Double Deuce
-
Posts
158 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Double Deuce
-
-
In the 80's some of us did it routinely but I can't remember if it was a standard practice. When I was on the M60A3s I kept an extra long hand mic cable (I think it was 50') to connect my CVC to the external radio/intercom on the rear fender while I dismounted to scout things out. I missed that ability when we went to the M1's.
-
So, looking at the Scenario Depot @thefewgoodmen.com for the Final Blitzkrieg module it seems to be seriously lacking in extra content (only 14 scenarios listed) (also a lot lower forum post count). Is this because it was the most recent module released (not counting the addon for other base modules)? At the moment, I'm torn between getting either Final Blitzkrieg or Red Thunder (or both
) but to be honest, late war East Front isn't something I really fancy so am leaning more towards FB. I'd just like to think that there's a decent size player base to justify me putting in the hours needed to design content.
-
11 hours ago, MikeyD said:
Admit it, creating that map was great fun, wasn't it!
Yeah, the 2nd time was mush better. The first time I was almost done, trying to add in flavor objects, and overwrote that file with a new, empty file.
Rest assured, I'm backing up regularly now.
-
Well, I took the plunge and started designing a small campaign (just starting with a single scenario and progressing from there). I'm using Battle for Normandy since that's the one I currently own (of the WWII ones). Once I experiment and get the design process down, as much as feasible, I'll probably get Final Blitzkrieg or Red Thunder and make a more detailed campaign.
Mostly finished first map attached. Really need to find some better screenshot software or learn how to better use what I got . . .
-
Many, many years ago I ran multiplayer games like this using Steel Panthers (both the WWII and Modern versions). I never tried using CM but I'm sure it'll be pretty involved and time intensive. The one advantage I found with using Steel Panthers was the random map generator which saved lots of time. It'll be interesting to see how this project turns out.
-
I have come back to the Combat Mission series after a 'really' long break but don't have either Final Blitzkrieg or Red Thunder yet (honestly I tend to prefer early war stuff). In previous attempts to design stuff for Battle for Normandy I always ended up feeling overwhelmed and dropping those projects. I have several ideas and would really like to pick up the design torch again and try to carry at least one scenario/mini campaign through to the end. I would like them to be well produced, have a high quality feel and immersive (probably my OCD). Where is the best place to start for learning design tips and such (hopefully with pictures cause that's how I learn best)???
-
Nice, I've been waiting for someone to start posting more on the Map Editor.
-
Cool, I was wondering how you were going to handle the unit headcounts/strengths once they fall below 50%The CMPC operational DAR i am posting on the forum will be used as a beta test of the rules set i am working on -
I looked at using TOAW but it didn't go into enough detail so I ended up using spreadsheets to supplement it. A real bookkeeping nightmare right there.
-
The AI will never be up to par as far as playing against another Human but most players shy away from battles they see as unbalanced, especially those who are into bragging rights and ladders. That usually runs off prospective players into any multi-player campaign. I ran into the same obstacles using Steel Panthers but when I switched to a Player vs AI format I found that the players seemed to enjoy it much more and they also helped me with ideas in advancing the overall storyline. We also were not effected by players dropping out or slow PbeM turn rates.I'm not a big fan of the AI in any of the wargames i've played, and CM is no exception, IMO it would be too big a task to make them effective against human players, and that's something i haven't got the time, or the inclination to do, however you sound eminently qualified to do it
If its is OK with you, I think I might review your CMx2 H2H Campaigns docs and see if I can morph parts of it in my existing system I use with Steel Panthers and come up with a new CM based Player vs AI system.
-
Yes, I believe that would be necessary which would obviously add a pretty good amount of work onto the GM. I admit I am pretty rusty with CM having not played for some time but with the Map Editor now available in CMFI I have been revisiting running an umpired game in that type of format.Interesting, but wouldn't that mean i would have to create AI plans for the CM battles that would be generated ? -
I have PzC Sicily '43, and i am in the process of preparing a scenario from it to play as an umpired operation in conjunction with CMFI.
I know that there are a section of players who just prefer to play against the AI. Have you considered using this format but with a group playing a team game against the AI where you handle the operational side of things for everyone along with the enemy's movements but letting each player command say their own company? Basically it would sort of be a game of continuous scenarios/quick-battles but players would keep their command for the duration and follow it through the campaign? I did this many times before over the years using Steel Panthers and players seemed to enjoy the small custom battles while leading their men through what essentially becomes a custom designed operation.
-
There is no possibility of this campaign being real time?
If your opponent in each mission is willing to fight the battle real time we could do that however everyone will fight a different opponent in each mission. Because of the pairing being different each mission it would likely need to be one or the other (Pbem or RT) for everyone.
-
OK, it would not be a real Meta Campaign like many might be used to and nowhere near the scale of the upcoming Operation Nemesis Meta Campaign but here is my "idea".
The game will be based on draft rule information found here: KRASNOVIAN WAR but will be further tweaked as the concept is developed. It will be Red vs Red so that it will be more balanced to test the concept out further and work out the kinks. It will be kept fairly small for the same reasons. Both nations start with the same forces but there will be a replacement purchase system and I'm working out the basics for it at this time (it will be a very bare bones system). We won't get into too many variables in this go around (such a Motivation and Fitness) although I do have a basic concept that will add in a little bit for Experience but only for HQ units. Supply will be modeled but not for individual units, it will affect the entire force.
The situation is a short fictional Border War between the Republic of Mojave (supported by the US and UK) and the People’s Democratic Republic of Krasnovia (supported by the Russian Federation through their Syrian proxy). The initial battle will be a Meeting Engagement on an 800x800 meter map representing a Border Post between the 2 countries that has been abandoned by UN Forces eager to avoid getting caught in a shooting war. The battle will be between 2 equally matched BRDM Recon Companies for both nations. The survivors will be added to each team's OOB AND the results will determine who gets the initiative in the 2nd battle. The overall mission is the destruction of the opposing sides HQ element. All players will play the same Pbem "mission" and I will use the results from ALL the completed Pbem's to determine outcome as well as the new start location for the next mission (that's why I need to have an odd number of Pbem battles for each "operational turn"). There will 2 main objectives during the Pbem's:
- 1) Destroy enemy forces
- 2) Capture objectives (to gain Replacement Points)
You will not get points for killing the enemy, you will just reduce the forces you have to fight each succeeding mission until the enemy force finally collapses.
For the game I would need 2 teams of equal numbers but enough to have an odd number of Pbem's per mission (there is a reason for this that will be outlined later). Each team will have a senior commander BUT fear not, he will not be burdened with a large number of extra responsibilities. The main thing will be to purchase replacements and decide what extra forces to commit to the missions (those that are in reserve).
Since I am still learning things about the game and it limits (mostly how to use the Editor
), everything is still in the development/design phase so it is not expected to start right away.Anyone interested?
- 1) Destroy enemy forces
-
I managed to find numerous old mine related threads but none that seemed to answer this question.
Basically, does a single Mine Marker cover a single 8x8 meter terrain tile? If I want to cover a 4x4 grid would that require 16 mines or does the single mine marker placement extend further?
I found all the Mine Marking/Clear information but nothing seemed to confirm the tile coverage question.
-
If we can come up with a base point value for each unit and then add multiplying factor (to modify that base value) based on Experience, Motivation, Fitness and supply may be all that is needed. However, after my initial paying around with that, I'm finding it much easier said than done.
My problem so far has been determining all of the possible unit mixes that come from the Equipment Setting, down to the units equipment themselves (# Men, Rifle Type, etc).
-
About the original question, there's only limited information available to the player without to much efforts. My approach is:keep things simple!
You may wish to check this: http://petzi-fr.bplaced.net/calc/
Not sure if it's what you're asking for.
Interesting. I wonder what they used as a basis (as far as points) for calculating the results. Looks like Syrian Tanks are all worth a set # of points (i.e. doesn't distinguish between T-55 and T-72's).
-
Indeed, exports shouldn't be hard to provide either, but I need a bit more meat on the bones before trying to implement any idea put forth here. I would love to see the existing excel efforts or at least get some more detail on the idea behind them.
Everything I have at this point is only a concept on paper and not very detailed at that. I'm currently working on trying to put together a complete equipment(unit) list before I proceed further.
-
Gonna hold you to that one. Hell, I'm half tempted to make that my new sig.
Maybe someone should screenshot that post . . for archival purposes . . .
-
Point systems are so damned difficult to work with because as soon as you proclaim a value for something someone will make a case for it being wrong. That's been our experience Anybody making their own system is immune to this sort of thing, by and large, because a) only a tiny number of people are using it and
it's voluntary. We neither luxury. And no, allowing people to use their own point systems within the game is absolutely not an option we want.Truthfully, I am not even sure where to start on this, just wanted to make sure I wasn't duplicating anyone's existing effort.
I guess the best way to start would be to put together a full listing of all the "units" available in the game (for the modules to date) and get them listed in excel. From there work out the possible settings that would affect a units performance/abilities and go from there. :eek:
-
This could be done in excel easily enough. I'd build a rough draft if you are interested. You could post the raw data here and people could agree/disagree with the stats. I use Excel 2007.
The problem is getting all of the names of the units imported into excel.
From there you could pick your army and it would do the rest for you.
Not by my CMSF right now but you would need to assign points to a unit like.
Sniper 15 pts
Elite 4 pts
Excellent equipment 3pts
High Motivation 3 pts
I forget what the options are but you get the drift.
We could have a thread for each army and list the points there wilth an open discussion...
Just my thoughts....
Excel was what I was thinking of using. I am looking at doing this as a "for myself" type project so hopefully no one would take it to be something of a "standard".
I am coming back to CMSF after my initial disappointment (no need to go into details on that) and from the digging around I have been doing the last few weeks I can see it has come along way. Because of that "gap" I am way behind the curve on coming up to speed on what is in the game as far as equipment. I mean, I know whats in there BUT have not yet figured out things such as what version tank you get by setting the quality to poor and then choosing a Tank Company as opposed to setting it to excellent and seeing what equipment you get that way. I know the manual and some other sources go into this but I am looking for a little more depth to the info. If I had that information in excel I think the points formula would be much easier to come up with, even if only in generalities.
-
Thanks for the feedback. The final product would probably not be something for general public use but something for me use as a guide for a sort of meta-campaign to implement a replacement/reinforcement system. I was hoping someone had already started trying to flesh out something on their own I could build on or use as a basis.
-
Just curious if anyone has tried coming up with something on their own for this?
-
I was really hoping this one would make it.
it's voluntary. We neither luxury. And no, allowing people to use their own point systems within the game is absolutely not an option we want.
Welcome to 2021!
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
TBH, I'd really prefer early war (WWII) content for CM, but I'll take what I can get and am enjoying what is currently available.