Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
GrogHeads Feedback / Re: Site Migration
« Last post by Jarhead0331 on January 14, 2019, 06:58:32 PM »
I’m working on it. I tried to add it, but it didn’t take. We have some underlying issues that are restricticting our capabilities in terms of Add-on options. These problems are fundamental and very difficult to resolve without jeopardizing the overall functionality of the forum.
2
GrogHeads Feedback / Re: Site Migration
« Last post by JasonPratt on January 14, 2019, 06:15:02 PM »
Bi-monthly bump for the return of the dice roller, please, failed to trigger the last two times, but I remembered this time!  :bd: :nerd: :hide: :dreamer:

We could sure use it in the Grogpublic game as the competition grows more intense.  :notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy:
3
GrogHeads Feedback / Re: Partying into the 41st Millenium with Sanctus Reach!
« Last post by Gusington on December 31, 2018, 04:37:22 PM »
 O0
4
GrogHeads Feedback / Partying into the 41st Millenium with Sanctus Reach!
« Last post by Jarhead0331 on December 31, 2018, 04:24:53 PM »
Ring in the New Year with Boggit on Sanctus Reach.

http://grogheads.com/whatever/19911#more-19911
5
GrogHeads Feedback / Re: Invasion Crete!
« Last post by Strela on December 23, 2018, 02:04:07 PM »
Thanks, David. It was a real pleasure to play that scenario. Great job putting it together!  O0

While we have your attention, I meant to ask you...what is the time scale of the scenario? In other words how much time is allocated to each turn. Without knowing this for sure, it was hard to judge my progress against the historical outcome.

Do the time scales hold true across scenarios, or is it different for each one?

Thanks again.

It’s 30 minutes a turn. This is consistent across the whole series.

As you saw from your play through, you were ahead of the historical schedule. It’s particularly hard for para themed scenarios to get consistent timing. Casualties and in some cases arrival hexes are wildly variable. These will conspire to speed up or slow down versus the historical achievement. We have found the variable VP’s help as we can weight locations on a more timely basis.

A scenario, like the one you played has all the historical units setup or arriving in the right place at the right time, but the rest is then up to  the player. Players tend to push their units harder as they ‘only have ten turns’ to play versus the historical commanders having to preserve their units for days of combat. Playing the longer landing scenarios such as the multi-day 56 turn ‘First Wave’ scenario sees a more historical pace in a broader context. We actually build the big scenarios first and then carve out the smaller ones, re balancing them based upon the testing results.

Finally, your AAR was great as it included the historical actuality’s. Understanding those add so much more to the play enjoyment and at a minimum I suggest players read the scenario briefing for context and at best go and get a few books from the bibliography we included in the Players Notes.

Thanks again,

David
6
GrogHeads Feedback / Re: Invasion Crete!
« Last post by Jarhead0331 on December 23, 2018, 10:00:27 AM »
Thanks, David. It was a real pleasure to play that scenario. Great job putting it together!  O0

While we have your attention, I meant to ask you...what is the time scale of the scenario? In other words how much time is allocated to each turn. Without knowing this for sure, it was hard to judge my progress against the historical outcome.

Do the time scales hold true across scenarios, or is it different for each one?

Thanks again.

7
GrogHeads Feedback / Re: Invasion Crete!
« Last post by Strela on December 22, 2018, 11:43:24 PM »
Play the battle, try a different strategy and write up the AAR. We'll be happy to publish it!!!!

Craig and team,

Thank you for the write-up on the AAR. All this has helped more people to see the game and consider its merits (or otherwise!).

Personally, we learned more about the game system and what it could/could not be achieved when using it, through the design of the disparate scenarios in this title.

One thing to try, there is a Variable Victory Point version of this scenario, that you should try. This really rewards the German for taking objectives early and continuing to hold them. It eill play a little differently to the 'fixed' VP version that you tried.

Thanks again, we have linked to the story on the WDS Facebook page.

David
8
GrogHeads Feedback / Re: Invasion Crete!
« Last post by Jarhead0331 on December 22, 2018, 10:27:07 PM »

Thanks Groggy! Glad you enjoyed it.

When I play these scenarios, I try not to think too much about points. Rather, I focus on the historical objective of the operation. Here, it was to capture that airfield at all costs. I dont think taking the hill at kavkazia really would have contributed to that goal. I moved on Point 107 because historically, this was crucial to taking and holding the airfield.

In addition, the troop disposition based on where they dropped and landed also had a lot to do with my strategy. I think taking kavkazia hill would have diverted forces too far south, thus drawing critical manpower away from the primary objectives.

Interesting thought though. Let me know if you end up picking up the game. Play the battle, try a different strategy and write up the AAR. We'll be happy to publish it!!!!

Thanks again for reading and for your feedback!

I will definitely keep that in mind. It might be a minute, but once I purchase the game and try out the Crete scenario, I would look forward to writing up an AAR. My girlfriend has broad editing experience, so she could clean up all of my crappy grammar.

Thanks again.  :bd:






Groggy

Don't worry about that...our team of highly paid, well-benefited editors will take care of all that for you.
9
GrogHeads Feedback / Re: Invasion Crete!
« Last post by GroggyGrognard on December 22, 2018, 09:37:14 PM »

Thanks Groggy! Glad you enjoyed it.

When I play these scenarios, I try not to think too much about points. Rather, I focus on the historical objective of the operation. Here, it was to capture that airfield at all costs. I dont think taking the hill at kavkazia really would have contributed to that goal. I moved on Point 107 because historically, this was crucial to taking and holding the airfield.

In addition, the troop disposition based on where they dropped and landed also had a lot to do with my strategy. I think taking kavkazia hill would have diverted forces too far south, thus drawing critical manpower away from the primary objectives.

Interesting thought though. Let me know if you end up picking up the game. Play the battle, try a different strategy and write up the AAR. We'll be happy to publish it!!!!

Thanks again for reading and for your feedback!

I will definitely keep that in mind. It might be a minute, but once I purchase the game and try out the Crete scenario, I would look forward to writing up an AAR. My girlfriend has broad editing experience, so she could clean up all of my crappy grammar.

Thanks again.  :bd:






Groggy
10
GrogHeads Feedback / Re: Invasion Crete!
« Last post by Jarhead0331 on December 22, 2018, 09:17:46 PM »
Nice AAR. I always like these early war scenarios. I would be interested to see if you could achieve the same using command ops. They have these scenarios as well in their foothill of the gods pack.

Con

The Crete landings are in the Cauldron set of scenarios, and you know what? I just might give it a shot!
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10