Computer Gaming World Issue 54 - TextFiles.com

to remember after a number of saves as to which ridge line
or pillbox was the prime objective.
(2) Terrain Types. A plethora of terrain types exist for one's
usage. However, nowhere in the documentation is there
any pictorial representation of such types. The documentation
strongly urges the user to go through the design
parameters in order to become familiar with the terrain
types, but this reviewer does not think that a pictorial representation
of such types would have required an inordinate
effort. Even more confusing is that certain terrain types are
the same!—e.g. Pacific wheat (level 3) and high grass {level
1), Pacific clear terrain (levels 1 or 3) or stone buildings
(levels 1 or 3). While a map recon may well serve to
delineate the type of objective, it becomes difficult to remember
them in the aggregate.
(3) Order of Battle. Nowhere in the scenario explanation is
an order of battle given. While this may have been done in
order to have one experience the incomplete intelligence as
to the enemy, this reviewer would have preferred to have an
order of battle. It would have greatly assisted in deciding
how to tailor one's forces in order to maximize command
emphasis.
(4) The Military Misconceptions. One may choose to advance
his units, e.g. across an open area to a building.
However, once the units are spotted or fired upon, they immediately
slow to a cautious advance and are often
rendered hors de combat. While this may occasionally be
true in actual combat, it is idiocy to seek cover in an open
area instead of rushing into a region offering both cover
and concealment.
Terrain is defined in terms of "cover." In military parlance,
terrain offers "cover" and/or "concealment." Concealment
simply reduces one's visibility; cover offers protection from
enemy fire. Since even wheat fields offer "cover" in Typhoon
of Steel, this apparently represents concealment rather than
cover and should be noted as such.
(5) Non-Interchangeability: Typhoon of Steel may not be
readily mixed with Panzer Strike. Thus, one cannot mix Russians
with Japanese in a replay of Khalkin-Gol (the 1937
divisional-level battles wherein the Japanese were
repulsed by General Zhukov's Far Eastern Command).
Random Observations .
(1) HISTORICITY: SSI has done an admirable job of detailing
unit weapons and vehicles down to squad level.
Typhoon of Steel utilizes 50 yards per hex with 20-second
phases and 1 minute turns at the squad level. By comparison,
Kampfgruppe utilized 200 yards per hex with 30second
phases and 2 minute turns at the platoon level.
Weapon ranges from both games are generally comparable
(e.g. Typhoon/Kampfgruppe rifle, 500/400; SMG, 300/200;
HMG, 900/1000; PZIV-G, 2500/2400 yards). As ranges increase,
lethality decreases in an algorithm available in the
documentation for the true grognard.
On a higher level, however, historicity does not appear to
be totally accurate. For example, the Omaha Beach
scenario postulates a landing by the 116th infantry assault
regiment. The scenario postulates a landing by 8 Sherman
DD tanks. Historically, by H +5, there were 16 tanks available.
On Dog White Beach, only 8 got ashore. Thus, if one
utilizes an Order of Battle for H +60, the scenario would
reflect Company G. Yet, the number of squads available in
the game does not correlate with Company G's historically
available manpower (cf. Omaha Beachhead, Center of
Military History, 1984, pp. 44-57). Granted that liberties may
be taken with the OB, it would have been nice to have a little
more explanation as to the who, what, where and how of
the scenarios.
(2) Map Recon: a detailed map walk-through is a must in
order to succeed at Typhoon of Steel. It would have been
nice to have a hard copy option available. At the squad
levels herein, it is incumbent on the commanders to establish
"kill zones" and for squad positions to establish "fields of
fire" and interlocking firepower schematas. In order to do
this, a hard copy map would have been of inestimable
value. Also, it would assist in the playing of a scenario, since
one could note the axis of advance and the intermediate objectives
and phase lines on the offensive. This would
prevent the user from becoming bogged down in a visual information
overload.