What happened to ATD2?

Discussion relating to Across The Dnepr Second Edition

Moderators: Run5 Staff, SSG Staff

Postby Talos » Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:50 pm

Noakesy wrote:
RalphH wrote:I am looking forward to the Operation Husky scenario. I bet that would make for a great tournament scenario since one should be able to play it in a reasonable time.
I would love to see all of the Decisive Battle Maps made available for the Kharkov engine. I think that may spur people to attempt there own translations of Korsun and TAO to the Kharkov game standards.


Agree 100% :D


It would be fun, but would play substantially different to the original in the db series i believe.

I can see the Herman Goring Pz Regiment being rather lethal under the Kharkov engine. :wink:
User avatar
Talos
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
 
Posts: 755
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 5:59 am
Location: Kent, UK

Postby RalphH » Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:41 am

Any chance that SSG can release the maps to Italy in a Kharkov format? I know that Sicily is done and I am sure that lots of folks would like to play around with scenario creation. I have played with the editor but sadly I do not think that I have what it takes to create scenarios. It would also help bridge the gap to the long awaited ATD2.
RalphH
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:30 pm

Postby Roger Keating » Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:00 am

The maps are simply pictures that can be manipulated by any paint program but I think you mean with data attached which is a bit more complex.

If you would like to get any data related to Italy in a Kharkov format I would advise that you contact me privately on rogerk@ssg.com.au as any request will be specific to a scenario and it will never be done without knowing what it is you are actually doing. The request to 'make Italy Kharkov' is a bit broad.
User avatar
Roger Keating
SSG
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:32 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Abwehr » Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:06 pm

I think he's referring to what you (SSG) commented on earlier: converting stock BiI scenarios to the Kharkov: DotD or ATD 2 engine.

I believe you (SSG) said that Husky was going to be first.
Abwehr
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1041
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:23 am
Location: Arnhem, Gelderland province, the Netherlands

Postby Roger Keating » Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:24 am

From the post I think he is referring to the release of skeleton scenarios that could be taken up by interested members who have the time and desire to convert them to a Kharkov format.

This is possible but only through direct contact with myself. I have the ability to quickly convert any scenario up through the variations as I know all the different formats and changes. It still means that a lot of work is required to get a running Kharkov game but it is definitely the engine I would choose to do any new or updated scenario.

It is also possible that I have completely misread this post and if that is the case then I will listen to any reasonable requests.

It takes a lot of work to produce a Kharkov scenario and just asking SSG to put them on the market, or make them available for download, really is not going to work.
User avatar
Roger Keating
SSG
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:32 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Malak » Thu Jan 07, 2010 7:45 am

I confirm. This is a lot of work, lot of parameters. This is replaying again and again each turn to verify that the outcome is what you want. This is then modifying OOB, AO and AI of each of your armies to adapt them if needed and replay again.

This is fun. This is a game within the game. :D
So be patient. :twisted:

I wish you all a Happy New Year.
Malak
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:35 am

Postby RalphH » Tue Mar 30, 2010 1:20 pm

Looks like ATD2 will be out very soon!!
I think that a Operation Husky tournament would be a great way to kick things off.
On another note; I am muddling though the editor so that I can attempt to convert Novorissisk from Battlefront to Kharkov format.
RalphH
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:30 pm

Postby Abwehr » Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:20 pm

I'm still very curious whether what Husky will be like. In the original Husky, if most of the Italian formations survived the first few turns, it was possible to quickly stop the Allied advance in the hills/mountains. The Allies just didn't have enough forces to break through the hills. With artillery requiring its own dice rolls now, and most artillery being medium to medium-heavy calibre, I have some fears that the Allies will require some impressive artillery rolls to get going.

A tournament would be a good idea, though, as a celebration of the new title.
Abwehr
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1041
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:23 am
Location: Arnhem, Gelderland province, the Netherlands

Postby Noypi53 » Wed Mar 31, 2010 9:49 pm

Could someone please post a quick description of the 3 additional scenarios?

Thanks in advance.
Noypi53
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:04 pm

Postby Abwehr » Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:28 pm

Kirovograd: 12 turn scenario featuring the early 1944 battle of Kirovograd between 2nd Ukrainian Front and 11 divisions of the German 8th Army. Small map, lots of deadly combat. Many German units return as cadres.

Konrad: The scenario includes all Konrads (1/2/3) and includes some variant scenarios including an early Fruehlingserwachen scenario. 18 turns. VP's are gained through controlling objectives on turn 18 and, for the Soviets, by killing the Budapest garrison and 2 Panzer divisions that withdraw later. Medium sized map, with plenty of units for both sides.

Husky 2: No idea really. The original for Battles in Italy was 30 turns long and regiment scale. The confusing thing is that in the Kharkov manual, an example is given of a 4 step US infantry regiment, as well as a 4 step Bersaglieri battalion from the Husky scenario, so I'm not entirely sure what the scale will be. I'm hoping it will be battalion scale.
Abwehr
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1041
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:23 am
Location: Arnhem, Gelderland province, the Netherlands

Postby pete AU » Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:39 am

Noypi53 wrote:Could someone please post a quick description of the 3 additional scenarios?

Thanks in advance.


to elaborate in Konrad


Between 1st Jan and 15th Mar 1945 no fewer than 5 German offensives took place in Hungary – the destruction of the Garam Soviet bridgehead, Spring Awakening and 3 attempts to relieve Budapest. This scenario recreates the 3 major offensives designed to relieve encircled Budapest and recapture the eastern sector of the Margit Line – Operation’s Konrad I,II and III.

Contrary to popular assumption these offensives were not intended to rescue the garrison; but move further forces into Hungary for Hitler’s final stand, however, with a view to giving the Axis player 2 paths to victory – both strategies can be successful in this recreation.

Players familiar with Kharkov will notice a few design elements that are quite different to what they may be used to. I will attempt to clarify them here so you can appreciate the thought process behind them.
1. Only the Budapest Garrison and 8th and 20th Panzer Divisions are worth vp’s if eliminated. The idea here is to allow the Axis player a way to keep a sizable vp total out of Soviet hands and a chance of a victory if he feels he must evacuate Budapest. Budapest is quite valuable, but its capture will only give the Soviets a crushing victory if they reduce the garrison too. The 11th and 20th Panzer Divisions are withdrawn mid-game. By allocating points we can stop the Axis player committing them to destruction before withdrawal and resulting in unlikely last minute offensives. This feature was debated hotly as I know many players like to get points for unit kills, but I hope you can understand the reasoning and the way it makes the Soviet player focus on the objectives rather than taking the easy option of concentrating all forces on the relief and none on the siege.
2. Last turn VP point for objectives. Many locations in this game award vp’s only if held at the end of the game. As you play you will notice a tendency for the Axis to make rapid advances, capturing a lot of territory in a few turns. Generally, by the end of the game, the Soviet player will have recaptured most of these. Last turn only points ensure the Axis fight to keep hold of territory gained and the Soviets race to the more distant locations as the clock runs out – ensuring a well paced game. There are some locations that give a one off vp dump to the Axis if captured. These represent locations that if captured indicate the Axis offensive is going to plan. The big ones (Szentrendre and Erd) were locations that if captured provided an anchor to keep the city open, they are big rewards for difficult objectives and ensure the Soviet player keeps the locations defended to the last – but after the locations fall the Soviets need to reassess their offensive objectives since it’s likely the Budapest ring defence has been broken. There are also 4 supply points on the outskirts of western Budapest. If captured these will supply the garrison after their initial supplies run out. They start off in Soviet hands and it is wise not to lose them once the German breakout is triggered by the approaching relief forces; to do so will make it very hard for the Soviets to reduce Budapest. These locations do not represent a cache of supplies and weapons etc, however, are an indication that the ring around Budapest has been broken and supplies are getting in – either by air now airfields are out of Soviet artillery range or through gaps in the Soviet line.
3. Terrain: The major river is the Danube and is impassable except at fords or bridges. Fords are represented as discoloured river sections and have the same penalties as minor rivers. Some hex sides are rugged and afford the same benefits as the full hex hex side. Play with ‘cliffs’ on to see them easily. The battle took place in snowy conditions; however, I have reserved the white map for periods of heavy ground snow. The top of the map is east.
4. Units: All units are based on a direct comparison to the standard soviet infantry unit and the T-34/76 from Kharkov. Direct armour defence has been given to units equipped with Schurzen and of course, heavy tanks like the IS-II and King Tiger. The comparisons were done with the aid of ASL references and do highlight some interesting differences in the way these units should now be used.
Also included are 5 extra scenarios designed to challenge the experienced player or explore a number of plausible ‘what if’ situations
1. Additional German Forces: 10th SS, 20th Pz, 3rd Kav, 257th VG, 79th VG, 167th VG are available. This assumes that some of the units fed into the Ardennes offensive (to little benefit) were used to bolster the attack in Hungary.
2. Larger German Offensive: 10th SS, 76th and 167th VG at start BUT 20th Pz and 3 Kav are not received. Soviets do not get 104th,122nd,35th gds, 113th and 74th rifle, 23rd Tk Corps. This assumes an earlier Frehlingserwachsen. Including attacks by 2nd Pz armee and Armeegruppe F on the RHS of the map.
3. The soviets prepared:All 18th Tk Corps are set up near Bicske. 32nd Mot Brigade replaced by 10th Gds Rifle. 1st Mech set up west of Danube at Szent Endre. Reinforcements are 1 turn earlier. No german surprise.
4. As above but with surprise (Soviets partially prepared).
5. Operation Paula – main attack from the south (right of map), but fuel problems occur 2 turns earlier and the game ends 2 turns sooner.
An AI is included for the main game only and will be improved over time.

References
The Siege of Budapest – Krisztian Ungvary
Armies of the Bear – Craig Crofoot
Bitter End – Richard Spence
Active Play testers
Roger Keating, Pieter de Jong (Abwher), Andre Noakes (Noaksey), Lewis EW (Talos)
History is an argument without end
Projects - Iskra (available to download), Stalingrad Pocket (ver101 finished and available to download), Guadalcanal (map done), Guadalajara (playtesting - volounteers?), Napoleonic Borodino (volounteers?)
ImageImageImageImage Image Image
User avatar
pete AU
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1273
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 2:07 pm
Location: Australia - Perth

Postby Gregor Whiley » Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:00 am

The Husky scenario is the essence of the old Husky scenario (same map and scale) but updated to the Kharkov engine. So while the OB is more or less the same, artillery is now done Kharkov style, so there are now lots of artillery units on the map. The AI is all new.

One great advantage of the Kharkov system is that the Area of Operations system makes it easy to enforce Monty's operational plan. So in the historical scenario, the US forces are restricted to 'flank security' and then must push north and take Palermo before they are allowed to drive on Messina. Please address all complaints to Monty's estate, not me.

On the other hand, Monty may well have been right in radically altering the original Allied invasion plan, which envisaged widely separated landings over about half the coastline. The original plan is available as variant, and may lead to some very interesting results, especially if the Germans decide to do a Dieppe on the Canadian landings at Gela.

Gregor
Gregor Whiley
Vice President, SSG
www.ssg.com.au
User avatar
Gregor Whiley
SSG
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 10:55 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Abwehr » Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:32 pm

Does the scenario now feature alert triggers? The original has alert units, but no triggers IIRC.

Is HG now closer to the landing beaches, so the Axis can actually counterattack in a historical timeframe should they desire to do so? I guess that with direct attacks, German Panzer units will be a lot more deadly than in the original.

In the variant scenario with the landings across most of the coast instead of the south-east tip of the island, what happens to Italian dispositions, are they the same? The Comando Supremo counted on a landing at the south-east, but there were not enough regular troops to hold it. There were not enough quality troops in general.
Abwehr
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1041
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:23 am
Location: Arnhem, Gelderland province, the Netherlands

Postby Gregor Whiley » Sat Apr 03, 2010 7:37 pm

Abwehr wrote:Does the scenario now feature alert triggers? The original has alert units, but no triggers IIRC.

Is HG now closer to the landing beaches, so the Axis can actually counterattack in a historical timeframe should they desire to do so? I guess that with direct attacks, German Panzer units will be a lot more deadly than in the original.

In the variant scenario with the landings across most of the coast instead of the south-east tip of the island, what happens to Italian dispositions, are they the same? The Comando Supremo counted on a landing at the south-east, but there were not enough regular troops to hold it. There were not enough quality troops in general.


The new Husky has surprise rules, just like the old. The Germans started the battle with the Italians in overall command, and it took them a little while to assert de facto command for themselves.

The variant is an Allied variant, and the Italian positions remain unmodified, since neither they or the Germans had any real clue as to where the landings would take place.

There is an Axis variant in which the unit quality of all sub-standard 3 or 4 step Italian units is improved, this can provide some interesting challenges for the Allies.

Gregor
Gregor Whiley
Vice President, SSG
www.ssg.com.au
User avatar
Gregor Whiley
SSG
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 10:55 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Abwehr » Sat Apr 03, 2010 10:13 pm

And the alert triggers, if any, are they available in both variants or will we still have alert units in the OOB that can't ever appear on the map?

Will the scenario have 30 turns or 39 turns?
Abwehr
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1041
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:23 am
Location: Arnhem, Gelderland province, the Netherlands

PreviousNext

Return to Across The Dnepr - Second Edition Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron