Pete Wenman

Hope you enjoyed it and glad you like the map P

^^^ The Crossroad at Monthardrou ?? P

From Zwaerts - German Armoured Units at Arnhem - identified destroyed German vehicles on the Arnhem Bridge P

I feel compelled to chip in here, but will no doubt regret doing so. Just because individuals are not aware of something does not mean that the information relating to it is not out there. A huge amount has been written on Arnhem and in recent years many of the "gaps" have been filled. If anybody is still relying on the book of a Bridge Too Far for their primary information then they are sadly out of date, let alone relying on the film. If you look at the MG scenario "All Round Defence" you can see the forces for both sides laid out as historically as the game allows (other than I replaced the two 231's with 234's and also put Grabner in a 234). Frost had in excess of 700 men at the bridge from a variety of units, including 4x ATG and numerous jeeps. Good sources are Kershaw Middlebrook The Two Then and Now volumes and a raft of work by Dutch historians, including Zwaerts - German Armoured Units at Arnhem P

As the guy that made the map i can state that in places it has some incredibly long sight lines. Not a problem if the historical weather is used (fog/mist and or rain) but in clear daytime conditions you can see an awfully long way in places which makes the defenders job a lot easier, particularly if they have mortars and artillery and well placed spotters and FOO's. P

^^^ This Scenario author mode is your friend, - watch and repeat the AI in action carrying out the plan(s) you have given it. After a while you should get a feel for what and why the AI is doing in game. P

These tags bring into play amended textures, for the most part as I recall being what names showed on the road signs for a particular tag. There might also be some building textures being amended. Edit Just to add these tags were included by BF and so have the tagged textures already included in the game brz files, and so the textures are not required in the mod folder. For any user tags however the tagged file either needs to be added to the mod folder or a replacement brz file provided. For BF provided tags to find what textures have what tags will need all of the brz files to be exploded and reviewed P

Yep, and it is easy I've worked with terrain textures, but the concept is the same for any mod'able element. Here is a simple example that turns the hit decal pink for easy spotting of hit locations The .bmp file goes in the mod folder. The text file is added to the scenario in the mission editor (bottom tab) in the same way that briefing texts are added. Simple scenario attached for BS showing this in action. Note the tag when added to the bmp file is [glow] but in the text file is only glow. Shout if you have any problems P tagglow.btt penetration decal [glow].bmp glow tag.txt

Because that would never happen

You can picture the scene where several T-90s are racing up the M20 from Dover to London, when an unexpected knocking noise causes them to halt. At which point two dozen Somalis from the Jungle jump out of the ammo bins and disappear into the undergrowth p

A revised version replacing the PzIII with Char B-2 (f) has been up on the repository pretty much since the vehicle pack came out. As you say the vehicle pack is required in order for this version to work http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=3382 and here's the file MG Borderland_vp.btt P

Sounds like Borderland. Germans attack from west (left map edge) P

@dark helix Glad you enjoyed it, and finally got to beat it This is the training film from my recruit days that was the inspiration for the mission. It obviously made a strong impression on me back in 1984 that I was able to remember it and then find it online. An August Morning was an attempt to recreate the situation shown and how hard it can be to find and overcome even quite a small force. It's a just a shame I was not able to make the mission using British troops ! P

The two ford closest to the bridges are "shallow fords" and can be crossed by both vehicles and infantry, the two outer fords are "deep fords" and so only infantry can use them. P

^^^ This Thanks. Interesting fact is that this map is a reworking of a CMSF map I did (not a game release map, but it was available on the repository) and while being a very close match in the editor the look is totally different due to the terrain tiles and game enhancements of BS over SF. P

@Rinaldi Great AAR and I love all the low down with the infantry views.That's how I play the game and how I like to see it. When making this scenario I weighted the balance in favour of the Russians attacking as AI which does mean in H2H that the defender has a very tough job and is unlikely to win. Regardless it looks like you both made the best use of the assets available, and as you say it does show how much of a meat grinder modern warfare is. P

Great to see this map featuring in an AAR. It's one of those that is really subtle to fight on with interesting LOS P

That's interesting as I'm testing things here also. I'm targeting trees and empty buildings (3 storey modular) and no APDS rounds have been used even when the cannon has expended all its HE. It's also interesting that the cannon has to pause firing when its own smoke blocks LOS, while the AGS does not create any smoke and so not have this problem. The AGS however has a massive beaten zone. More control over multiple weapons would be nice, but I suspect no time soon. P

In that case they all have the AGS, but getting it to fire is more tricky. It looks like the 30mm cannon fires 30mm HE-1 and the AGS (30mm HE) will not be used until the cannon has used its HE-1 up. HTH P

@markus544 Just to check are you unable to find the BTR-4E or do you mean that those you can find don't have the AGS-17 ? P

Just to check but smoke is turned on (alt K) ? If so a bit more detail would help re the scenario, arty mission type, and what happens when smoke shells land etc P

Yep - use it all the time P

This is pretty much where I got to, and the reason I went for individual scenarios. The campaign option allows for easy use of the core force file, which automatically deals with casualties and re-suppy between missions, but in order to provide any kind of natural feel to the subsequent missions also requires a high number of possible missions, most of which won't actually be used. Given that campaigns can only be against the AI this is a lot of work for not much return. Going down the route of using scenarios does require a 3rd party umpire, who will control the map damage, and hopefully be able to match that from previous battles to the current. He will also need to impose the casualty reductions on both sides forces. This can be done either by using the % reduction options in the editor and/or deleting sub units. (3rd platoon is deleted, reflecting the losses and that the remaining troops have been re-organised etc). I always thought this option for H2H would not involve too much work once the map is created, with the main work being the addition of the compounding map damage and determining the available troops for both side and setting set up zones. Playing against the AI would require a lot more work to craft AI plans and so I discarded that option. Looking at my notes I made the following observations. KIV this is based on Op Jupiter with the operation lasting about 16 hours in total - 05.00 - 21.00 hrs Overall operation timescale either imposed by the ref or agreed by both players, but must also account for the time compression seen within the game. To assist with the above each pause between battles to be at least 30 minutes of game time or longer at attackers request, but with the defender being able to utilise additional defences if a longer pause taken. (Foxholes, Trenches, Wire, MG Bunkers ?). Arty support and re-supply would increase with the length of pause. An element of RP perhaps being required here by the players and ref. Defender has the ability to withdraw some or all forces from any given location unless surrounded (subjective and down to the ref for border line case) This could result in a battle where the attacker has a walk over against a very light defence, but this is the nature of this style of play. I felt that the overall mission time and objectives should be set for each battle by the attacker, but the ref could overrule and amend these if not deemed appropriate. Likewise each player could determine the force level to be used for each mission, but again with concessions given to how close reserve forces are deemed to be to the frontline. Given the operational nature of this style of play I did not see the need for any VP to be allocated, and in my case no real concession to balance other than the determination of each sides core force and ability to resupply. My notes suggest I was then going to reduce experience, motivation and fitness to varying degrees for units where losses of 10%+ were seen for each battle. I'll carry this on a little later P

It's in CMSF2 at the moment for Red forces only P

Happy to add what I can. The premise was that part of Operation Jupiter carried out by 130 Brigade to the NW of Hill 112. 4th and 5th Dorsets and 7th Hampshires together with elements of 9 RTR being the main teeth arms. It was the relatively small map area required, plus the specific taskings for the units that made me think the operational concept could work together with the fact the battle took about a day. In Simple terms 1st battle was to be the advance of two companies of 5th Dorset plus two Sqdn 9 RTR to secure the German outpost line at Les Duanes, which should be relatively easy. The second battle was for the same two companies to continue forward and secure the Chateau de Fontaine . The securing of the Chateau was then the signal for two companies from 4th Dorsets (again with tank support) to start their advance to capture Eterville which was approx 1k to the east of the Chateau with this being the third battle. Further battles were to follow I've detailed the narrative here as it's the precision of the objectives that made me think it would be cool to see this within an operational type context. If the British did not succeed with the initial battles, it would be cool for them to have to undertake further attempts to secure their initial objectives. Also if they suffered higher losses than otherwise might be expected this would effect the later battles. So the snowballing effect of either being behind schedule and/or suffering high casualties would impact the subsequent actions. This leads to the heart of what you are trying to replicate - force preservation and the need to balance short term objectives against longer term. In the same way the German decisions (whether player or AI) would impact on how battles played out. As an example if the Germans decided to abandon the outpost line at Les Duanes then the British would have an easy victory, but those forces not committed by the Germans would then be available for later actions. The size of the map also was designed to allow flanking fire from the defenders should the British not be able to prevent a salient being created on one flank or the other. In operational game terms core forces are needed for both sides, which are then reduced back to those in action for any given battle, but with all loses carrying forward. A local reserve could be available for each side, but does not have to be committed. I'll have a dig around for the notes I made at the time and see if I can add any detail to the operational aspects I considered. P