Jump to content

benpark

Members
  • Posts

    4,728
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    27

Everything posted by benpark

  1. Ammo distribution would fall under the 2IC role for most nationalities represented in CM. That would hew to the "real". There isn't a TOE for things like Signals units in CM, so some other solutions for runners would fall under the "game" classification.
  2. Thy can be useful doing things like tending to wounded soldiers/ammo scavenging, replacing a wiped-out higher HQ, or any other duties like relaying spotting information from squads/teams and higher HQ (like a "runner"). That last use is helpful for calling in artillery, when the radio unit doesn't have LoS and you don't want to risk them in an exposed position. Security uses also are another slot you can drop them in, and you could do some extra-self-imposed rules, like moving them near prisoners to simulate moving them to rear-areas, etc. I'm always checking the visibility icons to see what the "range" is in the UI. The benefits of any HQ will be greatly lessened when out of any given C2 contact range.
  3. You will also find this AI action used in some FR campaign scenarios (particularly in the German campaign, as I recall). It is a bit tricky to use as far as timing when using the capability, and works best when the AI is on the attack and aimed at an obvious area the player may be defending.
  4. I had suggested different QB categories of orders based on foot/wheeled/tracked categories at some point. However, that's 3 x more AI orders! That's a lot to keep track of. I keep track of what the AI plan is via a Photoshop template (I made a post about that somewhere - I call it the P.A.I.N. system), but even with that, it would be a lot of information to juggle.
  5. Correct, Ian! Thanks for catching that. It is the distribution to groups.
  6. A few QB suggestions from someone that has now made a bunch of QB maps that you see in FR and FB:Downfall- -If the QB map is Huge/Large, select mechanized/armor forces only - infantry can't traverse the map in time and be fit enough for any AI plan where that branch is concerned. Large force sizes will work best with these maps -Medium sized maps can be used with all forces, but the infantry can struggle sometimes with any AI plan in terms of lagging where the plan is set for. -Small and Tiny QB's are for all force types, and I think will give the best challenge for single-player. Don't over-stuff them with more forces than are appropriate for the map-size, though. When making AI plans for QB's- -The AI plans weight heavily to Groups 1-3. Group 4 may never be used, or assigned to a very small, ineffective group in Small/Medium sized force selections. I concentrate on these 3 plans, and will only add 4rth or 5th AI plans for Huge maps, as there may be a far larger force used. -If AI plans use these 3 AI groups primarily, they seem to distribute each AI group to a higher HQ. If the AI force has 3 Platoons, each one seems to always be assigned to a different AI group. -PAY ATTENTION TO THE TERRAIN when making the AI plans. Don't just make a blob in a location, and hope for the best. Use the available cover, and the height toggle to judge good positions for the task. This takes some extra time, but it pays off in better simulating at least half a brain for the AI side. Look at the AI plans from Downfall to see examples of this, if you have it. A lot of work went into these QB plans in FR and Downfall. -Use the appropriate movement state for a wide-range of forces. Quick works for unobserved areas, but Fast will tire out any infantry beyond use. Know that the AI plan could be either infantry or mechanized, so it needs to suit either. -I use Assault/Maximum Assault and Aware for areas where contact is likely. It gives the AI a chance to fire back and be more active, and not just keep charging towards the player, doing the crawl of death. It won't avoid it completely, but this gives the AI more of a fighting chance. -Let the AI set the artillery targets. It can do a decent job of calling in support, when available - and this is actually reactive to the battle that is happening. If choosing manual force-selection, give them an observer or two if they have artillery. -Keep the AI orders to a large enough area that most force-sizes can utilize. But pay attention to the underlying terrain, and don't leave unit areas in open areas when they are near cover. -Embrace odd AI plan shapes when necessary, based upon the underlying terrain and heights Other Single-Player QB Suggestions: -Start a QB. Make manual force selections and manual map selections. Start the game, and save it. Name it something helpful, like the size of forces and map. Forget about it for a while. Make a bunch of these. Return to them later, after you forget what the manual force selection was. That method adds some randomization to the experience. Trade these with other people. -Trade mid-game save-games with people, or use the above method for your own. It should be a save from once the opposing forces are coming into early contact. This simulates being dropped into command, mid-battle.
  7. Aschaffenburg is a further anomaly, as the Germans had a 4:1 advantage over the attacking US forces. Quality and motivation counts for a great deal, obviously. Lots of ciphering on this example here (though not formatted for most human eyes): https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA212023
  8. They all carry over, unless noted otherwise in the scenario briefing (I believe I noted these non-Core units with an asterisk, which should be noted). This is a concentrated period of time, just a few days of fighting. This is a mild spoiler- The forces that come in as a KG replenish your force by adding to it. You have what's left of the starting forces in addition to that to hobble alongside the attempt to recapture the bridge. The difference between hard and easy is 25% more replenishment and repair in "easy". Beyond that, you don't have much of anything (25%, IIRC) to rely on, as is stated. It is plainly described that there isn't much to rely on, so let that be your guide.
  9. I believe it is around 8 or 9 scenarios of differing sizes for the US and UK, and 6 or 7 for the German campaign (6 if you aren't doing well, 7 if you break through in the counter-attack).
  10. As a guy from ancient history once sang "I don't need to be forgiven". We can talk campaigns somewhere else on the forum, if you want to start a separate campaign thread. This one is like a black hole. I would wait to play through 5-6 scenarios, to get a fuller sense though, if you haven't yet.
  11. David - One thing I learned from watching many replays of the campaigns I made for FR (with multiple AI plans) was that people would sometimes get an outlier AI plan, right off the bat. The other thing to campaigns (especially the longer ones) is the testing - It's impossible to accurately test all the outcomes of multiple plans over the arc of a campaign. My work-around in the crucial cases was to use somewhat larger AI plan areas, so the TacAI could have a bit more freedom to use the areas set. These were still carefully placed, but add some variation. I don't recall what the setup zones were (I made that campaign earlier in the development) - Some had to be set set-ups due to LoS issues. If there's something that I can adapt, maybe I can do so and upload it informally. 3D Editor setup and AI planning is the dream. It would save a massive amount of time. No, no it doesn't. That looks like a Draw.
  12. Aye, I am the person responsible for this work. It's one of the very late battles of the war, featuring Kriegsmarine defenders. They put up a fight, as the original poster found out. It's also playable from the German side, with 3 plans per side. Maybe he got the Ultra Tough one. To those that struggle through it, and need Cliff Notes: Smoke is available, use it if needed. There's plenty of artillery available. There's also 2 flame-throwing Wasps that, if you aren't charging at everything can make short work of anyone in strong points. Otherwise: I don't make puzzle scenarios. This area of Northern Germany is largely as flat as Holland. I've been generous, as to the cover in the design. It's flat, and largely treeless save along the water areas. The terrain is made from a period map and images from the actual area - as close as I could get to the real deal.
  13. There's a book called No Triumphant Procession that covers this battle, with a good deal on the fighting in Rethem. This battle as designed hews close to the actions depicted, down to the placements of units and rendering of the map. The battle is a question of whether or not a player can do better than the UK force did.
  14. The only Mud terrain set in the editor you will find on the campaign maps (or the master maps) is adjacent to (or in) streams - and it is sparse and obvious where used there. Bear in mind that the module time-frame takes place in early/mid Spring, after a snowy winter. The conditions as depicted are actually fairly generous, as a concession to game-play. I believe I also added ground conditions to the weather section in the briefings. Check that to get an idea of how risky it is to travel cross-country. It's still far less of a risk than adding Mud terrain tiles - which also play havoc with any AI movements.
  15. There isn't a listing for the big maps I made for the DF module included anywhere, but I'll attach some images of each them here for some visual reference for people looking to use them for their own purposes. These were either chopped up for the campaigns, QB's, and for the Rethem scenario that I made. There's a good deal of territory that wasn't used, as well. Rethem: Cologne/Koln: Heister: Kleve/Materborn: Remagen: Kranenburg: Erft Kanal: Elsdorf:
  16. I give orders to groups (generally by Platoon) by first arranging them in the Setup Zone before the game is started. Once the game starts, this can be done by reforming Platoons/Companies in a "quiet" area, and resetting the formation for movement. Spacing can be controlled with this method by placing the squads whatever distance between is desired. I will set Platoons in formations like a wedge, line, etc.. I'll also use two squads up, one back with support weapons and command units behind (in a diamond formation, generally). Once this is done, I'll issue orders for movement, with all squads in the Platoon. I generally experiment with which squad the order is issued from - Most often this is the forward-most unit, but sometimes the rear-most unit works best. This is generally towards some terrain that offers cover, over-watch, or some other tactical concern for that pathing. I will then adjust whatever squad/team ends up in an odd location. This is generally not too much of a task, as the formation is moving together and the setting of the end-point of the order is close to where it should be. The main thing is spending some time at Setup to get everyone in the formations they need to be in for the tasks assigned. (Ian answered as I was typing - generally the same idea!)
  17. It's two scenarios. No branching, as the operational situation is a foregone conclusion - The breakout was an impossibility, beyond very tiny groups. Playable from either side. I didn't change anything to create a "Draw" in the file, but you could potentially change the language to a certain point in the campaign file.
  18. There are windmills from CMFR onward. They are either in "Commercial" or "Other" Independent category.
  19. It was a module, not a battle pack as you stated. That's about 2/3rds of a full game.
  20. It was about 2 years total spent on active FR work. That was along with Covid interferences. The team for FR was far smaller, as well. The work done on FR speaks for itself.
  21. I only add them at the very, very end. Then, cut down from the final big map.
  22. Adding Flavor Objects to the giant maps should be fine. I did it for CMBN:MG maps, CMFI maps, and RT maps, and I and others cut them down from there for scenarios and QB maps. The issue with them shifting around only happens if you resize a second time. So, measure twice, cut once and you should be fine. Unless I'm hallucinating from making more of 'em.
  23. I grew up with historical boardgames in the early 1980's during my early-teen years, primarily playing Panzerblitz, setting up Drang Nach Osten, and mainly playing Squad Leader (pre-Advanced). Warfare has unfortunately been a family business, so it seeped in to me. I made many maps and counters on paper that had a pre-printed hex grid and designed a few for myself and friends. Imagination was the limit, pre-computer, but I had an inkling of the potential when I first started messing around with the Tandy machines back in the olden tymes. I mostly stopped all that that in my late-teens, and didn't play a computer game until I saw Close Combat 2 in a store in my late-20's, and was re-hooked. the linked campaigns and persistent map damage over battles, in particular were a huge draw. I then found the original CMBO searching the internet just around the time of the release, and ordered it immediately. I really got back into historical simulations at that time, because I could now make whatever I could imagine within historical confines. CM was the perfect vehicle - interesting to play, and interesting to make with. Depicting actual terrain is a huge draw for me, as it illuminates actions in ways that would have been inconceivable prior. The scenario editor, novel use of turns as slices of time that could be replayed, and the map editor all sealed the deal (along with the attention to historical detail, of course). And now I'm back to making maps.
×
×
  • Create New...