MarkEzra

Changes in The QB Map Description:
"Best Play" time setting gives the player a good idea of How fast or slow the AI is set to Attack or Counter Attack. For example:
If the Best Play is 30 Minutes the AI will start its attack or counter attack well within the time it might take to reach it's objectives.
So the player should consider Not just the time but the size of the map when selecting a game. In no way does this hamper the players' choice of time. Just a suggestion.
"NOTE" is a way of addressing not clearly defined map features, like Water Depth or the existence of Fords.
The information is available not only during map selection but at any time during the game via the Menu.
New Quick Battle Map “Amphibious” Type!
QB Map Design Features
Setup areas are very clearly defined for each Group Orders
Each Objective Has 2 Attack or Defend Orders
All Meeting Engagement Maps have no AI first turn Artillery Strikes of any kind!
All Probe Style Maps have no AI first turn Artillery Strikes (exception The AI can lay Smoke on first turn)
Assault and Attack Maps still Have AI Artillery plans for first turn but with limits. The AI Attacker targets Objectives only
The AI Defender no longer targets EVERY possible line of attack the Human Player has available.
 
The Attached pdf 
 
 
 
Changes in The QB Map Description.pdf

Send me an email with a list the CM Games you own and I will match up a scen or QB map to study.  I would suggest you do the same with as many scen designers as you can.  You'll see a lot of styles and techniques.... It is an art form.    markDOTezra3591ATgmailDOTcom

Here is something to always keep in mind: 
Elevation keys trake lots of memory. Use them sparingly and effectively. Especially in large Maps. I always consider my maps to be art. But functional art they must be. If the average player PC can't run the map easily it won't get played

Thing 1:  The Blue units on the board at the beginning of the game are to have something to do besides slugging down beer and eating pretzels... Really!  The Amphibs are reinforcements.
The FO is a MUST for Human Player 1st turn arty- air strikes.
Thing 2:  The Engineers were used against wire and mines when I was doing the original scenario.  Also They were a compact unit which allowed fewer order slots.
Thing 3: As the author of A Day at the Beach I made a decision NOT to be realistic so much as fun.  Honestly -  No Marine would plan such a hap hazard beach assault with No intel, a couple of Helo's and pretend Naval Guns .   The Scenario was designed to display the New game features and to blow stuff up.

Thing 1:  The Blue units on the board at the beginning of the game are to have something to do besides slugging down beer and eating pretzels... Really!  The Amphibs are reinforcements.
The FO is a MUST for Human Player 1st turn arty- air strikes.
Thing 2:  The Engineers were used against wire and mines when I was doing the original scenario.  Also They were a compact unit which allowed fewer order slots.
Thing 3: As the author of A Day at the Beach I made a decision NOT to be realistic so much as fun.  Honestly -  No Marine would plan such a hap hazard beach assault with No intel, a couple of Helo's and pretend Naval Guns .   The Scenario was designed to display the New game features and to blow stuff up.

Cat? Bag?   I have Chihuhuas

Ah, thank you for the explanation, I appreciate it. I know that the original in CMSF1 had the company start on the beach in AAVs, but real life and work got in the way of me playing much more than one Striker campaign and the first couple of missions of the Sempre Fi campaign. Since the FO team is there for a first minute artillery strike, it looks like I'll be playing A Day at the Beach again.
Thank you for all your work revising scenarios and maps.

I have followed this with some interest.  Designers are by nature passionate.  They want you to feel as well as think.  Time compression can be used to great affect when used
in company with distance, difficult terrain, or weather.  Add to these stressors Units limited in size or capability and the designer is moving the player towards the nightmare of
command.
There are some great Combat Mission designers who have honed their craft since the early days of CM.  They evolved has the games' editor and AI offered more tools and choices.
But these artisans often feel handcuffed by the one absolutely uncontrollable factor-- The Player.  How a player "feels" about a specific scenario-- its' balance, time, triggers, units, and objectives vary so widely as to be, in the end, somewhat useless. I grant that the novice designer can learn from creative advice. And Great designers can, too. But as a general rule the designer must follow his or hers'  vision...Not the players.  
One final thought (and what triggered me to write) There are NO lazy designers.
 

Boy do I get That!   One thing you'll want to hold off on is making AI plans and creating/setting up units.  Might want to re-work the map with the thought that New tiles and unit groups are coming.  Too much reliance on what was may get in the way of what is coming... which is Very Cool

Thing 1:  The Blue units on the board at the beginning of the game are to have something to do besides slugging down beer and eating pretzels... Really!  The Amphibs are reinforcements.
The FO is a MUST for Human Player 1st turn arty- air strikes.
Thing 2:  The Engineers were used against wire and mines when I was doing the original scenario.  Also They were a compact unit which allowed fewer order slots.
Thing 3: As the author of A Day at the Beach I made a decision NOT to be realistic so much as fun.  Honestly -  No Marine would plan such a hap hazard beach assault with No intel, a couple of Helo's and pretend Naval Guns .   The Scenario was designed to display the New game features and to blow stuff up.

While I don't design CM scenario's myself, I don't think you have grasped what Mark said about 'vision'. When you design something, you need to have a 'vision' of what you want to achieve with you design. Otherwise you aren't designing anything, you are merely clicking around in the editor.
The same goes for product development in general. 
 

I have followed this with some interest.  Designers are by nature passionate.  They want you to feel as well as think.  Time compression can be used to great affect when used
in company with distance, difficult terrain, or weather.  Add to these stressors Units limited in size or capability and the designer is moving the player towards the nightmare of
command.
There are some great Combat Mission designers who have honed their craft since the early days of CM.  They evolved has the games' editor and AI offered more tools and choices.
But these artisans often feel handcuffed by the one absolutely uncontrollable factor-- The Player.  How a player "feels" about a specific scenario-- its' balance, time, triggers, units, and objectives vary so widely as to be, in the end, somewhat useless. I grant that the novice designer can learn from creative advice. And Great designers can, too. But as a general rule the designer must follow his or hers'  vision...Not the players.  
One final thought (and what triggered me to write) There are NO lazy designers.
 

It's my favorite era

It's my favorite era

So maybe Combat Mission North Africa for the first CM3 title?   

@homewrecker
Welcome! Game testing starts with one question:  Is that right?

A Great Line from SPR:  "Where's the Rally Point?" … "Anywhere BUT HERE!"
And so it goes in CMSF2.... as the title of this thread mentions: Rarely.
Sometimes all we can do is patch up our differences rather than the game, and hope for a New CM Tomorrow.
I VOTE for that
 

The Quick Battle Maps are very well along.  No QB Map shipped in CMSF2 is an untouched hold over from CMSF1.  And there are a LOT OF THEM

The Quick Battle Maps are very well along.  No QB Map shipped in CMSF2 is an untouched hold over from CMSF1.  And there are a LOT OF THEM

The Quick Battle Maps are very well along.  No QB Map shipped in CMSF2 is an untouched hold over from CMSF1.  And there are a LOT OF THEM

The Quick Battle Maps are very well along.  No QB Map shipped in CMSF2 is an untouched hold over from CMSF1.  And there are a LOT OF THEM

check your C:Documents/Battlefront file  

Personal belief: CMSF2 = Soul Food for modern wargamers

OK,  Tonsils look fine.   Now drop your pants and let's check the old prostate....

Let's see How should I use my time today?
1. Work on Scenarios, and QB Maps while beta testing multiple titles,
2. Read Forum threads written by players wondering 'what's going on, why the delays', OR 'don't you guys understand business or customer service'.
3. Take a Nap.
Gosh, I just can't make up my mind...Why not help me choose.