Pete Wenman

QB-68 is actually the map from the first scenario in the Courage and Fortitude campaign. P

Because CMSF didn't have any water type tiles. P

This was done a while ago for CMSF, http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=484 but it shows what can be done P

Hey don't worry about being obdurate - this is your map and you can do what you like with it. However as it stands it has the necessary space and obvious objectives for an attack from the south edge. Let me have the revised map, but before you do so select the two forces and deploy the defender in the editor as if you were setting up to play as the defender. Either via dropbox or send it to me at petewenman at navairat.com - change at to @ obviously P

Again - I think you are over thinking this and seeking perfection. You agree this is a fictional map, with a fictional force composition, and yet you worry about which way is north. If the game play is good, no one will care. (Or if they do we can just ignore them) As for not being able to add to the map on the north side I suspect that it is because you have moved 2k north from the default at start map position when building the larger map from which I assume this is cut. But no worries we don't need to expand to the north. My vote is to do as I suggested yesterday. Live with this map as it is, extend it to the south so the off map force has a set up zone out of sight of the rest of the map and chose the opposing forces. If it makes you feel better have the Germans attacking from the South and the Brits on defence, but I would stick with your original intent. Remember this is about scenario design so lets keep going with what we have as there is a danger otherwise that you'll never finish anything So tonight's task is to: Extend the map a little to the south to create an out of sight SUZ Select a British company size force Select a German platoon size force and 6 or so attached teams. P

I do wonder if you are overthinking things a little here. We have a saying in the UK - KISS - Keep it simple stupid, and it works well for CM - sorry about the stupid bit I like the idea of working the map on the north - south axis, but my inclination would be to have the British advancing from the south - just because the map works better that way. Maybe a couple of touch objectives at the railway station and along the railway line, with two occupy objectives for the two farms. It might be the southern edge of the map needs to be increased a little with some low ground added to allow a set up zone along the south edge, but that is not visible from the rest of the map. As for force size I'd suggest the British attack at company strength, and so the Germans defend with a platoon, plus some attachments - scouts lmg teams etc Nice and small, nice and simple. So tonight's task is to: Select a British company size force Select a German platoon size force and 6 or so attached teams. Don't worry about vehicles at this stage other than any that come with the selected force. No right or wrong here, but we have to start somewhere. P

OK, some initial thoughts. All the maps are excellent, with a style of their own. I would suggest however that it is noticeable that they are fictional. I think it is due to the high object density and small fields. I've fallen into the same trap in the past and you can end up with an overcrowded map sometimes. A couple of points, On the Station de Toquemont I would avoid the kinks in the railway line where it passes through the cutting. Rivers and bridges can cause the AI a lot of problems. Too much bocage upsets some players Your field layout across all the maps is very square and looks a little un-natural as a consequence. George Mc's Wittmans Demise is a great example of a natural map. There are areas with a lot of map objects, but there are also a lot of open areas. Field edges are irregular etc The mapoverlay option has made it so much easier to create actual landscapes and I find it easier to do so than create fictional ones now ! If you want to go the historical or real route this is a good place to start for France http://www.geoportail.gouv.fr/donnee/51/cartes-ign I use screencaptures to build a map image at the required resolution which is then cut to size to be used as an editor overlay image. Jon covered this in his SOO thread. But overall cracking maps and a good reward for the time you have spent on them. Good idea to start with something small as you are far more likely to finish it, and be satisfied with it. If we work with the Station de Toquemont map: The first thing that jumps out of me that this a good map, but I can tell it was made as a map, rather than for a game scenario. Jon covered the concept here in his thread, but it really helps if at the outset, there is some design concept regarding the battle. What are the objectives for the scenario What direction will the opposing forces be moving (what map edges can be considered friendly to either side) Can both forces set up out of sight of the other at game start. These points are all important to the player(s) and so must be important to the designer. So tonight's task is to give consideration to the following. 1a. What are to be the objectives for our scenario in terms of both the defender and the attacker. 1b. Give consideration to both terrain and unit objectives in this regard (touch, occupy, spot, destroy etc) 2. What is your suggested force size and composition for the attacker and defender . (A 3:1 ratio is not a bad place to start, so if the defenders are at platoon size the attackers will be at company strength - a gross over simplification I know but it's not a bad place to start) P

Happy to help, either here or offline. I've you've not already done so check out JonS's Sheriff of Oosterbeek scenario design thread http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=110294 and George Mc's scenario design handbook http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1194 Lets talk P

Well I won't argue with that P

I don't want to labour the point ..........but I've not really looked at VB although I'm sure I recall somebody is working on one. With regard to Hill 112 it's not a complex map at all. If anything it's a very simple map, with lots of open fields, a small wood, a couple of orchards and a very low hill. Oh and it's big - say a map of at least 3k x 3k, a big plain, for the most part, featureless map ! and that's why it's not on my to do list, as there are far more interesting maps out there to do P

I remain to be convinced, but here's the deal, give it a go I'll provide editor support and encouragement, and we'll see what you end up with. I fully agree with you here, but I suspect we may be in a minority of 2 as most scenario complaints are all about balance. At 8m x 8m tiles that's a lot of editor clicking I think you are perhaps under estimating the number of historical maps out there, but in the context of Normandy you are asking for a huge area to be mapped. Other than Hill 112 what other maps do you think should be made, (genuine question as I'm interested) P

Just read this thread I considered doing Hill 112 but when researching the battle it became obvious it would actually make a very poor scenario due to the nature of the fighting there. That's why I moved half a mile or so to the East and went with the "Shadow of the Hill" missions. The actions here gave a much better basis for interesting CM scale actions. It's worth considering that well known actions don't necessarily make good scenarios. Wittman hitting 7th Armoured Div at Villers Bocage, is a good example of this. As for making quick scenarios do consider using existing maps and setting up a simple tactical problem on part of a larger map. A platoon patrol or a company attack on a large walled farm as examples can be great fun to play, and are a great way to learn the editor. Getting a half decent AI plan to attack a static defense is a good way to get a grip on AI plans which can then be carried across to larger maps. If H2H is what you like then it's even easier. P

It does 2/353 GIR =2nd battalion 353rd Glider Infantry Regiment P

I've got to disagree with this. CM is a sandbox game so even the scenario designer has no idea as to how a player will fight any given battle and use the assets available I will agree that maybe not all scenarios are winnable for a given side - how can they be unless you want every one to result in a draw ? P

Oh so easy to write - but lets just think what is being asked here. Some of the variables that come to mind, without any real thought Play style Which side is being played WEGO or RT AI or HTH First time player or Grognard Crap player or expert tactician If vs AI which AI plan is being played Who's definition of "reasonably sensible tactics" is used. I could go on.... All these will affect how easy or not a given scenario is to play, before we even start talking about the forces involved, the terrain, the map size. And the really bad news (and I can only talk for myself) is that I don't want my labours of love easily won on their first play. I want them to be challenging and I want them to have a good basis in historical reality. As for numbers I make it that CMFI has 10 campaigns and some 35 scenarios across the two modules. Doesn't seem too shabby for starters P

I never added set up zones or objectives so unless someone else has done so for their own benefit you are out of luck. I do believe however chunks of the map (maybe with some slight alterations) made into GL QB's but don't ask me which one(s) P

There is a google map page showing the location of some of the historical battles https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=213046468374458899658.0004c2f2cbb3b4c5d62f4&msa=0 but it doesn't seem to get a lot of attention. P

For those not paying attention to the news updates The CMFI/GL bundle is now available http://www.battlefront.com/community/announcement.php?f=137&a=624 and the GL demo is also up http://www.battlefront.com/community/announcement.php?f=137&a=622 P

Are you sure you don't mean Roger Waters P

Not now ;-) P

It Never Snows in September P

17th September P

I can sleep easy now P

All my moves were at quick and I certainly did not have to use slow. I'm patched to 2.01 - how about you? P

I think it is your waypoint placement as I was able to get the Tigers to go where ever I wanted them to. I tend to be specific with my wp placement and so the Tiger had a clear route to follow, in this case a wp on the other side of each gap I wanted it to use. The issue might be if you are only placing one wp on the far side of the map and then expecting the Tiger to follow the route you have in mind. Let me know if that works P