Bimmer

Thanks for the feedback. After you've played it as Blue, you may want to go and read the Red briefing that explains the rationale for the force type and deployment. It may well need tweaking, but it was not done randomly. Also, there are three very different Red AI plans, so Red behavior may have been quite different for some of you. I am curious as to the tactics used. Please post AARs detailing your approach to the scenario. The map is designed to give Blue lots of options. I'd like to hear how people dealt with the situation the first time through. Also, please describe how Red acted when you played so that I can adjust the AI plan distribution if necessary.

A Stryker unit is conducting convoy route security operations when one of their vehicles suffers a mechanical breakdown in a small, rural village. While the crew is trying to figure out the problem, a shot rings out from inside the village... Best played as Blue or two-player. For your gaming pleasure, available here: http://files-upload.com/419177/VillageofTrouble.zip.html Comments, criticisms, etc. most appreciated.

Haven't seen fire yet, but I did notice today that artillery seems to knock the foliage off of bushes (and presumably trees, but there weren't any where I was dropping mortar rounds). That was pretty cool.

Wow, off-topic in two posts. I'd like to think that's some sort of a record, but sadly... Anyway, the idea for my first suggestion came from reading an AAR of 2/5 Marines in Fallujah, where the company tank reserve was held within 200m or so of the objective area. If you want to force the player to keep the reserve as a reserve, you must either rely on the player to adhere to conditions in the briefing or set the reserve as a reinforcement that magically appears on the map when you want it to. Either one of these is a serviceable choice; IMHO a locking option for on-map reinforcements would be preferable in recreating such a situation. As to the levels of fire, I'm referring to direct fire, not artillery (the artillery system is fine the way it is). I for one am not bothered at all by the number of available interface commands, and would gladly trade a slight increase in interface complexity for more control over what my forces do. Direct fire, being considerably more common than artillery, would benefit from more direct player control.

First off, I'm really enjoying the game thus far. I've spent more time in the editor than playing, but that's nothing new. Hopefully I'll have some scenarios ready soon. Anyway, a couple things that seem like they might be useful additions: - Allow reinforcements to optionally start on-map but locked. This would allow the designer to establish an on-map reserve that the player could not control until a set time, but that would unlock on contact with the enemy. Not a major thing, but it would give scenario designers another set of options. - Allow the designer or player to set levels of fire. Something along the lines of suppressive/normal/harassing. This would allow more control over ammunition expenditure as well as giving more tactical control of the battle. My .02.

On a related topic, I've got a scenario that I'm just about finished with, but no place to host it. Can anybody recommend a good free file host?

Just a quick note of congratulations to all the players, and particularly those who managed to come out on top of their respective groups. Special thanks to my fellow designers, George and Rick, and of course to Holien for running the whole show. We all had fun designing and testing the scenarios, and hope that they provided an interesting set of challenges for the players. After Holien has recovered, I'll start talking to him about another tourney, so watch this space. I've already got some scenario ideas... -Bimmer Lead Designer

My research confirms what Kingfish posted. I Battalion (Panthers) was trapped east of the Orne waiting for fuel and did not participate in the battle. They arrived late in the evening of 7 June and were slotted into the line, along with 26th Panzergrenadier Regiment, west of Meyer's 25th PzG Regt. I found nothing to suggest the 12th SS forces involved had any armor other than the PzIVs of II Battalion. The 12th SS continued fighting in this area for almost a month, IIRC - perhaps the Panthers to which you are referring were knocked out later on?

Here's a shot of most of the map (as much as I could get) looking north.

Nah, I wasn't complaining, just musing. And an actual download link? Geez, you want me to make it easy or something? I mean, anybody ambitious enough to go after a 100 turn scenario should be willing to chase it down...

Hmmm, perhaps my oversight in failing to actually NAME the scenario in my big announcement may have had some negative effect on the willingness of people to download it... (The name is actually part of a quote from "Panzer" Meyer's discussion of the battle in his book.) Anyway, that said, what is it about it that strikes you as particularly insanity-induced? FYI, I'm still working on development - one thing I have yet to do is get the historical commanders' names inserted where I have them. Let the insanity continue.

20,000 points. 12+ square kilometer map. 100 turns. Big. The battle represented is the 7 June 1944 clash between elements of the 12th SS and the 3rd Canadian Infantry Division north of Carpiquet Airfield. I've made it as historically correct as I can based on available sources. As you might expect, something this big will likely need some tweaking, so if you play it please leave me some feedback over at TPG. Thanks and enjoy.

OK, I will work up a basic storyline and some guidelines for forces and maps. If you want me to design one of the scenarios, I'm happy to do it; if you have enough other designers who want to participate I can just coordinate the design and testing. Drop me an email and I'll send along the outline in the next day or two.

Either game is fine with me. Are you planning to work up the storyline or do you want to leave that to the designers? General similarity between maps should be fairly easy to achieve. Agree on the point of having some interesting feature (bridge, town, crossroads, etc.) on map or nearby to give reason for fighting over the area. Related point on forces - some degree of continuity will be required. Designers must work together within storyline to make sure there is consistency between scenarios. Maybe designers could participate in playtesting phase to speed things up.

A few thoughts on your thoughts: I would suggest that a pre-defined script is a necessity if you want to run a balanced tournament. Probably Side A attack, meeting engagement, Side B (counter)attack. Locking players into playing Axis or Allied through the entire tourney might be limiting. How players advance, or if you use round robin with aggregate points at the end determining the winner (I would use the latter) needs to be resolved. Maps need not be physically connected to keep continuity of story line. In fact, having different maps keeps things more interesting for the players. You are probably talking about smallish maps (to minimize approach time) and reinforced company size attacking forces. Limited armor is possible, but forces should be primarily infantry, as the loss of a tank or two in such small scenarios can be devastating (unless cheap, early war tanks or light armor are used). The trick is going to be to create scenarios that allow the players some real flexibility rather than just forcing them (especially the defenders) to line up and die. While there is plenty of time, it is advantageous to get the scenarios underway ASAP, as even light testing will eat up time.

Holien, I never got an email from you, but from your description here it sounds like a viable project. How many scenarios do you need? If you really want to pursue the story line continuity angle, perhaps several designers could agree upon (or be provided with) the basic story line and then each design a scenario to fit. This would spread the workload as well as giving players a more varied experience. Let me know if/how you want to proceed.

I might be able to help you out. Drop me an email with your requirements and preferences and I'll see if I can put something together for you. aeg at computer dot net Edit: Go to the Proving Grounds or the Scenario Depot to see examples of my work. Search for the same user name as on Battlefront. [ February 18, 2005, 06:04 AM: Message edited by: Bimmer ]

My first bet would be spyware and/or virus. Get a couple of anti-spyware programs (AdAware, Spybot S&D are the one's I use) and run a virus scan (I've had good luck with the TrendMicro online scan). Then stop using IE forever - get Mozilla, Opera, or a similar browser and move on feeling (reasonably) secure.

I've been running and Audigy 2 ZS for about a month now with no problems in CMAK (a few in IL2FB). I just updated the drivers to the latest available and most of the problems seem to be gone, though I'm not sure the sound quality is exactly as good as before, though this could be a settings issue.

I've only used the ones that came with my card (FX5900XT - I don't recall what version those were) and the 56.72s. I've had no problems in CMAK, IL2FB, RS3, or anything else I've tried. Can't speak to frame rates of later versions, which could theoretically be higher, but the 56.72s are stable.

I have a similar system (64 3200+, 1GB RAM, FX5900XT). I had lock-up/crash problems when I upgraded from 512MB RAM - the culprit was a bad RAM stick. Swapped it out and everything was fine. Some hardware testing, as suggested, is certainly in order. BTW, the temps you see are about the same as what I get on my rig, and I have had no temp-related issues.

I think you need to run 2x FSAA to get it to work properly. I ran one up until recently and it worked without any problems. Also, you cannot alt-tab out without causing graphics corruption. Other than that, it's just fine.

I have posted four scenarios at TPG: Grinding toward Messina Palermo by Morning Settling in for the Winter On the Road from Niscemi All are best played as two-player games. If you play them, please consider reviewing them. Any comments (good, bad, or indifferent) are appreciated. Enjoy. The Proving Grounds

I have posted four scenarios at TPG: Grinding toward Messina Palermo by Morning Settling in for the Winter On the Road from Niscemi All are best played as two-player games. If you play them, please consider reviewing them. Any comments (good, bad, or indifferent) are appreciated. Enjoy. The Proving Grounds

FWIW, D'Este dedicates 34 pages to the battle for Primasole Bridge (13-15 July), including three small but useful maps. I would think it a useful reference for building your operation, but depending on your desired level of historical detail, perhaps not enough to answer all your questions.