MOS:96B2P Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 /////////////// SPOILER ALERT ///////////////////////////////// /////////////// SPOILER ALERT ///////////////////////////////// Pierrefitte-en-Cinglais, created by @Bulletpoint is an interesting well done scenario. I ran out of time (also demo charges) and ended up with a minor defeat. Below are some screenshots of the battle. SitMap as of 1108hrs. SitMap as of 1130hrs. Halfway through the battle. An example of the many tactical problems encountered during the scenario. Third Platoon pops smoke to flank the OpFor MG. Third Platoon used demo charges to blast through the wall behind the OpFor MG team. Location of fire teams when the clock ran out. AAR Screen. Very well done scenario with multiple AI plans. If you want a good hour long, infantry fight in Normandy give this one a try. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 (edited) Very interesting to see how players deal with this mission, because I spent a long time pondering likely courses of action during the creation. The idea was to make a challenging scenario without making it extremely frustrating - I've played many hard-as-nails scenarios, and while they can be fun, I often think the cards are stacked too hard against the player. So, I am happy that you enjoyed the challenge level of this scenario, even though you ran out of time in the final assault. Maybe I should have put in just a bit of variable extra turns. It seems you and I have similar play styles, preferring a careful advance with few casualties and always in need of just a little more time... But then again, I didn't want it to be too easy either Edited June 26, 2016 by Bulletpoint 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted June 27, 2016 Share Posted June 27, 2016 9 hours ago, Bulletpoint said: Very interesting to see how players deal with this mission, because I spent a long time pondering likely courses of action during the creation. The idea was to make a challenging scenario without making it extremely frustrating - I've played many hard-as-nails scenarios, and while they can be fun, I often think the cards are stacked too hard against the player. So, I am happy that you enjoyed the challenge level of this scenario, even though you ran out of time in the final assault. Maybe I should have put in just a bit of variable extra turns. It seems you and I have similar play styles, preferring a careful advance with few casualties and always in need of just a little more time... But then again, I didn't want it to be too easy either That's why guys like @MOS:96B2P who post detailed AARs with screenshots are like gold dust to scenario designers. He's done similar for my recent CMSF releases and confirmed that the missions were there or thereabouts in terms of design. I wish more people would follow his example rather than banging on about what perceived nerfed AI behaviour they've experienced or asking when the next release is coming out. It might result in the community knocking out more content for everybody's benefit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger73 Posted June 27, 2016 Share Posted June 27, 2016 @MOS:96B2P, I found this an excellent scenario as well! The defense was cunning and brutal. Your plan was sound. Smoke is essential. The Combat Engineer teams are critical to victory. Bulletpoint did a wonderful job. I also recommend this scenario highly. I look forward to more by him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbasid111 Posted June 27, 2016 Share Posted June 27, 2016 I will have to give this a try! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 "It seems you and I have similar play styles, preferring a careful advance with few casualties and always in need of just a little more time... " Ditto - I really liked this approach. One can roleplay that it's one's own life at risk out there, and that's how a "human" soldier would behave. Hope that designers incorporate more penalties for losing friendlies - as we had in CMSF. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 On 28/6/2016 at 11:10 AM, Erwin said: "It seems you and I have similar play styles, preferring a careful advance with few casualties and always in need of just a little more time... " Ditto - I really liked this approach. One can roleplay that it's one's own life at risk out there, and that's how a "human" soldier would behave. Hope that designers incorporate more penalties for losing friendlies - as we had in CMSF. There is a bit of penalty for casualties in the scenario, to reward careful players. But I didn't want to be too strict about it, as I wanted to make it a flexible scenario that can be played (and won) in a lot of different ways, not just the one that I personally think is the best way. It is tricky to get scoring exactly right. I would prefer to have victory or defeat determined by reaching the main objectives for the mission or not.Then casualties should be one of several other factors that determine if it's a total victory or a smaller win. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 "... victory or defeat determined by reaching the main objectives for the mission or not. Then casualties should be one of several other factors that determine if it's a total victory or a smaller win." I didn't mean reaching objectives should be unimportant. Simply wanted to agree that we players should be "encouraged" by casualty penalty calculations to treat our pixeltruppen as real people, not expendable fodder. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 54 minutes ago, Erwin said: "... victory or defeat determined by reaching the main objectives for the mission or not. Then casualties should be one of several other factors that determine if it's a total victory or a smaller win." I didn't mean reaching objectives should be unimportant. Simply wanted to agree that we players should be "encouraged" by casualty penalty calculations to treat our pixeltruppen as real people, not expendable fodder. I didn't think you meant that. I was just musing on a bit. Must be getting old 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 Ok so I just found out some player has made a play-through video about my scenario Was extremely excited to see in detail how he would overcome the cunning defense I had spent so many evenings designing! ...and then the video turns into an hour long complaint that the player can't make his halftrack fire, completely disregarding that there's a tall hedgerow and three trees in the way... I mean, seriously... Please, someone make a video where you actually play through this mission and show how it's done. Because this is not the way: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.