Operational game to go with CMFI?

[Tactical Wargamer]

Our little LAN group is closing up its CMBN Sword operational game using the board wargame Battle for Normandy. Any Sicily/Tunisia board/PC wargames you can recommend that would be conducive to an operational level game?

Thanks guys!

[JonS]

Our little LAN group is closing up its CMBN Sword operational game using the board wargame Battle for Normandy.

Neat! Is there any chance of a highlevel AAR or rundown of how it went, both technically (ie, how well the campaign ran) and tactically (how well each side did in meeting their objectives)? I'd be really interested in that

[Broadsword56]

Our little LAN group is closing up its CMBN Sword operational game using the board wargame Battle for Normandy. Any Sicily/Tunisia board/PC wargames you can recommend that would be conducive to an operational level game?

Thanks guys!

This isn't to answer your question, RCMP, but...

How about posting something over on the CMBN forum to share with us how your Sword campaign went? How was your experience playing with an op layer? How did you go about converting results between layers? Was it fun? Any highlights?

[JonS]

Any Sicily/Tunisia board/PC wargames you can recommend that would be conducive to an operational level game?

HPS:SIMS Panzer Campaigns has a Sicily module. I *think* they might have a Tunisian module too - there was some talk about that a while ago, but I lost track.

There is the boardgame Decision At Kasserine, which would probably make a lovely base for a CM campaign (although some of the toys you'd need are missing - no Grants, for one. Edit: The Brits and French are missing too)

[Tactical Wargamer]

It was fun thanks guys!

Just had 4-5 players that we LAN with on a regular basis. We would hotseat for the evening, & setup with PBEM to continue the battles that were large and would take longer than 4 hours of RL time we had.... Had to go home to our wives eventually!

Any battles that were not too close or exciting we just computed using the CRT's. The game is at the Battalion level so it wasn't too hard to translate units into CMBN OOB's. Found some excellent sources (and from the forums) on the German OOB's for the counters in Battle for Normandy (GMT) using VASSAL operational map displayed on the 60" Had some pencil and paper for some losses but usually just went with step loses on the operational map and converted them to losses in CMBN.

Some battles were huge 3+ CDN battalions in a 2x2 km hex was fun. We were amazed with the ARTY that was able to called in!! Had a great time. Just fighting outside of CAEN with the big bad 12SS. Man chewing up the Shermans.....but they just keep coming.

[Tactical Wargamer]

Thanks Jon I will try to find a copy of it on Vassal. Hey do you have a copy?

[JonS]

Of DAK? No, unfortunately. A school friend did when I was a nipper, and I remember it being a really good game. A quick noodle showed a reasonable number available 2nd hand, although they're a bit spendy. I've no idea if there's a VASSAL kit for it.

I don't have PzC:Sicily either, but I do have some of the othergames in the series. They're pretty good, especially as a campaign base (see n00b's posts on that) but you'll need to check the OoB really carefully - HPS can be a bit slipshod there.

[Erwin]

The old Avalon Hill board game ANZIO comes to mind as well.

There have been numerousl Sicily and Italian theater board games. Check out boardgamegeek.com and search.

Also current companies like GMT, Columbia, Decision Games, http://www.multimanpublishing.com/ and there are many other smaller outfits etc.

[Broadsword56]

If you liked GMT's Battle for Normandy, there's Battle for Sicily, using the same system, open for preorder, and coming out eventually. Battalion scale, really nice map, and it covers the entire island:

http://www.gmtgames.com/p-354-the-battle-for-sicily.aspx

The other one I have my eye on for when it preorders/publishes is Consim Press' revamping of the 1970s highly regarded monster, Avalanche, which will cover Salerno at battalion scale:

http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?8@@.1dd59cd4

[noob]

I have PzC Sicily '43, and i am in the process of preparing a scenario from it to play as an umpired operation in conjunction with CMFI.

What i will be doing is creating an Allied and Axis thread on the CMFI forum, then i will post screenshots of the operational map with a terrain key and an elevation key, the maps will also show the OOB's of each friendly occupied hex, any visible enemy units, victory objectives, and each unit types maximum move distance for each turn.

There will be no CO's, the operational moves will be determined by anyone who wants to put their ideas forward, then if a single plan comes out of the discussions generated, i will perform the operational moves on my version of PzC Sicily 43, if there is a split between plans, there can be a vote, if that is inconclusive, i will flip a coin.

(As all CM battles will be PBEM games, any players wishing to play an operational CM battle will need to be able to generate at least one turn a day).

When a CM battle is created, i would want each side to nominate a player to play it, and also to produce a DAR, if the player wins the battle they get to play another one, however, if a player loses, that player can be replaced for the next battle if that is what the team decides.

As all members of the BF forum will have access to both sides, FOW will be maintained by the integrity of the participants, however if the Allies peek, then we can put that down to Ultra, and if the Axis peek, we can assume the Abwehr have finally got their act together

The scenario i have in mind is the Herman Goering Divisions attack on the Allied landings at Gela, the reason i chose this is because of the interesting OOB's, and the unique nature of this particular engagement.

I have been looking at the QB maps for CMFI and i have found a few that will suit the PzC scenario i am using.

I am currently building the CMFI OOB's of all the units that are going to participate, this OOB will be used to track combat effects, and each side will have access to their sides CM OOB to check the status of each unit, the OOB's will be available via a public dropbox that i will put a link to in my signature when the time comes.

I hope to get this "open" operation started next week.

[Sergei]

Have you given Advance Wars a try yet?

[Double Deuce]

I have PzC Sicily '43, and i am in the process of preparing a scenario from it to play as an umpired operation in conjunction with CMFI.

I know that there are a section of players who just prefer to play against the AI. Have you considered using this format but with a group playing a team game against the AI where you handle the operational side of things for everyone along with the enemy's movements but letting each player command say their own company? Basically it would sort of be a game of continuous scenarios/quick-battles but players would keep their command for the duration and follow it through the campaign? I did this many times before over the years using Steel Panthers and players seemed to enjoy the small custom battles while leading their men through what essentially becomes a custom designed operation.

[noob]

I know that there are a section of players who just prefer to play against the AI. Have you considered using this format but with a group playing a team game against the AI where you handle the operational side of things for everyone along with the enemy's movements but letting each player command say their own company? Basically it would sort of be a game of continuous scenarios/quick-battles but players would keep their command for the duration and follow it through the campaign? I did this many times before over the years using Steel Panthers and players seemed to enjoy the small custom battles while leading their men through what essentially becomes a custom designed operation.

Interesting, but wouldn't that mean i would have to create AI plans for the CM battles that would be generated ?

[Blazing 88's]

I know that there are a section of players who just prefer to play against the AI. Have you considered using this format but with a group playing a team game against the AI where you handle the operational side of things for everyone along with the enemy's movements but letting each player command say their own company? Basically it would sort of be a game of continuous scenarios/quick-battles but players would keep their command for the duration and follow it through the campaign? I did this many times before over the years using Steel Panthers and players seemed to enjoy the small custom battles while leading their men through what essentially becomes a custom designed operation.

That sounds like a good idea.

Ahhhh Steel Panthers, I really enjoyed that game. SPWaW was / is terrific. The Meta campaigns are a blast. I fire SPWaW up every once in a while just for nostalgia purposes, SPMBTwin as well. Quality games especially for being free now.

[Double Deuce]

Interesting, but wouldn't that mean i would have to create AI plans for the CM battles that would be generated ?

Yes, I believe that would be necessary which would obviously add a pretty good amount of work onto the GM. I admit I am pretty rusty with CM having not played for some time but with the Map Editor now available in CMFI I have been revisiting running an umpired game in that type of format.

[noob]

Yes, I believe that would be necessary which would obviously add a pretty good amount of work onto the GM. I admit I am pretty rusty with CM having not played for some time but with the Map Editor now available in CMFI I have been revisiting running an umpired game in that format.

I'm not a big fan of the AI in any of the wargames i've played, and CM is no exception, IMO it would be too big a task to make them effective against human players, and that's something i haven't got the time, or the inclination to do, however you sound eminently qualified to do it

[Double Deuce]

I'm not a big fan of the AI in any of the wargames i've played, and CM is no exception, IMO it would be too big a task to make them effective against human players, and that's something i haven't got the time, or the inclination to do, however you sound eminently qualified to do it

The AI will never be up to par as far as playing against another Human but most players shy away from battles they see as unbalanced, especially those who are into bragging rights and ladders. That usually runs off prospective players into any multi-player campaign. I ran into the same obstacles using Steel Panthers but when I switched to a Player vs AI format I found that the players seemed to enjoy it much more and they also helped me with ideas in advancing the overall storyline. We also were not effected by players dropping out or slow PbeM turn rates.

If its is OK with you, I think I might review your CMx2 H2H Campaigns docs and see if I can morph parts of it in my existing system I use with Steel Panthers and come up with a new CM based Player vs AI system.

[76mm]

I'm also working on some kind of operational layer, but only for the Russian Front. I've been playing around with the Panzer Campaigns data, scenario, and save game files, and you can really do quite a bit with them.

I think noob's sistem is interesting, but for me it is pretty important NOT to have to play every operational battle in CM, so I'm looking at ways to do that.

[Double Deuce]

I looked at using TOAW but it didn't go into enough detail so I ended up using spreadsheets to supplement it. A real bookkeeping nightmare right there.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

“I think noob's sistem is interesting, but for me it is pretty important NOT to have to play every operational battle in CM, so I'm looking at ways to do that."

I agreed... I have developed such a system. I also think it essential to mix-up an operational game that can be resolved entirely at the operational level if people wish with the option to resolve any particular contact battle at the CM level and then apply the results back to the operational level. A bit of a mouthful but you will understand what I mean .

The system I use is that developed by T N Dupuy. From some people he gets a lot of stick, but I do rate his system. He is the father of all operational wargaming having collected huge amounts of data and then developed formulas to predict outcomes at the operation level of war. Google the guy and you will see what I mean. He uses school boy maths but that is all it takes.

Anyway.... his method predicts attacker’s casualties, defender’s casualties and distance advanced if any. Because his method is to “predict...” I add a final die roll with the centre of the range of outcomes being his prediction. In a wargame we do not want “prefect prediction...” as in real life there is also a wide range of outcomes. His prediction just being the central point in that range..

If you are interested I will send you an explanation, with rough tables, of how to do this stuff. If you sit down and read through it carefully, as if reading a badly written text book in your school days, you will be able to follow things just fine .

Anyone interested in the stuff just email me....

All the best,

Kip.

PS. BTW as some of you may know, there “may...” be a guy developing an operational layer for CMX2 as we speak. I mean real operational layer, a commercial companion game. He cropped up on the Mods forum to recruit programmers then disappeared as quickly. Had official permission from Steve.

PPS. My preferred option is to use Panzer Campaigns to track and manoeuvre units, with operational clashes determined using Dupuy. But until we have a real operational layer... there is no perfect solution.. I use Dupuy because he gives historically accurate outcomes for the operational clashes.

[noob]

If its is OK with you, I think I might review your CMx2 H2H Campaigns docs and see if I can morph parts of it in my existing system I use with Steel Panthers and come up with a new CM based Player vs AI system.

The CMPC operational DAR i am posting on the forum will be used as a beta test of the rules set i am working on, and as you can see i already changed a couple of rules after the first couple of operational turns, so much so that i have had to start the operation again, so there aren't really any documents as such, i want to use the DAR as a way of refining them and hopefully, once the operation is over, there will be a definitive system, the only document that i would distribute at the moment would be the one below:

[Tactical Wargamer]

Ah brings back the days of CMC

[Double Deuce]

The CMPC operational DAR i am posting on the forum will be used as a beta test of the rules set i am working on

Cool, I was wondering how you were going to handle the unit headcounts/strengths once they fall below 50%

[Rake]

Have you given Advance Wars a try yet?

Nice looking map... where's Mario?

[noob]

Cool, I was wondering how you were going to handle the unit headcounts/strengths once they fall below 50%

I posted the wrong text file, this is an amended one because for recently i found out that if you split the operational forces into two .btt files, one removes the other when imported into a scenario, therefore the operational OOB has to be one file with containing all the forces involved.