George MC

Cross posting from other thread: CW First Clash. Smallish map, several + platoons each side. Mix of units. http://www.battlefront.com/index.php...leinfo&id=1905

Ach weel seeing as it's all about self promotion I'm in! CW First Clash. Smallish map, several + platoons each side. Mix of units. http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1905

Are you talking about creating an AI Plan rather than what how your own units move and behave on the map?

Just noticed that when I uploaded the revised scenario it went and scrubbed the previous review. My apologies and thanks to the reviewer for taking the time to post their feedback. Many thanks to Erwin, SD Smack and Lee Vincent for your feedback

http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1194 Best advice with creating AI Plans is start small scale and don't try to micro manage - let the tactical AI do it’s thing. For your first attempt co-ordinating an AI attack is daunting. I'd go for AI defence with a small number of AI units moving/counterattacking. Whatever I am doing first step is create AI Groups for one side and give each group pretty sweeping plans e.g. AI Group 3 might only have three points to go for with large time between etc. Think really, really simple here. The I play the scenario from against the AI. This way I get an idea of the tactical options on the map and how best to use the terrain. Then I go back in and flesh out my AI Plan making better use of terrain features, tactical options etc and responding to the possible tactical options a human player may use. This may take several takes. Once you get into the swing of it it's quick to do. It also helps for your first AI Plan to note timings and 'behaviours'. Re 'behaviours' yeah the lack of difference between the behaviours thraps my wapple... I tend to use two main behaviours for the AI - advance for general movement and a more aggressive attack. Assault for a slower tactical bound all guns blazing option. The only place micro managing may work is in complex terrain where you use the AI painted areas like a breadcrumb trail but as soon as you hit more open or less constricted terrain go back to thinking BIG. That’s a quick and dirty intro. Mind it’s more of an art than science and the pitfall in designing AI Plans is attempting to micro manage. It won’t work so think big and sweeping. Hope this helps. Must admit the more I design AI Plans the more I learn about doing em. But keep it simple. Don't try co-ordinating platoons etc leap frogging each other to tight timescales down that road lays madness Hope this helps. Cheery! George

Bail em out the jeep?

In the opening screen of CMBN click on 'saved game' - you'll see it there. Assuming you are both playing the same version e.g. 1.10 etc

Nae worries

Alt J = show objectives Alt L = show map labels

Cool That's what I was aiming for so glad you enjoyed it. Cheers for taking the time to post your comments. Cheery! George

Glad ya enjoyed it What I rather like about creating AI Plans is that even playing against the AI in some small way you are playing against me. The AI Plans I create are based on plans of attack/defence that I would use myseld. Granted you don't have any reactivity (is that even a word?!) but you can gauge the general intent. Many thanks for the comments - much appreciated

Cheers for that. Not wanting to spoil it now but when you are done would you mind sending me your comments please? Are you playing H2H or against the AI? I suspect if playing against the AI one of the AI Plans - bold and daring - could result in a lot of burning wrecks But there is a sting as I think you may have found. Good luck!

Anyone given this a go yet? Just curious as to how it played out?

What I have found is keep the infantry platoon HQ (who is in C2 with their sections)close to the armour troop/zug commander who is unbuttoned. You'll find that info is shared faster (so it seems to me anyways) with other takns in that platoon. The whole C2 is very powerful in game play once you get the hang of it

Good attempt PT to open up a discussion about scenario design It did allow the two hobby horses lack of time; multiple scenarios designed for specific play to be trotted again (can you ride a hobby horse on a saopbox ). In response to comments about secenarios designed for this play or that play or max out the time. Me? I'm pretty happy that my design standpoint will be designing for single player play against AI. That's how I spend most of my playing time and I primarily design scenarios I find interesting etc. Playing H2H is a spin off. Nice if it happens. The whole issue with H2H scenarios and has been mentioned umpteen times is playtesting. It takes ages to run through one scenario PBEM. How many play throughs constitute 'testing'. Look at the fuss over Huzzar and Carbide Carbide. Both played extensively after release and both had option divided about whether balanced or not. It's a no win situation I feel as players will have their own opinions. I agree PT about your comments with time in scenarios. Players should also consider (as you rightly point out) if playing against the AI that the AI Plans are set to run for a particular time. If players want scenarios to max out on time (or they do that) then at some point the AI will just stay put. Then you can walk right over the AI. To me that's a very, very odd way to play. Guranteed win? I'm all for giving the AI a chance. Creating scenarios takes a long long time. Good ones take longer. If players want scenarios to do partcicular things I'd suggest they get cracking and start designing

That chaps Ekins, in a Firefly took out three Tigers - bang, bang, bang at 800m. First time hits. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rj97_pTIT1E

Go into the German AA battalion. If you go to armoured car companies you will find you can change (bottom right of screen) what vehicle makes up the unit.

Although there is a very strong and vocal H2H lobby BFC have stated the majority of players play against the AI. I tend to generally favour doing scenarios for play against the AI. H2H stuff is a happy spin off.

You can get an idea how this might work in game - dismount (bail out) your crew after the tank bogs. See how long they stay in command/alive. If more than an hour then it's probably possible but mind a great deal many repairs/boggin/immobilisation required specialist help from the recovery crews and that was often done under cover of night.

To the chap who posted on the comments section for Carbide Carbide: 2012-02-29 22:44:11 This map is broken. My units are on an exit point exactly where they are supposed to exit and now they are like sitting ducks in a pond waiting for an exit that doesn't exist. The exits do exist and they do work - just checked. It just takes a few moments for the units to 'fade' it's not an instantanous exit like in CMX1. By the way you do need to make sure you secure the exit zones by covering fire rather than attempt a mass fast drive of escpae. That'll get messy...

Yup totally agree - and to get away with it intact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rj97_pTIT1E I've no wish to call into dispute Joe Ekin's being attributed with killing Wittman but came across this video clip. It does attribute Ekins with shooting three Tigers but claims that Wittman's Tiger was KOd by Canadian Shermans.

You've absolutely no idea what is going on behind the scenes buddy

Errmm - there's been several community made scenarios released. In fact it looks to be around several a week (all quality ones) - check out the repository. Re triggers - it's been talked about for sure and BFC have stated it's on the 'to do' list so it will make it in there. If playing QB you can get odd things happening as the AI Plans by the very nature of the QB set-up are more generic. Try one of the user made scenarios and you will more than likely find that the scenario designer can ensure the AI gives you a run for your money. If looking for ideas why not start a thread asking for recommended single player scenarios. I'm sure you'll get enough to keep you going? Cheery! George

I think that more news from BFC is not always a good thing given how some on here seize on any bit of information like this