Robert Olesen

Army at Dawn looks like a good read, but I'd rather have a web reference if possible.

The Raid battle problem is handled identically in v2.02 for CMBB and v1.00b for CMAK - it ought to be OK now, I adjusted the difficulty to hopefully reflect the situation. But do tell me if you find a problem with it. The "Fight with own division problem" is known - I have just uploaded a version that fixes it: http://www.roqc.cdgroup.org/files/ROQC_CMAK_Sheets_1_00c.zip IIRC it's otherwise identical to 1.00b

The Americans and British landed in western Nort Africa in November 1942. At that time they fought the Vichy French, but not, it appears, the Germans or Italians. Yet the Americans appear in the game as a valid Allied force in November 1942, and the Vichy French do not. What's the catch here? And when did the Americans and British get into contact for the first time with the Germans or Italians in the western part of the North African region? I'd appreciate a link to a site that can give me an overview of the history of that theatre. I'd like to present the Americans properly in this theatre - it is after all the first time they appear in ROQC On a related note: Which of the commonwealth nationalities took part in this theatre? Thanks. [ February 17, 2004, 02:03 PM: Message edited by: Robert Olesen ]

Thanks, Derfel. You should give it a try. It isn't that difficult. What's Byte Battles?

What is the problem? Oops, should be VAA, not V2. You're welcome. And thank you for the appreciation

Thanks, guys. Good to know. Please remember to tell me about any errors you might find. Inconveniences too. And improvement suggestions are ofc. welcome as well.

So, how does it work? Flawlessly? Is anybody using it? I'm not getting any feedback.

The "Always fight with own division" toggle doesn't work in 1.00b. You'll have to keep track of that manually, as I'd like to delay an update till I find some more serious problems.

Version 1.00b posted (see the first post). Three errors were corrected: - You could not play Italy and East Africa in v1.00a - Generation of next battle didn't delete all die rolls in 1.00a - Raid battle handicap modifiers corrected

There is an embarassing bug in v1.01a - basically you can only play the North African campaign. I'l upload a fix asap.

I must be sounding like a cracked record, but I had to make another update. A minor matter, but still anoying: The raid battle handicap modifiers were a bit strange - battles were set to be easier at night than at day, and it should be different. Raiding at night is in general an advantage because the reduced visibility goes well with the limited target. Get 2.02 at the usual place

Yes, it's a matter of preference. It would be great if one could import a map into the editor while keeping the units. It's strange that it can't be done.

Version 2.01 has now been uploaded. get it at the usual place There are two changes: 1) Raid battles on a Gun battery and Mortar battery adjusted to compensate for the fact that you cannot ensure that the enemy guns or mortars have a reduced ammunition load. 2) Adjustment for the fortification point bug added. This bug gives the attacker kill points for the defenders? fortifications as if they were destroyed. The campaign files are now updated to 2.01 [ February 10, 2004, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: Robert Olesen ]

Blackbear, the problem with using pre-generated maps is that you have to purchase your core force each time you set up the game in the editor. How do you deal with that? Do you remember to edit all the specifics into the core force (no ammo, different quality levels, HQ bonus values)?

Yes, they are updated. Go right ahead.

Bumping this to ensure that as many as possible get the news.

The Long Walk is supposed to be a long walk - that is an infantry campaign. But it doesn't really matter, you can call it whatever you want. And the long walk starts in June 41, your campaign seems to start in 42 - there weren't any PzIV F2 in 41. Your core force seems to be a bit large - a platoon of PzIV F2 and a platoon of PZIIIJ is probably well over 600 points, perhaps over 800. If you couple that with an offensive that gives you more support, you're likely to get larger battles. I'd advise using a smaller core force. I can't help you there. You'll have to complain to the powers that be at BFC. [ February 09, 2004, 03:14 PM: Message edited by: Robert Olesen ]

I just forgor to delete the custom campaigns from the CMBB version. Not a problem - just ignore that section for now while I upload a corrected version.

You can get the long awaited version 1.00b here: Rules in MS Word format (1618k) Spreadsheet in Excel format (271k) Example in Excel format (278k) I'm not sure why the rules got to be so large - perhaps Word converted a picture to bmp format behind my back. This version is a beta version (thus 1.00e, not 1.00), but I don't really expect to add more features for a while, so it's only a question of testing before it becomes 1.00 Please report any problems and suggestions here, or send me an email. Edit: Rules updated: Suggested campaigns removed. Edit: German division availability table made more readable. No rules changes. Edit 12.Feb.04: Version 1.00b posted Edit 20.Feb.04: Version 1.00e posted [ February 20, 2004, 03:58 PM: Message edited by: Robert Olesen ]

Hey jamesroe16, I'm flattered But my alias is RobO, and the campaign is ROQC for RobO's Quick Campaign (it's not as quick as it used to be, but still quite doable). As for your question, here's the answer: I needed to complete an example game (I obviously needed to update the example that's used to illustrate the rules) in order to complete the "after battle" part of the rules. I have just completed that, and will do an update on the rules. So, I should have a test/beta version out in a couple of days. The problem is that I found that the example game has to be redone, see http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=001390 - I used a die roll of 10 for the enemy force handicap in the example, and chances are good that I need to introduce a large die roll modifier for the exact type of game I used in the example (raid on a gun battery). Or that type of game has to be removed. In both cases, I'll need to redo the example. That takes time. But I'll publish a first beta version regardless, using the example game I just played through even if it doesn't match the rules completely, so that anxious players like you have something to play with. That will also give me some feedback on errors. So, expect something in a few days. Oh, btw, the beta version link is now outdated. The newest CMBB version is on the cdgroup link (also in my sig). [ February 07, 2004, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: Robert Olesen ]

There is a problem with Raids on a gun or mortar battery, see here: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=001390 I'd advise you to either - take the challenge, - adjust the difficulty (subtract - say - 4 from the die roll for the enemy force handicap) or - reroll the battle (or raid type) if you get such a raid. I'll update the rules when I figure out how to deal with it (and get the time to do it).

I only know one who did finish a campaign from 1941 to 1945. He started again with the same core force :eek: But I expect there are a fairly large number of people using ROQC that I don't know about. Perhaps others can share their experiences with longer campaigns.

When you import troops into a QB their ammo loadout is kept, except if you edit the ammo to zero, in which case the QB amo setting is used. This is true for your own troops, but not for the enemy, it appears. I have tried both CMBB and CMAK (patched), and have tried setting the ammo level to all the possible interesting combinations I could find (none, 1 HE, 1 of each available type etc.) and in all cases, the units turn up with a full ammo load (which as the QB setting). I'd love to find a workaround or have this fixed. It makes those raid battles in ROQC where you go up against a gun battery very difficult. I'll have to remove them or adjust the difficulty a good deal. And I have been told that a gun battery that was set to fire indirectly isn't all that easy to adjust to direct fire mode, thus a low ammo setting for such a gun is appropriate. It could be wrong. JasonC, you ought to have some experience with that?

Von Rosen, don't tell me it's too complicated. I've gone to great lengths to make it as easy to use as possible I assure you, it's worth the effort. You don't have to read all the rules, you can skip the section on how to roll up the battle parameters. It does provide some nice background info, but you can read it later.

Version 2 is out. Please move discussions to that thread unless they are specifically about version 1.