CMRT Campaign - Kampfgruppe "von Schroif"

[George MC]

15 hours ago, Chudacabra said:

I've been busy with work, but just got started on the third mission and it is a tough one so far. The map is wonderful. So far I think this is possibly the finest CM campaign I've played. Amazing work as usual!

Now if we can just get a George MC CMBS campaign...

He! Thanks very much

CMBS campaign yeah I've been mulling that one over...

[George MC]

7 hours ago, [MyIS] Buffpuff said:

Yeah that was the first thing I noticed. The PDF file is just damn right genius if you ask me. I'm looking forward to starting this once I get done with my trip down Montebourg Lane.

Thanks  TBH this was a project whithin a project! I'm hoping it helps players manage the campaign and creates a suitably immersive atmosphere - caring for your little digital guys in this campaign greatly helps the chance of success!

Cheery!

[Warts 'n' all]

I think that Georges' pdf is Pretty Damn Funky!

[grunt_GI]

@George MC

Sorry if you have this posted somewhere, but how many scenarios in this campaign?

[George MC]

6 hours ago, grunt_GI said:

@George MC

Sorry if you have this posted somewhere, but how many scenarios in this campaign?

Depends on which branch you take. If you download the zip file there is a pDF which shows the branching route. IIRC it's around six scenarios straight - if you manage to keep on one of the optimum routes - but with all the branches there are around 12 or so. It all depends on how things pan out during each mission.

[Silentotto41]

Really enjoying this. An incredible level of detail/effort went into it - thank you.

 I'm just starting the 3rd mission (3b Angriff gegen einen Brueckenkopf). In the pdf copy of the mission briefing I'm told that I have 3 King Tigers from the 501st but in the mission briefing on my PC it doesn't discuss the King Tigers and more importantly they are not on the map. Should I expect them or was it a typo in the mission briefing? Thanks.

Edited May 8, 2016 by Silentotto41

[George MC]

Hi @Silentotto41

Glad you are enjoying it - good to hear thanks.

Re the briefing - it's a wee typo error with the briefing in the PDF. You don't get any large chaps for this one - mainly because you're doing well so far and the Tigers are still wallowing on the sandy roads to your rear. I've updated the PDF and asked @Bootie to update the file at TSDIII.

So you are all good. Be keen to hear who this plays out for you. This is the pivotal battle - so good luck

Thanks for spotting this and letting me know.

Cheery!

ps temporary link to updated PDF

Edited May 9, 2016 by George MC

[Silentotto41]

Thanks George - as I had feared....no Tigers to help win this key battle. I'll have to rely on the excellent tactics of Von Schroif

[George MC]

8 hours ago, Silentotto41 said:

Thanks George - as I had feared....no Tigers to help win this key battle. I'll have to rely on the excellent tactics of Von Schroif

I think if you need the Tigers then that means your attack progress has been slower and more problematic than envisaged, giving these heavy beasts time to catch up (the roads are generally dire in this part of the world in 1944); therefore the Soviets know what you are up to and where you are; they've had time to prepare...

Trust me - at the moment - you are in a better place relying on von Schroif's excellent tactics  

[Redmarkus]

On 18/04/2016 at 8:03 PM, Redmarkus said:

 

Just found time to play the first battle in this truly excellent campaign. The scale is exactly what I had hoped for, and the map is a work of art.

However, I must be missing something. With 15 minutes remaining in battle #1, I had knocked out all of the Soviet tanks (I think), one armoured car, an AT gun and a good quantity of infantry for the loss of only 4 PzGrs and zero vehicles. All objectives/touch points had also been taken. I abandoned the touch points but I have tanks and infantry in strength sitting on both objectives.

However, I only scored a 'Draw' result, which was rather disheartening. Short of searching the woods for more enemy infantry and one armoured car I spotted running away, I'm not sure how else to improve my score...

Any suggestions?

[George MC]

1 hour ago, Redmarkus said:

Just found time to play the first battle in this truly excellent campaign. The scale is exactly what I had hoped for, and the map is a work of art.

However, I must be missing something. With 15 minutes remaining in battle #1, I had knocked out all of the Soviet tanks (I think), one armoured car, an AT gun and a good quantity of infantry for the loss of only 4 PzGrs and zero vehicles. All objectives/touch points had also been taken. I abandoned the touch points but I have tanks and infantry in strength sitting on both objectives.

However, I only scored a 'Draw' result, which was rather disheartening. Short of searching the woods for more enemy infantry and one armoured car I spotted running away, I'm not sure how else to improve my score...

Any suggestions?

Simples  Don't get spotted... Or at least not everything. 

Jesting aside that was excellent going with your losses. However to 'win' this you do need to grab everything and have as few of your units ID'd as you can.

In saying that I would not be downhearted as technically you 'win' this you go onto a slightly different timeline - and more importantly you have your force pretty much intact. The thing that will start to hurt as this goes on are panzergrenadier losses. So watch them and use they wisely. You can easily get back on track via the next mission (assuming you win it).

SPOILERS (highlight to see)

Looking at what you ko'd you missed two armoured cars - they follow an AI Plan that puts them in good observation points. So could be they spotted all your units hence the Soviets get a larger score.

The challenge with this one is KO'd the Soviet units, capture the objectives and avoiding being spotted - or more precisely the majority of your unit being spotted. This is stated in the brief and in the OP Map - "avoid German units being spotted by Soviet units". It's a toughie but doable. I lead with the same units - so they get spotted - but they do the heavy lifting. Everyone else hangs back and supports by fire. You have two scout teams and sniper team. I'd advance with them, everyone else back, spot units, try to pin em (artillery fire does the job) then take em out.

Hope the above helps. In anycase glad you enjoyed the first mission and hope you enjoy the others as well.

Cheery! 

Edited May 14, 2016 by George MC

[Redmarkus]

37 minutes ago, George MC said:

Simples  Don't get spotted...

Ah... I missed that point. I only have to odd chance to play and I tend to just jump in without reading the full briefing.

Here's my final result. Is this good enough to push on, or should I replay the battle?

[George MC]

Hi @Redmarkus I'd push on TBH - you took very few casualties (none that will make any odds) - so all is good in that regard.

If you check out the PDF (in the zipped campaign folder) you'll see a flowchart that shows you where you will end up. In your case your timeline slips and the Soviets know you are coming.

But you are still slightly in their decision cycle, so they won't be all that prepared, so all is still good - for now.

[Redmarkus]

1 minute ago, George MC said:

Hi @Redmarkus I'd push on TBH - you took very few casualties (none that will make any odds) - so all is good in that regard.

If you check out the PDF (in the zipped campaign folder) you'll see a flowchart that shows you where you will end up. In your case your timeline slips and the Soviets know you are coming.

But you are still slightly in their decision cycle, so they won't be all that prepared, so all is still good - for now.

Ta! Will give it a go. Sounds like I need to expect poorly coordinated flank attacks by T34s...

[George MC]

10 minutes ago, Redmarkus said:

Ta! Will give it a go. Sounds like I need to expect poorly coordinated flank attacks by T34s...

Maybe...  Or...?

Best of luck anyways

[Redmarkus]

2 hours ago, George MC said:

Maybe...  Or...?

Best of luck anyways

Badly knocked about by one invincible 45mm AT gun... I think this one is out of my league...

[George MC]

22 hours ago, Redmarkus said:

Badly knocked about by one invincible 45mm AT gun... I think this one is out of my league...

Sorry to hear that ?

Aye it does get tougher....

[Silentotto41]

I was optimistic until the 3rd mission - I'm about 45 minutes in and it is a TOUGH fight. Still enjoying it though, I love a good challenge!

[George MC]

12 minutes ago, Silentotto41 said:

I was optimistic until the 3rd mission - I'm about 45 minutes in and it is a TOUGH fight. Still enjoying it though, I love a good challenge!

Aye it is tough. Slowly, slowly does it. ?

Get through this though and the road ahead is nice and clear. For a while. 

[[MyIS] Buffpuff]

Almost done with my Road to Montebourg trip and I'll be going to this campaign next George. Any helpful hints that don't give away too much information you care to share?

[Redmarkus]

23 hours ago, George MC said:

Sorry to hear that ?

Aye it does get tougher....

So I've been giving this some thought. What I certainly don't want to do is disrespect the energy and devotion you put into creating your wonderful scenarios and campaigns. So, this is certainly not intended as criticism. What I do want to explain are the things I personally look for in any CM action. I might be the only one with this mindset, so please just take is as one man's chain of thought.

As a former rifle company OC, my recollection of training and ops 35 years ago (some of my senior officers at that time were WW2 vets), is that the tactical situations we were required to assess were relatively straight forward; the enemy is dug in on that hill in platoon strength. Are you going right flanking, left flanking or straight up the middle? What's your fire support plan? How will you employ your attached elements?

A campaign was a series of such actions, taking various forms; advance to contact, hasty attack, reconnaissance patrols, ambush/fighting patrols, defensive night actions, deliberate attack, breakthrough and pursuit. The actions themselves were simple; suppress and close, reorganise, defend the ground taken. The complexity arose when attrition and low morale took effect, or when ammunition ran low while objectives still needed to be taken.

I guess that what I personally seek from any campaign in CM is a series of smaller actions that form a part of the whole but which are not necessarily designed as chess-like challenges. I don't believe that a majority of combat unit leaders have to make that many problem-solving decisions, or that many real-world actions hinge on finely tuned point scoring systems.

What I am really saying is that while smarter and more game-savvy players than I will waltz through a campaign like this, using all manner of highly intelligent ploys and moves, a more simple-minded player like myself, who employs conventional combined arms tactics, tends to lose on points. I'm not questioning the quality of the campaign or the massive effort that's gone into the documentation; I am proposing a different philosophy for campaign design.

Just ignore me if this sounds like babble...

[George MC]

Hi @Redmarkus

I appreciate you taking the time to expand on your views regarding scenario design.  However, before I answer the point you make, here is a fundamental truth about stuff I design. Be warned I'm babbling back! 

I first and foremost I design scenarios etc based on situations and events that I want to play myself, in my own time. If others want to play it, and enjoy playing it then brilliant. But I don’t design to order and I do this first and foremost as a hobby. There are no rewards in this over and above the feedback I get, but again back to my first point I do this out of purely selfish reasons to play scenarios I like to play. Now a few, a very tiny, few, even give up their free time to help playtest my stuff. For that I am truly grateful and IMO they are the ones how are doing this for entirely altruistic reasons. For that I am truly grateful.

What you are looking for out of scenarios for yourself is great. But TBH you want scenarios that truly address what you want out of a scenario, exactly, to suit your play style and methodology  – you need to design them yourself. In doing so you’ll find other players who like your style and will play your creations. TBH that was how I got into this game in the first place. I was frustrated with what was around, wanted to play particular types of scenarios, so hey, I started designing my own.

Re your military service. Your experience and views I truly appreciate, and have real respect for,  your real world take on this. However I'm not sure what about the campaign does not address the points you make though? Ok sounds like from your previous post you got kicked about on the second mission. But just to be clear there is no finely balanced point scoring here. The second mission is a “simple” suppress and close, you can choose where and how you attack and with what – you take heavy losses in men and machines then you’ll get to manage complexity next mission as your unit is attrited and the morale of your surviving troops goes down…

So how do you get to that? Just to be clear. The first mission is an advance to contact (you’re the advance guard for the main effort – no recce boys as yet cos they are all still on the trains stuck somewhere back in Poland – that happened). However failing to eliminate enemy outposts and/or being spotted by them means the enemy knows your avenue of attack and what force is at the tip of the spear. The next campaign step, regardless if you win or lose mission 1, are two alternate timelines – the first – if you win, sees you press onto the next mission catching the enemy unawares (no proper intel you bounce em hard). If you don’t win, then you get to go onto the next mission with the enemy a bit more aware. By that they have a slightly greater amount of time to attempt to ambush/block your advance. I refute the view that success in mission 1 hinges on finely tuned point scoring systems nor is it a chess like challenge. Its simples. You get ALL your unit spotted by the enemy there are consequences next mission. You don’t lose too many guys and vehicles then great you are in a strong position next mission regardless.

If you totally make a hash of the first mission and lost men and machines then come the next mission you start to encounter that complexity you talk about. The campaign script takes that into account, plus losing more men and machines means you will start to suffer complexity on subsequent missions. That’s what campaigns, and this one in particular, offer.

As I’ve said I don’t believe any of the missions in this campaign are “chess-like” problems (in fact I am no fan of such scenarios and yeah OK I'll admit that touches a nerve!). The missions are based on real life actions; the Soviet defence is based on Soviet doctrine; the OOBs of both sides are realistic and again based on RL OOBs. The player just needs to apply tactics. All the missions have multiple options as to how the player might play it.

However you will need to press on with subsequent missions. But as I said it might well be the case this type of campaign with these types of units with these types of missions may not be your thing. That’s fine, no problem. However if you want to propose design philosophy then you really will need to step up to the plate and start designing your own – and please take that in the best possible way. I’m not all that interested in “design philosophies” personally. I just create stuff I want to play on maps I like to play on with OOBs I rather fancy playing with in missions I think might be interesting. As I said this is a hobby for me, not a job or a calling and whilst I appreciate feedback (and occasionally have been known to act on it) I’ll still design stuff, well, I’m sure you get my drift by now.

I think if you carry on with this campaign you’ll get what you are looking for out this campaign. If you don’t well, thanks for at least giving it a shot. Mind it is only a game and all the best with your future scenario designing.

Cheery!

George

 

[George MC]

On 16/05/2016 at 3:18 AM, [MyIS] Buffpuff said:

Almost done with my Road to Montebourg trip and I'll be going to this campaign next George. Any helpful hints that don't give away too much information you care to share?

Hi @[MyIS] Buffpuff

Cool - hope you are not to combat weary after the Road to Montebourg, it's pretty intense!

So helpful hints for von Schroif, without giving too much away...

OK first off read the briefings - the PDF in the zip file makes that easier. If you don't like reading the scenario briefings the OP Maps give you the key info re victory conditions and tac map the overall situation.

Whilst you have a lot of vehicles and tanks you don't have many dismounts - so look after em like your children! You'll need em further down the line so don't throw em away in needless attacks. 

The name of the game is combined arms so use the firepower you have to blast your way to victory. If you are using boots to clear ground make sure tracked stuff with splodey guns are paving the way.

Oh and you'll need luck, the more the better!

Cheery!

George

Edited May 17, 2016 by George MC

[[MyIS] Buffpuff]

3 hours ago, George MC said:

Hi @[MyIS] Buffpuff

Cool - hope you are not to combat weary after the Road to Montebourg, it's pretty intense!

So helpful hints for von Schroif, without giving too much away...

OK first off read the briefings - the PDF makes that easier. If you don't like reading the scenario OP Maps give you the key info re victory conditions.

Whilst you have a lot of vehicles and tanks you don't have many dismounts - so look after em like your children! You'll need em further down the line so don't throw em away in needless attacks. 

The name of the game is combined arms so use the firepower you have to blast your way to victory. If you are using boots to clear ground make sure tracked stuff with splodey guns are paving the way.

Oh and you'll need luck, the more the better!

Cheery!

George

If it's luck I need then I'm screwed. My luck consists of my LMGs are the first to fall (followed closely by the SMG). My tank commanders sitting 400m away from the front line get pinged by a machine gun. My rifle squad that just cleared the first floor of a 2 story building fail to notice an enemy LMG squad above their heads who then cause 4 casualties to my bounding platoon HQ and an accompanying half squad. I send in 3 full rifle squads to the first floor of a building to smoke out a pesky 3 man recon team armed with MP40s with area target orders for the building the recon squad is in only to suffer 4 casualties and ALL 3 squads running to the rear like their butts are on fire...Well at least that was my luck so far with my finale mission in Montebourg....

 

[Warts 'n' all]

@Buffpuff... And I thought my luck was bad.

@George MC... I'm hoping to get stuck into this campaign pretty soon. In the meantime "splodey guns" is such a great phrase.