Last Stand at the Grain Elevator - Clearing the Grain Elevator

[Vapors]

Hey all, played this scenario a couple of times now. First time locked up on me as I was closing on elevator. 2nd time got to the elevator with most of the Russians broke but for the life of me could not seem to move through it! There is only one entrance next to the bunkers on the right - is that correct? In my first attempt, I tried coming from the left and could not find a way in. Those of you that have won it - how did you manage the grain elevators themselves?

[Simicro]

Originally posted by Vapors:

There is only one entrance next to the bunkers on the right - is that correct?

Correct. Funny thing is that when I played this scenario I had the same question LOL.

Originally posted by Vapors:

how did you manage the grain elevators themselves?

Not sure to understand fully your question but I :

1. Tried to minimize the loss (of course) when advancing the troops.

2. Used most the AFVs and tanks to make a strong attack on the right in order to clear the entrance as much as possible for assault by infantry.

3. Used some of the AFVs and tanks to break or weaken the soviets, especially the leaders, at the middle front of the building. It is important in anticipation of the final fight at the top of the building.

4. Assaulted the gun on the left to kill it, then attacked the soviets at the rear top of the building by throwing TNT.

Of course times is running out fast... that's also the challenge, so you need a bit of luck with the RNG.

It's doable, good luckl mate, and have fun! Let us know whenever you win this one ;)

[Vapors]

Originally posted by Simicro:

Originally posted by Vapors:

There is only one entrance next to the bunkers on the right - is that correct?

Correct. Funny thing is that when I played this scenario I had the same question LOL.

Originally posted by Vapors:

how did you manage the grain elevators themselves?

Not sure to understand fully your question but I :

1. Tried to minimize the loss (of course) when advancing the troops.

2. Used most the AFVs and tanks to make a strong attack on the right in order to clear the entrance as much as possible for assault by infantry.

3. Used some of the AFVs and tanks to break or weaken the soviets, especially the leaders, at the middle front of the building. It is important in anticipation of the final fight at the top of the building.

4. Assaulted the gun on the left to kill it, then attacked the soviets at the rear top of the building by throwing TNT.

Of course times is running out fast... that's also the challenge, so you need a bit of luck also with the RNG.

It's doable, good luckl mate, and have fun! Let us know whenever you win this one ;)

Thanks! You understood me. Only one entrance - confirmed. I appreciate that. I entered the building but could not seem to move any further but I just realized that maybe I missed a stairwell. It is a challenging scenario but fun.

[Simicro]

You are most welcome, mate.

Originally posted by Vapors:

...could not seem to move through it!

Are you aware that you can remove the roof of the building and watch floor by floor by using the TAB key (toogle) ? Also we have the free camera rotation now (middle mouse button and drag).

I'm telling you that because sometimes you cannot enter the building or move to an upper floor because the hex is occupied by one enemy unit and you realize it better by using the TAB key and the free camera rotation. So you have to kill that unit before being able to enter the hex.

[Simicro]

Assuming that the hexs are clear of enemy at the upper floors... : it's difficult to explain but move the motion arrow through the building... at some stage it will point skywards and have the colour of the floor. Then you just need to confirm the move to go upstairs.

[Ivo Shandor]

Flame throwers!!! That how you win! Move them last after the enemy has shot their wad

[SnuggleBunny]

So this is a scenario that requires you to be utterly ruthless with the lives of your men... but not all of your men. Keep the TNT and flamethrower squads alive at all costs. Everyone else is disposable. MMGs try to suppress the Soviet MGs. LMGs move a bit closer to get rid of the long range penalty and do the same. Armored cars move close enough to attract machine gun fire, but not so close as to get wrecked by ATRs. Each turn, all of the regular infantry should move first, soaking in fire. Flame and TNT squads move last, trying to stick to cover - on the right, the wall, then the shrubs, then the second wall, then the wooden buildings. On the left, the building and the ravine.

You can flame or TNT enemies at the top of the grain tower from an adjacent square regardless of elevation (if they remove this the scenario would probably need rebalancing...).

So the first 6-7 turns are all about setup - keep firing with MGs and Stugs, keep getting your regulars mowed down so your assault squads can stay alive and move forward. Once the AT gun is dealt with (whether by infantry fire from the houses, or a costly close assault with armor), you can use a turn to rush everyone adjacent to the back of the building at once, and then use your several tnt satchels and flame blasts to simultaneously rout just about everyone. After that it's a matter of walking in and cleaning up the shredded survivors.

[Daffy&Gwidion]

Originally posted by SnuggleBunny:

You can flame or TNT enemies at the top of the grain tower from an adjacent square regardless of elevation (if they remove this the scenario would probably need rebalancing...).

Actually, the scenario would not need to be rebalanced as the designer, me, never even thought about trying to use the TNT from the base of grain elevator into the top, through windows, and none of his testing had even tried doing that. Typically the front of the elevator was cleared by the support fire and the back be filled with broken units that would be taken under fire by armor that worked its way into firing positions.

@Jo_Beta , Jo, I thought the thrown TNT and FlT height differential was going to be limited to one level.

[pterrok]

A different approach:


Yeah, I tried the Normandy Beach approach as has been described and got close but no cigar. Inside the first hex of the elevator but not enough time/troops to get it all.

So THEN you think, how to do it differently? By NOT a head-long approach!

Back EVERYONE up, so there are only a couple stacks that can take/give fire. Your cars can stay far enough back to shoot a bit, too.

Wait for your reinforcing vehicles. They move forward and try to smoke the bigger positions, BUT from such hexes that you can ALSO use the vehicle smoke dispenser as more smoke for troops to come up behind them. (Have them on the right side as you are likely to be looking at the map as the entrance is around back there.)

Eventually you WILL get some upper levels smoked and enough vehicles that manage to disperse smoke that you can start to run guys forward! And sure are a lot less hits since there is smoke.

Then the FTs and TNTs run along the back line from the left to the right. Either they or others will load onto some of the incoming tanks to get a nice ride in style to the front!

The other thing that came up doing this, is that the AI seemed a bit 'confused' and move way more units out of the grain elevator than it did when I had started advancing right away.

Being out in the open when I DID start the push eventually made them much easier targets.

[Vapors]

Thank you! I will give this a run again using all these approaches to see what works. I came so close once and had the game freeze up but accidentally restarted so I lost my save games. I will let you know how it goes

[El_Globo]

"Actually, the scenario would not need to be rebalanced as the designer, me, never even thought about trying to use the TNT from the base of grain elevator into the top, through windows, and none of his testing had even tried doing that. Typically the front of the elevator was cleared by the support fire and the back be filled with broken units that would be taken under fire by armor that worked its way into firing positions."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

=> I did it on my second run. The first attempt wasn't planned with a overall understanding of the situation and I played dumbly (tried to force the way by rushing amount of squads...). On the second I simply waited for the tanks reinforcement and spared the life of my squads, at the cost of the stupid clockwise timer.... Id did threw some TNT on top of the building, beeing lucky to have some baseball champions in my team. It's gamey but not as much as the way you positionned the grain building on the edge of the map.

Sorry to say, no personal offence, as each scenario designer creates with his own spirit and way he likes to play but some scenarios "packaged" with the game seem to have been made in a way that is very frustrating to play. Sadly two of the ones I tried and disliked have been made by you. It seems like you like to force the player into death traps, like "hide and seek on hill 200" which is nothing but a rat race in a maze, with forced restrained hexes passage which of course have been carefully covered by AT (with OP actual rules regarding their use). To ensure that the player canno't be cautious the game has 5 turns limit. You win on lucky RNG only if you rush and don't loose like 2 or more tanks from memory. Totally unrealistic and frustrating.
For "Last stand on the grain elevator", the scenario itself is interesting, but you positionned the grain building at the edge of the map, with the bunker linked in a manner that you only have one bloody entrance to the building. What I dislike is that you canno't surround the building easily by the rear side, you have to go into a tunneled kill zone with your tanks, at two hexes from AT rifle squads entrenched in the building. I did it this way but it's hard to stack some tanks in the rear, like in a supermarket parking a saturday morning, to shot at the top.
The building should have been centered in the map, allowing the player to surround it. Furthermore the tanks reinforcement should have been available and well positionned at the start of the assault to help the squads at the beginning without losing 3 or more clockwise counter objective turns.
Of course I understandand that the scenario wouldn't have been rated three stars. Certainly many ASL fan club supporters won't like my reviews, but the real question is "how the designer wants the game to be". The way Jo did some rules (like gun high ratio malfunction) and the way ingame scenarios are designed will contribute to the feeling and frustration of the users, and the rating they post on steam for the game. Otherwise the game has great potential but it will depend of the way it evolves.

[Simicro]

Of course it is OK to like or dislike a scenario but let's keep in mind that scenario design is always delicate. Too easy for player X... too hard for player Y...

I did not like either like "Hide and seek on Hill 200" because it has the flavour of a puzzle game.

However, even if it was difficult, I found "Last stand on the grain elevator" interesting. For sure the fortress and its defenders are nasty. So is the distance to achieve to reach them, and the same for the bunker guarding the unique entrance. Time is also an enemy. On the other hand, to counter-balance that, we have tanks and AFVs, quality troops in superior number, a few places where to hide. In the end, for me it was epic, that is long after you can still 'see" in your mind the scenery and the action that occured, especially the final assault.

Yeah I threw the TNT from the ground up to the top floor of the building. I know it is unrealistic and gamey but given the difficulty of the scenario, I'm not complaining :)

I've not particularly observed negative rating of the game on Steam due to scenarios design. But maybe it is subliminal and people don't voice it? Out of 48 scenarios that come default with the game, I find normal that there are a couple of ones that leave a bad souvenir?

[Daffy&Gwidion]

Originally posted by El_Globo:

....Sorry to say, no personal offence, as each scenario designer creates with his own spirit and way he likes to play but some scenarios "packaged" with the game seem to have been made in a way that is very frustrating to play.

Not very much offense taken. However, I do reserve the right to defend my decisions.

As far as spirit goes, my main emphasis is historical accuracy and the Grain Elevator scenario has a remarkably accurate map and is quite true to the history. The landmarks of the battle, from the ditch in front of the elevator, to Station No.2 in the northwest corner, to the beginning of the warehouses in the Food Exchange to the southwest, even the lone standing chimney in front of the elevator are all represented. I would not expect many to notice these details, but I know they are there and hope a few of the students of the war note them sometimes.

As far as player frustration goes, a difficult situation well played should be very satisfying, not frustrating, but, no personal offence, perhaps the player's style of play needs to be a bit more flexible and/or appropriate for the defined situation.

Originally posted by El_Globo:

For "Last stand on the grain elevator", the scenario itself is interesting, but you positionned the grain building at the edge of the map, with the bunker linked in a manner that you only have one bloody entrance to the building. What I dislike is that you canno't surround the building easily by the rear side, you have to go into a tunneled kill zone with your tanks, at two hexes from AT rifle squads entrenched in the building. I did it this way but it's hard to stack some tanks in the rear, like in a supermarket parking a saturday morning, to shot at the top.
The building should have been centered in the map, allowing the player to surround it. Furthermore the tanks reinforcement should have been available and well positionned at the start of the assault to help the squads at the beginning without losing 3 or more clockwise counter objective turns.

Except for the comment on the sceanrio being interesting, you are quite wrong about every comment you made in the statement above.

As for the edge of the map issue you have, two hexes from the edge is fine and not particularly gamey. At the time Jo was asking for smaller maps (file size and physical size) I did not have the luxury of space that you (El Globo) take for those horrible maps you did for AGN. And, just for the record, two hexes is not on the edge and there is cover on that edge to work with, something you might consider for your efforts.

As for the single entrance, that was also historically accurate. If you knew anything about the battle, you would know that the ground level of the elevator was barricaded and blocked with rubble, but for the single entrance. In addition, the outbuilding was fortified by the defenders, hence the bunker.

As for the lack of space in the back, can you guess why I did that... you got it, it is historically accurate. The area between the elevator and the Volga was absolutely devastated and choked with rubble. Infantry could barely work their way through it, vehicles could not. I'm sorry you don't like the tunneled kill zone. Perhaps that is why the defenders historically did exactly what I modeled. It really isn't my problem if you can not figure out how to do a combined arms assault. Sometimes in combat, soldiers are given a sh-- situation and this was one of those. If you don't like it, don't play it, but don't presume to tell me how to do a historical scenario, unless you have some actual knowledge on the subject.

As for the tank deployment. Open a damned book and read instead of complaining. That is how they arrived historically. There is plenty of time to get them deployed, just maybe not exactly they way you would like it done or on your schedule.

Originally posted by Simicro:

Of course it is OK to like or dislike a scenario but let's keep in mind that scenario design is always delicate. Too easy for player X... too hard for player Y...

I did not like either like "Hide and seek on Hill 200" because it has the flavour of a puzzle game.

... [skip] ...

I've not particularly observed negative rating of the game on Steam due to scenarios design. But maybe it is subliminal and people don't voice it? Out of 48 scenarios that come default with the game, I find normal that there are a couple of ones that leave a bad souvenir?

You are spot on Simicro regarding the delicate balance. I'd add player expectation to the list. El Globo seems to want the entire package delivered to him on a silver platter. His AGN scenarios reflect that quite well. As for negative ratings and reviews go, I've got no problem doing that and I think I know where to start.

As for "Hill 200", I did not like that scenario either. However, it was a specific request by Jo ("do a tank only breakthrough scenario"). It was a first class b---h (took me a day and a half) to find a historical situation. When the boss says "jump", I respond "How high sir?". It turned out so gamey because in the historical situation, the Germans were ordered to avoid contact and get north fast.

I also had a bad taste for several of the scenarios that ended up in the 48. Check out some of my early AAR posts from Discord (I think they are still available). I really have a big problem with hypothetical situations (too contrived) and bad history (sloppy design) and that is where most of my complaints stem from. But then, I like beating my head against a tough scenario until I work it out. And that is what I call fun.

[El_Globo]

And you said you were not offended.... Many of your comments and subjective statements are more hostile than mines.

"I did not have the luxury of space that you (El Globo) take for those horrible maps you did for AGN" => It's curious how ASL worshippers don't like maps that have LOS > 2 hexes. Some of my maps are fictive, some are based on real geographical datas. And many are much more complete and filled with details than many ASL chess like formatted types I've seen (Daugavpils, Dudenhorf, etc). For the terrain open ground was common. Perharps it is why it doesn't fit too much with the mechanic of this game. So "horrible" could be applied to many adaptations of ASL scenarios with 3 houses, 2 fields on a 10x10 map.

For Grain Elevator I didn't complained about historical setup and pretended anything about that. I just said it would have be more flexible to have a few hexes behind, even with rubble difficulty and limited path for tanks. Grain elevator is about 700/800m from the Volga, so with a scale of 28m an hexe it could have been "historical" if it is all about. If Jo wanted small map I got it, but no need to be so hostile and upset.

"don't presume to tell me how to do a historical scenario, unless you have some actual knowledge on the subject" => It wasn't the case and you don't know me too, so keep your statement for yourself.

"El Globo seems to want the entire package delivered to him on a silver platter. His AGN scenarios reflect that quite well." => Not sure to understand correectly this... If it's about (un)balance of forces, it's difficult in the current state of the game to reflect the situation and historical outcome of early Barbarossa. German achieved great victories with somehow poor material. But they had combined support that is currently unavailable in the game.
That will be all for me, I won't waste my time with you anymore.

[Daffy&Gwidion]

Originally posted by El_Globo:

And you said you were not offended.... Many of your comments and subjective statements are more hostile than mines.

I said that I was not very offended. I was offended, just not a great deal. When I respond to someone with whom I disagree, I try to be very direct and clear, if that is hostile, so be it.

Originally posted by El_Globo:

[Regarding maps...] So "horrible" could be applied to many adaptations of ASL scenarios with 3 houses, 2 fields on a 10x10 map.

Excellent, something we agree on. Many of the maps that were produced in February were terrible.

Originally posted by El_Globo:

For Grain Elevator [... snip ...] I just said it would have be more flexible to have a few hexes behind, even with rubble difficulty and limited path for tanks. Grain elevator is about 700/800m from the Volga, so with a scale of 28m an hexe it could have been "historical" if it is all about. If Jo wanted small map I got it, but no need to be so hostile and upset.

Interesting philosophy you have there - If it (a map, a situation, a game) doesn't fit with a preconceived, and potentially erroneous, assumptions, then just change it. That works for many, probably most, but I try to respect the history a bit more than that. This trait seems quite fungible for many wargamers. That is where much of my hostility stems from.

Originally posted by El_Globo:

"El Globo seems to want the entire package delivered to him on a silver platter. His AGN scenarios reflect that quite well." => Not sure to understand correectly this... If it's about (un)balance of forces, it's difficult in the current state of the game to reflect the situation and historical outcome of early Barbarossa. German achieved great victories with somehow poor material. But they had combined support that is currently unavailable in the game.

I believe you understood quite correctly what I was saying. Originally I didn't bother playing your AGN series because I knew it would be a waste of time. So, in an attempt to be fair, I did your NAG01 scenario today. As expected, I found it to be incredibly dull and tedious. It was obviously ahistorical since the situation had nothing to do with what 1st Panzer Division was doing on June 22 (urban fighting for Tauroggen). The map was pedestrian and in no way represented what the Lithuanian border area looked like (rolling terrain with scattered wood lots - not a billiard table). The OB selected was a highly contrived fantasy. The situation was a very simple assault with overwhelming forces - dull and not a challenge. If your goal was to show the German Wehrmacht as an unstoppable juggernaut, you succeeded. If your goal had anything to do with history, say showing a situation where despite not having overwhelming forces, they could achieve victories, you failed. This is the type of nonsense that I find so irritating. It is lazy design work and shows a complete inability to make an interesting and taught situation. Blaming the system, SF in this case, is just despicable. Try playing your damned scenarios a few times, triming the OB or the turn limit to make it interesting and challenging.

Originally posted by El_Globo:

That will be all for me, I won't waste my time with you anymore.

A real pity. If you don't want to learn, by all means, don't waste your precious time in discussion with me.

[Cmdr_Ripster]

Proud designers - YES! - This is a great game! Keep up the good work. It's all good! I'm loving it!

Some history for the interested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3pMF_8ik6A