Oleg's TOAW HQ

This site hasn't been maintained for years, and most probably will never be. Sorry. What's available is available and that's it. I still do play TOAW sometimes, so if you feel in the mood for some PBEM-ing feel free to send me your challenge. Meanwhile, games I play, recommend and/or await eagerly are: Uncommon Valor, War in the Pacific, Battlefields!, Dangerous Waters...

The Operational Art of War 1939-1955 (TOAW) is wargame on the operational level, designed by Norm Koger, and published by Talonsoft. If you wish to know more, and maybe try out the game for yourself - go see the links at the bottom of this page. Oleg's TOAW HQ is mainly aimed at those that know the game well, and play it a lot, especially PBEM. I believe there are few groups of visitors that may be interested in contents of this site:

- PBEM gamers, seeking a good scenario for PBEM play (not all scenarios are well suited for PBEM, for various reasons)

- both PBEM and solo players, wishing to find out different strategies, and "what if"-s for certain scenario, without trying them all by themselves

- PBEM players, looking for a favorable result in a PBEM game against a crafty opponent :o)

- scenario designers, looking for some quality playtesting, or wishing to improve their scenarios

At first - I wasn't sure myself that such site has any sense at all. "What is there to know about scenario and corresponding strategy?" - I thought - "There are not many ways to succesfully fight a certain scenario!". That was in the period when I played only against PO (programmed opponent, or AI, or the computer). I was wrong, and I found it out by playing a lot of PBEM games myself, and also reading other players' games resumes on the web. In this aspect - especially Holger Wilcks' site was very interesting, and I'm not ashamed to say that Oleg's TOAW HQ was directly inspired by it.

Actually, there ARE many, many different strategies for the same scenario, depending on many, many different factors, and it happens to be one of the many fine points of this game. Here, I present resumes of the games I played… some gamers call them After Action Reports (AAR).

I respect privacy, and will NEVER name my opponents in AARs, regardless of the game outcome! Of course, unless some of them specifically want me to do so :o)

Each AAR is equipped with scenario map, in JPEG format, in two versions - small and large. Map JPEGs are huuuge files (large versions of the map often over 1 MB), so, please, do yourself (and me, too) a favor, and don't download them unless you really, really need them. Of course, maps are without units, just terrain, so - no "spoilers" or unfairness there... Maps in such format are actually of no great use, but since on the Talonsoft board there was "popular demand" for them, and I'm able to export them using perhaps only commercial software capable of recognising TOAW metafile format (Corel Draw) - I decided to put them here. If you have a possibility of printing them on color printer (laser color is preferable) they may be of some use.

Each AAR has a "printable version". Actually, it's the HTML page same as "original", only made without web background, and with black letters on white background, so it's easy to read, when printed. (Well, some presumption! Will anyone actually want to print out and read those AARs!? :o))

Here we go… table of games - click on the scenario name to view corresponding AAR…

game no.	scenario	played as	outcome (-3 to +3)	balance (-3 to +3)	scenario rating (1-10)	game rating (enjoyment) (1-10)
1	Kreta 41	German	sig.def. (-2)	-2 British +2	2	4
2	Northern Burma 44	Allied	over.vic. (+3)	+3 Japanese -3	7	5
3	Korsun 44	Soviets	over.vic. (+3)	+1 German -1	7	9
4	Stalingrad 42-43 (v1.3)	Soviets	over.vic. (+3)	+2 German -2	5	6
5	Crusader 41	Axis	over.vic. (+3)	-1 British +1	7	10
6	France 40	German	over.vic. (+3)	+1 Allies -1	8	10
7	Kasserine 43	Axis	over.vic. (+3)	+2 Allies -2	7	7
8	Crusader 41	British	over.vic. (+3)	+1 Axis -1	7	10
9	Sidi Barrani 41	Italian	over.def. (-3)	-2 British +2	8	5
10	Fulda 55	Warsaw Pact	marg.vic. (+1)	+1 NATO -1	8	9
11	Patton 45 (modified)	Soviets	draw (0)	+1 American -1	6	6
game no.	scenario	played as	outcome (-3 to +3)	balance (-3 to +3)	scenario rating (1-10)	game rating (enjoyment) (1-10)

played as - which side I played in PBEM
outcome - final result, where -3 represents overwhelming defeat, -2 significant defeat, -1 marginal defeat, 0 draw, +1 marginal victory, +2 significant victory, and finally +3 overwhelming victory
balance - this is my (personal and subjective) judgement of scenario balance, in other words - what result is to be expected in a game (theoretically); rating is given from the point of view of side I played in that game (example: if I played Germans, and scenario heavily favors Allied side - rating would be -3, but from Allied perspective - it would be totally opposite: balance would be rated as +3). This column is scenario dependent (not game dependent, or opponent dependent) - ie. if I played 6 games of Crusader 41, against 6 different opponents - balance rating would be the same in all of them, as long as the scenario is the same. If the final outcome is higher than balance rating - it means I played that particular game well (read the AAR and learn from The Master :o)), if it is lower - I sucked (so - go read the AAR, and don't do what Oleg The Sucker did), simple as that :o)
scenario rating - this is my personal rating of scenario quality, personal judgement of how good scenario is done, regarding all sorts of things - historical data, map, overall quality of scenario briefing, assigned equipment, events, possible typos in briefing or map or unit names, bugs… This is also rating of how well the scenario represents the battle in question (and all possible events surrounding the battle, too), and how well scenario uses game engine. Please note - this has nothing to do with how much I enjoyed playing that scenario PBEM or solo, or how balanced, or suited for PBEM scenario is. Example: Northern Burma is, as far as I can tell, reasonably well researched and well done scenario. It's totally unsuited for PBEM, though, because Japanese don't have a slightest of chances, but this is not rated in this column (see the AAR to see why you shouldn't choose this scenario for PBEM). This column is scenario dependent, not game dependent.
game rating (enjoyment) - this is how much I enjoyed this particular game. This rating is not scenario dependent, but rather game dependent - ie. if I played 6 games of Korsun 44, against 4 different opponents - it's possible to have 6 different ratings. Of course - this is highly subjective rating, but is also perhaps the best as guide for choosing fun and enjoyable PBEM scenarios. You'll see that it's no great fun (although it is fun) winning highly unbalanced scenarios, but also that some scenarios are fun to play PBEM, even if I didn't win. Funny, though - I tend to give higher "enjoyment" marks to games I won… :o)

Details are explained on the corresponding pages, so I suggest you go and read them by clicking on the scenario name…

Some assorted TOAW links:

If you want to know more about me, Oleg Mastruko, creator of these pages:
- Oleg Home Page

Of course, best page to find more about TOAW, with TOAW demo version available for you to try out:
- Talonsoft, the publishers of this game

Norm Koger, programmer and designer of TOAW, has his private web with some additional info:
- Norm Koger TOAW page

Holger Wilcks made his TOAW PBEM pages, that actually inspired me to do the same:
- Planet Holger

Rugged Defense - wargame PBEM club with comprehensive section about TOAW:
- Rugged Defense

No Panzers, Please - Michael Peters' site, dedicated to pre-1939 TOAW scenarios and info:
- No Panzers, Please

Hell in a Very Small Place - Peter D'Adamo's site, dedicated mainly to his own (in my opinion, very good and excellent) scenarios:
- Hell in a Small Place

- 16.2.1999. - Crusader 41 AAR added
- 30.1.1999. - Stalingrad 42-43 AAR added
- 30.1.1999. - finished Patton 45, added in table
- 30.1.1999. - finished Fulda 55, added in table
- 15.1.1999. - Korsun 44 AAR added
- 15.1.1999. - finished Sidi Barrani 41, added in table
- 10.1.1999. - Burma 44 AAR added
- 1.1.1999. - first AAR added (Kreta 41)

Copyright 1998-1999 Oleg Mastruko (yeah, that's me on a cartoon above). Contents of Oleg's TOAW HQ may not be copied, reproduced, printed or published on the web or paper or wherever without my prior consent.

This site uses CSS, and strict version of HTML 4.0. It has been checked in IE 4.0, and Netscape Navigator 4.x. If you use anything else, and especially a browser that does not understand CSS - expect to see all kinds of garbage... One more thing: Netscape sucks. It interprets just about every standard from the world of Web in its own little manner. Please, use MS IE, not because it's MS IE, but because it's the only browser that's not Netscape. These pages look so much better in IE - not because my intention was for these pages to look better in IE, but because IE interprets and presents stuff like it should be interpreted and presented, and Netscape does not. Thanks.