a T mode mechanized infantry unit, it would be roughly one halftrack knocked out.
That said, keep in mind that there should be no direct comparison between infantry carried by hard target vehicles (hard halftracks) and infantry carried by soft target vehicles (motorized, bicycle, motorcycle, cavalry etc). The defense ratings are not directly comparable because they are of two different target classifications. So, a motorized unit might have a higher defense rating when in T mode than a hard halftrack unit does, but the motorized unit is a soft target which is extremely vulnerable to any weapon on the battlefield (especially artillery). Conversely, a mechanized infantry unit in, hard target vehicles (halftracks), are only vulnerable to certain types of weapons of the armored piercing variety. Generally speaking, halftracks provide more protection to the infantry in artillery strikes than a motorized unit. So, truly, T mode halftrack infantry and T mode motorized infantry will fare differently depending on the circumstances.
Recon and armored car units are rather special units now. The recon / armored car unit’s real strength lies in its mobility. You should use these units with the “recon spotting” (optional rule) ability as much as possible in order to minimize their exposure to enemy tanks. As in real life, use caution when conducting recon operations. Recon units should not remain adjacent to a much stronger enemy force but, rather, move to contact then withdraw once the enemy has been spotted and artillery and air strikes directed on them, then repeat. Do NOT use recon / armored car units to hold ground as they will easily be destroyed. The most useful employment of such units is to move them forward of your main force and place them in good vantage points. Then select "recon spotting" as you move forward to search for enemy units.
Anti-tank guns, for the most part, are much more powerful now and have longer ranges. But by the same token, they are also more vulnerable to artillery strikes and are almost completely impotent against infantry (except for a select few anti-tank guns who are now also useful against infantry as well).
Assault guns (AGs) and tank destroyers (TDs) are now very anemic in the assault category. This is primarily due to the fact that they have no turret and must pivot steer in order to aim their weapons systems. This makes them extremely vulnerable to infantry assaults. Keep this in mind, as you would do better to think of tank destroyers and assault guns as “armored self propelled anti-tank/infantry guns”, which, in all actuality, is what they were. It is best to either pair these units with an infantry component or use them to attack units at a standoff range. Built up areas (such as forests and cities) will almost totally require TD’s and AG’s to remain with infantry since they will be unable to use their standoff range. And you can all but forget about using them to assault those stacks of disrupted and isolated enemy units to get those easy kills. Also, in many cases, some TDs are very lightly armored now. This is especially true for open top or open rear tank destroyers. These should exclusively be used at standoff range and under cover if possible. In all practical terms, most of these lighter armed vehicles were intended to take on weaker tanks. In many cases, if you have a tank destroyer unit knocking out your tanks you have one of two choices: close the gap and take the fight to them or send in your infantry.
Infantry have now gained a greater importance because the overall reduction in the assault capability of most armored vehicles will leave the ground taking to infantry and infantry / armor teams rather than it being possible to take ground with a large quantity of tanks as it was before. Armor is also vulnerable to ambushes by anti-tank guns so in many such cases the infantry will be the best tool for taking out these anti-tank gun units.
Infantry also have adjustments based loosely on the McNamara database. All infantry have been plugged into the database to come out with standard values. The result is that you shouldn’t see “he who has the most guns and troops causes the most damage”. Now there is indeed a quantitative advantage that the Germans have and you should not see both sides slugging it only to destroy entire battalions in the course of several turns. This issue was one of the primary reasons that the Germans could not properly mount an offensive along historical axis of advance. What you will find is, infantry have a more historical effectiveness. Some are very effective on the assault, and some are not offensively effective against armor (the stock game placed too much offensive power, in general, into the hands of the infantry vs. armor). Some infantry are highly motivated attackers but susceptible to fire. Specific examples of changes are: Soviet SMG battalions are just about second to none in assaults but rather weak at ranged fire; Soviet rifle infantry are, as they should be, not very effective on a one battalion basis… their strength lies in their numbers; Soviet infantry, as a whole, have no offensive capability against armor but are effective defensively against armor. As the Germans, use your Pioneers as often as possible in assaults. You will find, for the most part, that German armor and infantry can take large casualties in assaults if you are not careful. Where their real strength lies is in their direct fire effectiveness. Often though, the Germans will have plenty of firepower but continuous assaults will realistically grind them down. That said, the Germans should utilize their Pioneers in assaults to make such assaults more effective (and lose less troops in the process). As the Russians, you will find that the role is reversed; Soviet troops are generally not very effective in direct fire but they are very effective in assaults.
Special note must be mentioned about bunkers. In the past artillery was somewhat effective against bunkers but now they are not. You will find that using your AT guns and tanks, mortars and aircraft are rightfully the best units to use against them.
-Standardized all artillery of caliber 150mm and higher as “heavy artillery”.
-Standardized aircraft ratings.
-Made all high altitude level bomber units into heavy bomber type in order to reduce their accuracy as they were essentially carpet bombing (standard).
-Reduced air strike limit from 40 to 20.
v.II
-Updated the suggested optional rules selection image at the top of this document.
-Adjust the VP levels of some objectives (in campaign scenario) [Kharkov and Slavyansk].
-Added 250 point objective to the city of Belgorod (in campaign scenario).
-Moved units in hex 157,147 over one hex to prevent their isolation on the first turn.
v.I
-Combined all soviet small tank companies into mixed tank battalions, very similar to the mixed soviet tank battalions in Kursk ‘43. This allows for more historical effectiveness albeit at the cost of flexibility instead of the weak armor companies.
- Adjusted German armored car defense ratings (lowered) to standardize them with other early Panzer Campaigns ratings. PzIII/PzIV unit defense rating is lowered from 16 to 12.
-Adjusted German armored car defense ratings (lowered) to standardize them with other early Panzer Campaigns ratings. AC Kp unit defense rating is lowered from 12 to 9.
-Altered / corrected German pioneers to be of type [foot] for regular infantry divisions instead of type [motorized].
-Altered / corrected Russian sapper units to prevent them from being able to construct bridges (don’t forget to use them to ferry across infantry units).
-Altered / corrected Russian “bridge units” to allow them to be the only ones to construct bridges.
-Altered / corrected Soviet 1st Motorcycle Battalion to be of type motorcycle instead of motorized.
-Adjusted defense strength of all motorized, motorcycle, bicycle and cavalry units to the now standard (and more vulnerable) rating when in T mode. The original OOB had the same defense for these units when in T mode and when out of T mode.
-Altered / corrected Soviet Guards sapper to be of type [foot] in regular Guards Rifle divisions.
-Adjusted objective points and locations in the alternate campaign scenario.
-Adjusted German mixed flak units by breaking them down into 88mm guns and their lower caliber flak guns (the original unit contained a mix of 88mm and 20mm flak guns with a mixed rating).
*overall result of changes: German PzIII’s are not super tanks now; they are less able to stand up to Russian mixed T-34 battalions and infantry hordes. Russian armor is more powerful but less flexible. Germans and Russians have less bridge building capability (before just about every engineer could construct a bridge). German 88mm FLAK guns are deadly now. The 88mm FLAK guns should now be called on as the primary means of stopping the more formidable Russian armor threat, and in turn the Russians should make them a priority target.
Ci joint les OR à prendre pour coller aux nouvelles UVs...
effectivement ça doit pas être mal .
Je suis plutôt pour donc
ça me va aussi :sourire:
arnaud ?
Ok pour moi. Vous pouvez commencer.
Je suis absent ce soir, samedi et dimanche.
j'ai un problème avec le scénar , je n'arrive pas à trouver/accéder à la page sur volcano mod ( pas réussi à m'enregistrer )
si quelqu'un peut me filer le lien direct ou m'envoyer le fichier à télécharger par mail, merci :sourire:
fichier bien reçu bedo , merci :clin:
coup d'envoi donné , nous jouons avec la mise à jour 1.09 de K42 sur le scénario alt de volcano :sourire:
vBulletin® v.3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Tous droits réservés - Version française vbulletin-fr.org