Meta Campaign for CM:SF?

[sdp]

Hi again,

How complex do people believe the Op Map part needs to be? I've looked at the MOCAT stuff and whilst it looks very well thought out it uses rangefinders and grids etc. over a proper map. To my mind, this adds unnecessary complexity when a simple hex grid could be used to control how far you can move, what you can see etc. I know others will disagree and say that a hex grid distorts the true geometry of the map but I've grown up with hex boardgames and have a soft spot for them.

To my mind, the Op Map part should be like a mini boardgame with its own rules, so the GMs have less to think about other than just applying the rules of how far each unit can go and the effects of terrain etc. A grid superimposed over a real map would require a lot more management and interpretation than I'd be comfortable with. That's not to say you couldn't use a real map with a hex grid. For such an arrangement you could superimpose some notation to make it clear where river-boundaries where and what terrain (rough, marsh) etc. was in any particular hex.

Yes, well, at the very least the OPmap would have to be able to simulate movement costs/different terrain effects. The advantage of a grid is that it allows for specific tactical maps - CMSF battlefields - to be assigned to specific locations.

I've already started to design some "TACmaps" in the scenario editor. They're basically generic representations of the terrrain in the hexes on the OPmap, like farmland, urban, open etc. Now there's an effort we could benefit from sharing! The "open" maps are quite easy of course, the urban maps takes some more time... My idea is to ask for permission to use some of the maps of the existing scenarios as well.

Gulf Strike uses a rather comprehensive "Terrain Effects Chart" with some 20 different terrain types and their effect on movement and combat effects - for the OPmap of Syria a handful of those terraintypes would suffice, I suppose.

This is how it looks on the Syrian OPmap at the moment (WIP).

In the MC I've been working on the OPmap is based on the "real" CIA-map with a hex grid superimposed. Notice the centerdots in each hex? Those will be essential to determine possible ways for movement between hexes - that's my thought... I'll explain more later on.

here's the entire map, also WIP... DLwarning!

http://opnem.googlegroups.com/web/Operation-NemesisMap_terrainoverlay.jpg?gda=LM9CUlgAAACs093CQ4Pwg8Ogn52hwmB5tEEePRlag8-1tYkUwOeddMy_0OKmnVc50d6Ix6aA_-LTTwGW3TWyWaEcTVqY9Vh6C4wY8-GQPMi7v7q09XkUgwTVoLi73HfKOpqo9r4I9U8&hl=sv&gsc=_WgEfgsAAACuVlYeGOz2TKhnh8GDeqRq

regards/

sdp

[ChrisND]

I have 8 ready-made maps from my Task Force Panther campaign that I am happy to contribute as stock maps. They are: 2 airport maps, 2 town maps, 1 industrial complex map, 2 wilderness maps, 1 heavy urban map.

[sdp]

That sounds terrific - actually you are one of the designers I had in mind! I'll let you know as soon as I've set up the "maparchive". You will of course be duly mentioned!

regards/

sdp

[sdp]

seems the Syrian OPmap went missing... I'll try this instead;

regards/

sdp

[ChrisND]

That looks really nice.

[Cpl Steiner]

sdp,

Yes, looks good. I guess the colour filling some hexes is some sort of overlay you can turn on and off in VASSAL, correct? If so, this is a neat solution to the problem of turning a real map (which won't exactly conform to a hex grid) into a hex map.

I wonder, would it be possible to make the colour-fills contain some more detail, such as building outlines for urban areas or a tree-canopy pattern for wooded areas etc., but still be semi-transparent? It might look even better like that. Obviously the aesthetics of it aren't that crucial but I thought I'd ask anyway.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[sdp]

I'm at work right now, so I'll keep this brief:

could this be of any use? http://groups.google.com/group/cmsfmc

I suppose we could have different MCs at different stages of development - developers could share info and resources, maps, orbats etc between the projects.

regards/

sdp

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Double Deuce]

I'm at work right now, so I'll keep this brief:

could this be of any use? http://groups.google.com/group/cmsfmc

I suppose we could have different MCs at different stages of development - developers could share info and resources, maps, orbats etc between the projects.

I have several personal hosting accounts and I could set aside a section on one of them for this if needed. I might not have enough time to actively help out in the development or help running the show but I could make the space available if there is enough need. I ran meta campaigns using the Steel Panthers game for many years so I may be able to help out.

[sdp]

sdp,

Yes, looks good. I guess the colour filling some hexes is some sort of overlay you can turn on and off in VASSAL, correct? If so, this is a neat solution to the problem of turning a real map (which won't exactly conform to a hex grid) into a hex map.

I wonder, would it be possible to make the colour-fills contain some more detail, such as building outlines for urban areas or a tree-canopy pattern for wooded areas etc., but still be semi-transparent? It might look even better like that. Obviously the aesthetics of it aren't that crucial but I thought I'd ask anyway.

-thanks! Yes you're supposed to be able to switch the terrainlayer on/off, that's correct. What you see in the screenshots are wip, have to remember that. The final design will surely look somewhat different I gather;-)

-Adam; check your email!

-Double Deuce; thanks for the offer, much obliged! I seem to remember that you were involved in a CMAK campaign also, weren't you? "Hunting the fox" or something? Anyway, having run campaigns before your experience might prove valuable to any future MC team. Do you have any MC of your own running right now? (I can't seem to access Combat Campaigns...)

regards/

sdp

[JohnO]

Hi John,

Have you guys made any revisions since the last copy I got from you?

Hi Double Deuce,

I'm on a Warfighter exercise here at NC and trying to get to a computer during work is hard. Most of my reply's are after my shift. To your question, no there hasn't been any revisions to MOCAT. sdp, I too have a website and a forum that can be used as well.

JohnO

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[stemar]

Hi,

May be you talking about the Rikki tikki's "Global Thunder MBX" ?

I was part of it, very amazing experience...

It was done mainly with the Tacops community, players of around the world were part of it.

Bill Jennings is ruling one at this moment...

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[stemar]

Don't know how you see a CMSF metacampaign, but i think that the MBX is at a size far larger than the CMSF context.

We play the MBX in 3 stages, the first was only political at world scale, the second stage was an operationnal one, with northern atlantic and north europe as field, the last part was the tactical, but involve a complete russian VDV division against a MEB and other norwegian brigade (not so tactical).

only a part of the tactical stage was played under tacops since the game cannot handle all units of complete division, and it will be the same for CMSF.

except the tactical part played with Tacops and harpoon for the air and naval part, all military order was more in a "real" style, thats mean that most of the game mechanics was handled by mail exchange...

We played during 2 or 3 years with a staff of half a dozen of persons in my team (red) and with only 1 referee with some help sometimes, its a huge works where its difficult to maintain the same team and the same figthing spirit along the game.

Anyway the best thing to od with CMSF is may be the CMMC game made by steve althouse (that was part of the MBX) with a dedicated forum and a dedicated tool to send and receive order at an operationnal level.

I also participate at an early stage at the CMMC but i don't play it, too much time need...

For this you need :

1- a good exchange system, a good one could be like in CMMC a forum...

2- a tool to send, treat, create, receive order, with teh bill jennings MBX we use google heart, but the tool of CMMC is perfect i think for CMSF

3- rules to track everything at a higher echelon that CMSF don't track like ammo, fuel, reparations, relief forces, CAS support, ADA defense, amphib ops, SOF ops, intelligence, strat strike, civil affair, economy and social problem at some point, diplomatic and political issue, operationnal goals with operational victory conditions

4- a tool to quickly transform operational map in a CMSF tactical one, a way to extract the same map and only adjust bombshell, ruins and effect of a precedent battle

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[stemar]

I think its effectively too big.

There is an initial choice to made :

Did you made a scenar where you simulate the whole conflict, or did you simulate part of a bigger war ?

The first case is far more heavier and detailed than the second and far more spicy.

In the first case you have and have to maintain a large team but you can explore real C4I and planning problematic, in the second case (if you used a boardmap game for example) its a kind of aleatory scenario creation where the you just create a context to have more possibility than in a 1 player campaign.

In the actual MBX we use the ground rule made for harpoon for the reedition of the falkland war with harpoon4 but you need authorization to use it, anyway the rule concept could be used for something else, you don't really need the combat matrix since all combat can be made with CMSF but you have all operationnal timing for movement and logistical issues, anyway in all case you have to adapt rules to make yours and need i think something like 1 year to test interface between operationnal gaming and CMSF (1 BN by player, you need something like 10 plyer for a whole division, its the max you can have for a long period, you need also may be half dozen of player as referee: 1 main referee, 1 referee by team for routine, 1 map boss, 1 tech boss for forum, and file, website and so on, and somebody to make some research...) and half a year of preparation for each team to plan something before gaming (in fact during the global thunder MBX, the first stage game at world level was used for each team to plan their operation with a credible world context, we do the same with the actual MBX), its a long way but this kind of gaming is incredible.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Cpl Steiner]

Hi,

As this thread seemed to have died a death, I thought I'd have a go at converting the free to download "Operation Iraqi Freedom" VASSAL module from Armchair General to represent the invasion of Syria back-story for CM:SF. I have therefore shamelessly taken the module and modified a lot of the counters to look like Syrian units. I have also changed the map to the CIA Syria map used for the CM:SF Deluxe edition map.

I have used the CM:SF Deluxe edition map and Wikipedia to determine the unit designations of the Syrian side and have done all of the Armoured and Mech units. All I need to do now is the special forces and Infantry units. However I'm not sure of what designations to use for these as the CM:SF Deluxe edition map obscures a lot of them with invasion arrows.

Here's what I've done so far. N.B. - If you can't see the image, try refreshing the page. I think Mediafire is a bit slow sometimes.

What I really need now is the 30 or so infantry unit designations and the special forces and airborne units. Does anyone have a suitable list I could use?