Jump to content
PeterLorre86

New Scenario- Battle for Waja [Update- Final Version]

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone

Here is my first map for CMSF. It is a fictional attack by a US mech. inf. company on a group of resurgent Taliban fortified in the farm village of Waja in Helmand Province, Afghanistan.

It is intended as multiplayer, but each side has one rudementery AI plan. I have found Blue attacks sometimes. Sometimes they do that crawl thing. Red defends.

It is important to understand that this scenario is intended as an example of assymetrical warfare. The scoreing is set up so that 10% casualties for US will result in mission failure, even if the town is taken.

I would apreciate any feedback regarding the scenario, especially with regard to balance, mistakes, point value, casualty %, however keep in mind what i am going for with the assymetrical aspect.

I hope my scenario is enjoyable.

Edit:

Ok, I have finished an updated version of my scenario. The download link has been changed to the new version. Please let me know what you think.

Changes:

-Increased size of Waja (about twice as many buildings, also added walls)

-added about 30 insurgents to red force, including 2 more rpgs

-US casualty limit changed to 10%

-Removed 3 command Bradleys and Company CO, XO, etc.

-Minor map changes

These changes should make it much more of a challenge to play as US, and much more viable as played by red. This is likely the final version, as i am working on new scenarios, unless someone finds a bug/mistake.

Let me know what you all think.

Thanks.

Download Link: Battle For Waja

Edit to add some Pictures:

PoppyPic2A.jpg

PoppyPic1A.jpg

PoppyPic4A.jpg

[ August 20, 2007, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: PeterLorre86 ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just played it though as Blue vs AI for a Total Victory or rather a Red Surrender after 18min. Lost one Bradley to the SPG-9 and had 4 men wounded. And not a single Javelin used :D

--- Possible Spoilers

Moved the squads up exclusively with the Assault command, seemed to work quite well. The mounted up platoon was sent onto the high ground to the west for overwatch and to later assault the village from the side.

Speaking of which, your briefing mentions that the terrain does not allow for a flanking maneuver, does that imply that we’re not supposed to be able to use the Western high ground, or simply that a large scale “operational” flanking was not possible?

If anything I’d make it tougher for the Blue side – I’d take away the two Command section Bradleys, as well as the FSV, leaving just the four IFVs organic to the platoon.

I would also stagger the front trench line a bit, just so it doesn’t make a perfect 250m-long “line” target for the mortars. Perhaps also add a few more buildings, for some close-combat house clearing?

All in all an interesting exercise in small unit tactics, quite enjoyable. Also a good effort with the briefing and the visuals, quite refreshing to see someone finally using those – really adds to the scenario immersion, good job!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the imput Louch. Lol, i just got done playing and commenting on your scenario!

The flanking was meant as operational. (an excuse for my rather narrow map) And the Terrain to the west was intended as passable. (perhaps it makes for too good and overwatch point?)

And i didn't intend the "assualt through the fields" bit to be literal, lol but it worked, so there we go.

I agree, blue should be made harder. I wasnt sure if i should take out the command Bradleys or not, but i think i will now. I am thinking of putting the acceptable blue casualty level at 10% also.

Thanks for the tip on trenchs too.

I will definatly take into consideration your comments when i go back to revise the map.

And thanks everyone else, who is playing my scenario!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know which is the US Army "aceptable" rate of casualties for this kind of stuff, but maybe even a 5%? That would be really difficult to archive (but then if we are talking about a platoon, that's zero loses, so 10% should do it).

Haven't played the scenario (too late now), but will tomorrow, looks interesting concept and I'm enoying smaller games more righ now (in RT at least).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like everyone else has said, nice mission overall.

My comments would be to reduce the US forces a bit just to make it a bit harder - as it was, I didn't need to dismount the mounted units and the already dismounted platoons weren't really used.

In my play through (using Elite/RT) I got a US Total Victory (Syrian surrender), but I took a lot of casualties - unfortunately I can't remember the exact number - but I think I had something around 23 Casualties and ~7 Killed but those numbers may be wrong.

Either way my two dismounted platoons got worked over during the initial advance which I thought would mean a loss, but it didn't.

So may be the loss rate can be given a greater status - even if the other side surrenders.

Good Work though!

TM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great scenario, I had been hoping for one with a low-casualty mission goal. It really makes you wince that much harder when one of your men drops, and makes you act much quicker. I spent a lot of the game having my Bradleys put area fire on buildings and lone snipers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played it as Syrians, a well made scenario indeed. My only disappointment was that the game engine with the known LOS/LOF issues doesnt hadle the reverse slope well and you get shot through the terrain. I lost a technical from small arms fire shooting through the rise while there was no way it could be seen. Currently all the non urban maps suffer from this problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was the best Shock Force battle I've ever played. I for some reason didn't experience any of these LOS problems at all. The Taliban on the reverse slope defended their position extremely well and I was very handicapped when it came to blowing them away with my Bradleys. Had to send in the infantry to do it and met many nasty surprises... but I don't want to spoil.

I will say that this is the first SF battle I've played as the Americans where the outcome was in doubt. It was extremely bloody for the U.S. side (6 dead, 26 wounded, 1 APC destroyed, 3 damaged). There was a moment towards the end where I seriously considered withdrawing my forward elements and pulling back because the heat was too intense. Won a total victory because the Taliban surrendered finally.

Anyway, great great work. I'm sad that other people can't enjoy it to its fullest potential due to technical difficulties. I had a freaking blast with your battle and look forward to trying it out again to minimize casualties. Taking those trenches was so bloody and fierce, I think it's given me post traumatic stress.

I would like to comment though that I didn't use the dismounted infantry very much and I don't think you need them. I had one group of infantry that did all the fighting and another that stayed in back and basically watched. Can't really do much with dismounted infantry in a battle like this where you want to minimize losses, they take too many losses from MG fire in the open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thanks everyone for such positive feedback. Hopefully in the next 2 - 3 days i will have an updated verion ready for play.

And yes, i have had similar problems with the berm not being as usefull as i had hoped when i decided to use it. I am not sure i can really do anything to fix that, but i will be looking at the other issues you guys mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well made scenario and good map!

The only problem is the usual one with all the CMSF battles that I have tried so far - overwhelming US firepower against second rate opponents (at least with the AI handling them)

Won a total US victory (1 KIA, 6 WIA, no other losses) by simply being cautious and plastering everthing spotted with all the firepower that I had. Eventually there were only 4 Reds left and they surrendered. The game still credits the red side with 100 map objective points - this is a bug I have pointed out before in the context of using the editor.

Absolutely no criticism of your excellent scenario building which I do appreciate, but it was no more fun than any of the original CMSF scenarios, played from the US side vs the AI. One side simply outclasses the other, or the game has a significant pro-US bias.

Also tried it as Red, but TacAI/StatAI plan cannot attack so did not work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*******possible spoiler*********************

I just played the game. very fun.

I was able to position two strykers to the highest point on the right flank.

This enable me to direct mortar fire on the trench.

the rest was easy once the trench was eliminated.

Please create more games like this that are larger in size. thanks a bunch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just finished playing your updated version of this scenario on the Blue side and had a blast! Having played the Beta, I noticed fantastic differences overall, more challenging for the Blue side, and better defenses on the Red.

*SPOILERS*

Played on RT - Elite setting

I started off with the platoon of Bradleys on overwatch, having good cover on the Berm and parts of the town. I noticed some LOS fixes from the Beta, and it was a bit more challenging to engage the Reds from just the starting position itself. When the map started, I began raining down 120mm airburst shells over the enemy trenches on the right flank. Having felt comfortable on having the far flank suppressed, I advanced with one platoon; then came under immediate small arms and MG fire. Having spotted the PKMs on the rooftops, I ordered my Javelins to engage, and brought down each building with spotted enemies. This worked marvelously and the platoon continued to advance, with Bradleys suppressing any enemy that was spotted. When the advancing platoon was halfway to the berm, I ordered another platoon on my far left to support their flank, and assaulted to up the wall, until a unlucky RPG round found its way into a torso of one of my men, and wounding two others. Eventually I advanced and suppressed far enough until I reached the outskirts of Waja, and the Uncons surrendered, and thus achieving a total victory, with 5 minutes to spare.

I came off with 2 KIA and 5 WIA; Uncons 48 KIA and 28 WIA, and 3 Technicals destroyed; And left with only a dozen survivors.

*END SPOILERS*

Great work, Peter. Now onto playing the red side!

[ August 20, 2007, 11:04 AM: Message edited by: Schwarze ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great battle, (newest version) but, as before, on the whole I reckon the US needs to be given more exacting penalties and/or the Reds toughened up somehow. I scored a Total Victory/Enemy surrender with eight minutes to spare, 4 dead, 14 wounded, one vehicle lost, not a single Red left alive. It's the old problem of 'how do you make the enemy AI act like it's life depends on it?', and though it puts up a fairly decent fight it's still weak against an experienced human player. Looking forward to getting some MP play in on these scenarios. That'll be the real test. But overall a tense and very enjoyable battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not have it either.

A great example of why once you are done with a scenario it really really needs to get uploaded somewhere official. That way it can get some kind of backup and longevity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, JulianJ said:

Oh dear @37mm I seem to be following your bumps (accidentally) while looking for old but good SF1 scenarios for SF2. Sadly I think quite a few of them have disappeared.

I couldn't find Battle for Waja, but almost all other CMSF scenarios and campaigns were sent to Bootie for his new CMMODS site.  It may take him a while to get everything sorted as I also sent him several hundred GB of mods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...