Holdit

Napoleonics, Napoleonics, Napoleonics. There's an untapped market out there of frustrated 1796-1815 players who are weeping and gnashing their teeth for want of something decent to sink them into. Yes, yes I know, but there's no harm in dreaming...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Paton Returns: and no in dublin ieland we don't drink Guinnes <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Do me a favour and stop banging on about being Irish (of which I'm not convinced). I'd hate for people to get the wrong impression...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Berlichtingen: The method I use is scan the map I want to reproduce and the (in Photoshop) overlay a CM scale grid over it. Print that out and go to work in the CM editor<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I really must get a scanner. I do it the hard way: print the map out and use a pencil and ruler to make the grid. ----------------------------- Combat Mission Map Case [ 04-29-2001: Message edited by: Holdit ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spike: [QB]Does anyone use the COCAT system? I D/L it from one of the CM sites. It is really cool! I just wish i could figure out how to make my own maps on it? Does anyone know???? [QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What is it and what does it do?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GriffinCheng+: Ahh, congradulations! Too bad, I don't know if Angelfire has access counters so I have no idea what-so-ever how many has come to my site. NM. Griffin.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If it's of any help, my site had over 100 hits over the weekend of the sale. Considering that nobody else is linking to my site (yet), and it doesn't register with any search engines. Those of you with better-known sites can multiply that by whatever factor you feel applies. I would say that's evidence enough of the beneficial effect of SuperTed's sale. Incidentally, those of you without means of counting hits might be interested in www.nedstat.com . Regards,

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 109 Gustav: By now I know his address backwards moc.oohay@yecniuqdet <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ...and if you say it thirteen times while walking backwards round a church at midnight, the devil will appear... :eek:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzer Leader: I would like to see any comment with the following phrases disallowed when arguing a point on this board: <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> "Peng thread." :eek:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Terence: I'd like to create a CM map of Central Park because, well, I live in New York and I think it would be really cool to have a battle there. I've walked through the place a number of times and noticed in my sick freakish way a number of great spots for ambushes and mg nests and so on. But its a complicated sorta place and im not sure how to get started. Any ideas???<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You need a good map to start with. One approach is to draw a grid over it such that each square (e.g. 1 x 1 cm) encloses what will be a 100 x 100 m square in the CM map editor. This allows you to scale the map however you like, and means that you can get the whole park in, albeit a proportionately smaller one. Using the squares as guidelines you can then place the roads and any prominent landmarks. This gives you a skeleton onto which the other details can be added. I think the manual says you should do the elevations first, but I find they're better left until last. If the rest of the map is right, the elevations should cause any real problems. All in all, it's a surprisingly creative process. Have fun. Regards etc... Edited due to influence of red wine...mmmmmm... [ 04-09-2001: Message edited by: Holdit ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzer Leader: I would like to see any comment with the following phrases disallowed when arguing a point on this board: <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Attrit OpFor MLR Asset Never attrit assets in the OppFor MLR when you can kill some enemy frontline units instead. Regards etc... null Edited due to early onset of senile dementia... [ 04-09-2001: Message edited by: Holdit ]

Good post. Regarding maps, one or two points: The following tiles should be used very very sparingly: marsh, fire, and non-dirt roads. (for an exception see I've found that marsh tiles are a very handy way of representing streams that are fordable along their whole length. A row of contiguous ford tiles just looks stupid. Sometimes twenty yards is just too big. Where I come from any watercourse 20 yeards wide is a river. By the way, what was the exception? Land is not flat. Even the flattest map should have a dimple or bump or two. I think this can't be overstressed. The last thing I do with a map is to set the elevation to one higher than the average and click all round the map in a semi-random fashion. Then set the elevation one lower than the average and repeat the process. Don't forget to to put dips and bumps in forests and on hills too. there are sometimes scattered trees as a wind-break. Another very inportant point: lots and lots of scattered trees. Use things other than grain for fields. Try rough and brush. Use scattered trees for orchards. I find this works very well too. Just about every man-made thing will try to stay on the same elevation. That includes roads, fields, and towns. I wouldn't agree 100% with this. It very much depends upon where you are. (You should see my town!) Behind churches surround rough with a stone wall for a cemetery. This works very well too. Regards Combat Mission Map Case [This message has been edited by Holdit (edited 03-30-2001).]

Glad you like it. I aim to eventually include maps from as wide a range of periods as possible, so if you have a particular Roman battle in mind, let me know. Correction to what I said previously: I won't be doing Gettysburg because SinPoet has kindly given me permission to host his, upon which I don't think I could improve. Regards

Well spotted. There are one or two others, I think, but I couldn't name names off the top of my head. Regards,

CM2: Goldilocks gets indigestion (You need to have seen that famous cartoon to get this one.)

CM2: Dr Strangedolf (How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Steppe) [This message has been edited by Holdit (edited 03-26-2001).]

Make sure that you have absolutely nothing else running at the time the CD is burning, and also disconnect any internet/network connections. We used to have trouble with Easy CD Creator at work, and this was usually the cause. Hope this helps...

Brilliant! That's just the type of thing I was hoping to hear. Glad you like the Borodino map too - one reason it might seem so useful for CM is that it's the one that (so far) was scaled down the most to make it fit. If it's ambushed you're after, you might be interested in a current work-in-progress, which is Beal na mBlath, the site of the ambush in which Michael Collins was killed - the one "battlefield" I can claim to have visited. Also in the pipeline: Ligny (1815) and, by request, Wingen-Sur-Moder (1945). I've just seen a couple of Battleground American Civil War titles going for a fiver a piece in my local games shop so I might give Antietam or Gettysburg a try at some point.

Thanks for all the feedback, lads. Vergeltungswaffe: I'm looking forward to the challenge. Give a shout when you know what you need.

Further to an earlier thread, the title of which I can't remember even though I named it, I am pleased to annouce that the CM Map Case is now open for your perusal. Inside are maps for scenarios (i.e. without units or VL's) and maps of historical battlefields, for anyone who would like to wander around Quatre Bras in 3D. Check it out at: http://homepage.eircom.net/~holdit/

That's the name of a site that I've just put together. It contains maps for use in scenario design, and maps of famous battlefields just for the hell of it. Check it out at: http://homepage.eircom.net/~holdit

So do I. Especially since you might well end up spending more time watching playbacks than issuing orders, since 1 minute action would probably be a bit short for the slower scale of Napoleonic battles. 10-15 minutes would probably be better. Suddenly you're directing feature-length war films . I couldn't agree more. I only wish someone who could make a difference was reading all this... Yes! This is what I've been saying for ages. Give the players the tools, and they'll provide the battles. Just get the bloody engine and the editor right is all I ask. My thoughts exactly. A lovely-looking game, but a wasted opportunity. My guess would be that (a) their knowledge of the period was sketchy at best, and ( their focus was more on playability than realism. It used to amaze me too, but not any more. You're quite right. In fact, I reckon that with some knowledge of the period and a few good sets of rules, you could come up with a design for an excellent Napoleonic wargame. I'm doing something along these lines as a long-term on-and-off project by using BGW as a virtual tabletop. What we really need, I think, is something like "Saving Fusilier Dupont" to generate a bit of interest and, hopefully, when all the publishers have finished jumping on the bandwagon, one or two decent games will result... Bah! [This message has been edited by Holdit (because his keyboard can't spell)] [This message has been edited by Holdit (edited 02-22-2001).]

Quite. If you've read the book, you realise that, while visually well done (apart from the bloody annoying slow motion), the film is actually pretty mediocre. "Crack of doom" aka "The Savage Mountain" is another Willi Heinrich novel I'd highly recommend. [This message has been edited by Holdit (edited 02-22-2001).]

But of course... Seriously, though, I think too much emphasis is placed on the deatils of this or that battle, to the detriment of the game itself. Miniature gamers have for years been recreating lesser-known but nevertheless fascinating smaller engagements like Liebertwolkwitz, Sabugal, Maida etc. Miniature wargames magazines regularly contain historical details of and hints on how to wargame various actions, but a computer gamer, lacking the correct tools, can rarely make anything of it.

You're right. In fact, given the following that the BGN series still seems to have, I'm surprised that the Napoleonic era is such a poor relation to WW2. Nobody seems to be interested in making a decent stab at it, yet I imagine that a Napoleonic game would provide fewer technical challenges than a WW2 game. I suppose what we need is a blockbusting Waterloo/Borodino/Austerlitz movie... What I'd like to see someone do...(drifting off into the realm of pure fantasy)...would be for a Steel panthers treatment; concentrate on giving players the units, the commanders and a good, realistic, engine, combined with a map, repeat, map and scenario editor, and let the players create their own battles and OBs. I'm positive that there wouldn't be any shortage... [This message has been edited by Holdit (edited 02-19-2001).]

Well, it's easy to be top when there's precious little by way of competition, and the problems I find with the BG Napoleonic system are nothing to do with what was and wasn't state of the art at the time, but more to do with design decisions that are just part of the number-crunching. Having said that, I think the entire series was beautiful, especially with the 32-bit upgrades applied (all three are still on my hard drive too, but more as a virtual tabletop). Visually, the games are a treat; 3D is nice, but it's not necessary for a wonderful game. In fact, if the faults in the BGW engine were fixed but the look and feel left as it is, I'd buy it again without hesitation. It's just that the unrealistic results that occurred in the game spoiled the playability for me.

I wouldn't call his Napoleonic games top of the line at all. There are some very dodgy things happening within the Battleground engine, which are not at all supported by my own readings. A good game it may be, but a good recreation of Napoleonic Warfare it isn't.