Eden Smallwood

- Douglas Adams It would be puckering on the piccolo of progress. If a designer provided no script, the AI would do what it does now, or hopefully even better in the rewrite. I don't think there's a valid objection other than that the benefits would not perhaps be worth the effort of coding. To that end the most interesting thing would be to hear from a qualified person on what concrete examples of improved behaviour might be possible, and how much of a bear this would be to code. Eden

My wish is for the ability to show a reverse oriented vector for each vehicle, showing speed/direction. Reverse, so it draws 'out the back', like a trail, or wake. Eden

Oh I get it; thx. Eden's small effort to payback the Commander of the Documents: 'favor.pdf' has three pages; page 2 and 3 are blank. 'mapaddon.pdf' has a landscaped image across two pages. Er, look at page two and I think you'll see; I think you meant that in landscape orientation on page one. Numbering of sections in Rules is inconsistent: { 5a, 5b} and {12,12a,12b} raise question, "is there a '5'?" Page numbers with filename, even if one page document, would be classy: "BCR rules v1.3 page 1" If sectional updating is envisioned, "smart" page breaks between sections would be needed. Hth, Eden

I guess you mean 'Excel greater than 4.0' ? So, er... is there some other way to get that one? Or maybe I don't need it; I should probably hold off on asking a bazillion questions- I'm still trying to get a handle on't. Well that's weird. Thanks for trying. So I'm printing the PDFs; when a new version is out 1) what's the best way to become cognizant of it? 2) will changes to the rules be sectioned (replace version 1.3 page 13 with version 1.4 page 13 and page 13.1) ? Eden

This should be the longest most active thread around; can someone tell me why it's not as long as the XBOX thread? Did my 'Real Man's AAR' of Matilda shame all of you, (except mPisi) so much that you can't even post? Hmmm yeah, that's probably it. C'mon you guys- all that asking 'where is the StalinPack?™' and now hardly anybody wants to rant about the scenarios? Eden

My claim is that I do indeed 'have an eye on it', that is quite emphaticallly my point exactly, I simply don't always choose to 'have a squad on it' during those twenty four minutes, but... Except for the deuce of common sense, I'm out of trumps, and I don't wish to pursue the enemy. It was not appropriate for you to have called this a 'gripe'- I began by saying 'I disagree' and that's what I've done, but... case closed. 'Don't worry, be happy' is SOP #1, so... don't worry. Eden

Absolutely. That jump to a bad conclusion has been made before in this topic. Noone has advocated making scripts a mandatory part of scenario design, just an added tool. What we SP people would like to see for the rewrite is simply more power of all kinds in the hands of the designers- it's up to them to use that power wisely. Like Luke using the force. Eden

Using "capitals" more correct still. We whine because it's such a great game we spend all our damn time playing it. It just comes with the territory. I think they understand that. I think. Eden

I think the key is in here; your other point(s) I understand completely; indeed I agree with them, yes I do. I think we all agree that while there may not have been a single soldier, nor even a bullet, perhaps, in Dumptruck, Idaho, still, that city was under the 'control' of the US at all times during the conflict. So- scale is one thing which works in my favor when large, not so well when small. Agreed? Agreed. But 'scale' as you use it refers only to area- what about timeframe? There's a scenario on the CD which lasts *six* minutes, for pete's sake. I think your point about the 'fluid' nature of the war is guilty of considering a twenty-four hour timeframe more than a twenty four minute timeframe, no? The battle, let's say, lasts twenty four minutes; this battle for 'the hill' is in it's twentieth minute, and 'we own' the hill. 'We own' it, in the common sense, John Wayne would understand it way meaning 'it's inside the closed polygon our troops are stepping on'. Since we're in the business of shooting things and blowing them up, let's put it this way: We could, if we wanted, shoot that hill and blow it up and step on it and call it nasty names. The enemy does not have that option. In the official manly man's dictionary, that constitutes control. *For Now*. OK. Now in the remaining four minutes (!) of this battle, what shall we do with Joe squad? The battle is happening now, the opportunities to inflict high cost on the enemy are now, (suppose). Shall we send Joe squad to aid B company in eliminating those last pockets of infantry resistance, thus allowing the tank hunter teams safe access to those expensive tanks struggling to escape right now? Or should we send him up 'the hill' to look the place over and start setting up barbed wire and putting up a clothesline? That sense of 'control' seems to me modelling the hour *after* the battle; the twenty four minutes in CM seem to me *THE* battle, not 'the battle and the hour afterwards'; there will be time enough for that later, if we care to stick around this hill. If your claim is that the motion is *that* fluid, that I will lose control in the next four minutes if I don't entrench in minute twenty, then that is tantamount to saying I'm vulnerable to a threat which is imaginary, which I've made clear I discount. Fluid, ok- but do you really mean that I don't control a VL which my front line has passed five minutes ago?? If I had to believe that about fighting in the jungles of Vietnam, I could. But not here- I just can't see it. What say you to that, O wizard? Eden

The way it already is, BFC has said that there's a *threshold* in order to claim a flag... Just bringing two rounds of Ruger up there won't do it, it takes some certain amount of real stuff. Eden

Yes, I can honestly say that, and I can say it very often- the enemy is before me, my battalion is advancing... Once again "guard it"... AGAINST WHAT? You are putting the onus on me to have the ability to defend that flag against an imaginary enemy force in it's proximity. I refute that, and I deny that I (the more recent battalion in proximity) have that responsibility. It is much more natural to put that onus on 'you', the complainant, the opponent who feels that my force on that flag is insufficient. If your force is not imaginary, then bring it on. If it is imaginary, then so is the idea that you threaten the flag. You're correct- Pak's example is a proper subset of my objection, so in re that I admit that I am hijacking the thread to at least consider the more general case, or the underlying supposition that we always need mighty force there in the first place. How do I 'control' that objective? I will tell you exactly how- by denying it to the enemy with force between he and it. That does not require a halftrack on the exact location of the flag. Please don't confuse the word 'secure'- I do not deny that force is needed to *secure*, id est "claim" a flag, but I don't agree that I need force points directly ON the flag for the flag to be "secure", id est unthreatened. Does "secure" mean unassailable by the enemy? Then YES, that flag is secure, even with just a peon on it, even with nobody on it. Disagree? Prove it. This is not the biggest issue in CM, not even for me, and most who don't play 'micro-force' games like I'm doing now won't even notice it. But yes, I do think it introduces gamieness to say that I must keep breaking off half-squads to sit on that exact pixel, when in RL his best interest would have been elsewhere, helping his comrades to *further* the control over that area already gained. Eh? Eden

Would it be possible for some kind soul to save/post the various spreadsheets as XL 4.0 readable? Eden

IMO, both should be treated the same way. Neither one has any way of defending the VL if it is contested, so why should they be rewarded the VL?</font>

That is the difference between what I would have done, fwiw. "Gun?" to me translates as "serious problem"- I don't play around with those turkeys. Either hazard free mortar fire, sharpshooter fire (see your other thread!), or arty and wait, or infantry approaching through sane cover, or massive local superiority. MassiveLS means as much mass as you can muster; bringing half-hearted threats to bear one at a time will probably get you what you got- losing half-hearted threats, one at a time. I would have waited for that other Hummel to be free, or brought him over anyway, to bring two Hs at once to bear, (assuming you didn't have other nice choices). FWIW, Eden

I've never had a ss take out an enemy tank, though the enemy's ss's have taken out mine. Still, I've been buying at least a few for every QB once I found them effective against BigGuns, MGs which otherwise just aren't going down... Very satisfying to take out a huge ATG with a pipsqueak ss, of course. I've tried them a couple times against pillboxes, and so far I haven't witnessed success, but the theory seems good. Eden

I remember now- I asked whether moving on grass was modelled as quiet and fast vs move; well, a claim is made, but how does he (SM) know that? http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=002827 Eden [ December 07, 2002, 01:45 AM: Message edited by: Eden Smallwood ]

Some other highly intelligent yet strangely modest folks, I believe, ahem. That was a good idea last time you said it, and it still is. It fits well with the existing cover arc business too. Maybe if we start a propaganda campaign calling it the 'Lack of SOPs BUG' they'll put them in the patch? Eden

While I see what you fellows are feeling is a possible inferrence from that, to me it looks like just an unfortunate choice of words. "Beyond that" looks like it's being used both in it's usual idiomatic sense "ButWaitThere'sMore", and as a literal "in the time thereafter", but I don't see a reason to think it means "speaking on a brand new subject now...". Anyhow, I hope I'm wrong this time, but I think it's a false alarm; this is how I read it: Eden

</font>

Oh stop. The point in context was exactly that this being the biggest complaint proves that we're doing pretty dern well. Well that fat lady was pretty Huge for me, in a couple ways. A huge win, a huge aggravation, a huge wonderment at what-the-heck-am-I-doing-out-here with a bazillion AP rounds but almost no HE???, a huge bug in CM, a huge cloaking device on that enemy ATR who I positively could NOT find until the penultimate turn, that turkey! So. Where to begin, again? The briefing, as I'm sure you know, is utterly complete, telling us not just how to play/setup, but indeed your email whatnot and whatall- thank you. Please apply pressure to some of your competitors. Ironically, though, there is one thing which I wished would have been there, which drove me crazy during the game- Why all that AP and no HE in the fat ladies??? Historical? Sadism? I soon figured out what a minimal effect those rounds have on infantry. Hee. But that's a large part of what made the battle a sustained fight. The battle- for me, this was one of those rare major victories where I never once had the option of just glancing around, giving a few orders, hitting Go... From early on, I had to precisely micromanage every unit to advance, a situation which didn't change. Oh btw bonus points also go to anyone finding a historical battle where we get to use some of these less common units and things. I know that they might have been rare here, or nonexistent there, but it would be nice to have them used *sometimes* in a scenario where it fits. Like how many scenarios are there with Italians? Not many I think. Anyhow. Back to the battle: Did I say "Major" victory? I was *robbed* I tell you, Robbed!! No really- I was, but that was due to the bug; that comes later. The question the author probably wants to know for SP is, "can the AI put up a good fight?" and although I won I was kept very constricted and constipated in that middle copse; as I said, there never came a time when I could stretch my legs and advance. Notwithstanding the fact that I got useful work out of all my units but the peon-vehicles... Well I'm sure my writing style is *exactly* the kind of thing desired at the B&T AAR section, but with the bug that comes later I can only put half a heart into this one; so saying, here goes: Begin: A middle copse, a smooth hill on the left, a bunch of weird tanks and a few peashooterwagen. OK. The guns will go up the left hill, to overlook the universe, using Eden's SOP #14- when the truck towing you gets knocked out, set up your gun. Might sound amateur, but it worked great. All of those guns would provide useful fire for the entire game, right down to their last few AP rounds... It cost a couple trucks, but I had insurance. In fact, that's about all I would lose- five little vehicles, and one Matilda *bogged* (sigh). "Major" indeed. So. The PSW (peashooterwagen) and inf will go sniffing around that middle copse, and hopefully my tanks will be soon behind, hiding back there till the next recon by infantry advance. OK. But one little wagen is getting holes in his paint job- where is *that* coming from? Lay down area fire all over yin yang, move PSW a bit... Hmmm, can't really tell if I suppresed it or what. Well, ok- it's not perfectly safe back here, right behind the forest, although it *should* be, but most of it seems ok. Pretty soon a nice little party is happening in back of that copse, more towards the left side than the right, since the right side is strangely dangerous, and infantry are ready to walk and find out more. One little wagen peeking around the left side of the copse valiantly discovers an ATG in town- Great going guys! And pretty soon the infantry have valiantly discovered enough enemy that they can't go anywhere further. So I start creeping tanks around the safer left side, bit by bit I'm finding people to shoot at, but the AP ammo doesn't do a heck of alot and it takes awhile. That ATG in town needs to be purified before much more tank motion; one of my big guns on the hill will inch forward until he has sight within a few meters of that foxhole... Get it? He lays down HE within a few meters; enemy can't take it any longer, move someone else in sight... I almost felt sorry, almost. Not sure if that was gamey, though. Geez- it's been *awhile*, and I *still* haven't found that ATR who's cramping my right side... In fact I would never get over to that right side of the map- there could have been an entire battalion over there. One Matilda I would move *through* the scattered trees towards town- he's not getting poked full o' holes, while covered in brush, and I really need some kind of firepower facing the right side of town. No, this isn't the one that got bogged. He made it to the town side of the forest, only to rediscover the joy of taking ATR shots in the nose without being able to figure out where they're coming from. He would finish the game there, and though I found the ATR on the penultimate turn, I couldn't do anything about it due to the bug. The rest of the force spent the remainder making slow steady advance, finally jumping a littlewagen across the road and chewing on enemy from two sides. So. The bug I mentioned in t'other forum, but there was no interest from BFC, no interest from anyone, actually, but I would feel goofy to not reiterate it while discussing this scenario where it occurred. Somewhere during the fourth quarter that BA-64 I mentioned who took a chance crossing the road just wouldn't fire at anyone, although he had "15" ammo and was in great shape otherwise. Hmm, I thought- that's weird, so I watched and commanded him for a few turns... He *still* wouldn't fire, not at anyone for any reason. Then I started looking around and I found that my Matildas had quit firing their AP; MG, ok, but AP, no way, not for any reason not even when in imminent peril. That one in the forest I mentioned still had 77 rounds, so while the force as a whole was pretty low, still... If a Matilda had both MG and AP, it would ask me "Use Main Gun?" to which I'd say "Yes, you idiot", but when the time came it would only MG. Hmmm. Well unless someone has a *really* interesting explanation on that one I say it's a bug, like with a capital BUG. But I never saw it before, haven't seen it again. Shew! In other words, good scenario. Eden

Hmmm so it's like a dark Yrgacheff French roast? I think we've got it now, and on that robust note, it seems to me that our "extended-manual" is nearly ripened with the maturity of a fine wine, (not to be confused with a fine whine). Thank you Steve; translation for normal people: a few lines about these issues in the manual addendum would surely help those poor pathetic newbies purchasing the game just now... Eden

This is, of course, not the first time we've been over this ground, and having followed the last discussion on it, I am pretty confident that the official answer is 'HC, R for you Ls' vastly more than it is 'Semblance of Order'. Yes, I also have used 'Advance in the opposite direction' with complete success. [PS Forgot to mention that 'Advance in O.D.' was officially blessed here awhile ago too, that use being an intended one] The thing this thread could really help with would be to flush out the meaning of 'ASSAULT in the opposite direction'. I've never even considered that one until recently people have posted saying they do this, but ISTR official explications of 'Assault' as having facets which only make sense when... well when assaulting, of course. So that idea has me piqued. It would be a tough one to test, too. Oh, I also recall that yes, Withdraw does have a definite peril of panicking to it. Better panicked in the back than dead in the front, which fits with the 'Get out of dodge without Delay' meaning after all. Eden [ December 04, 2002, 02:13 AM: Message edited by: Eden Smallwood ]

Where to begin? Name any SP scenario smaller than Huge and it's a deal. I played that tiny city scenario which had the reinforcements-magically-appear-midfield problem, which the author soon thereafter claimed to have fixed and reuploaded; other than that one problem, all the scenarios I've played have been notably compelling and of long standing value. Eden [ December 03, 2002, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: Eden Smallwood ]

"Bald Mountain", eh? Now why does that ring a bell? Just recently finished interesting QBs with RailCrossing and ForestRailhead, in my quest to help the AI attack me... Could feed you back on those for sure, if interested. But I should get to "BM" today, unless the dam breaks. Will post in Scenario forum, rather than bore everyone here. (I'd much rather bore everyone there) Eden Eden

No, it's "CODE", like I said- change K to C and you're there: [KODE]Nifty data with bad Chi[/KODE] [bOG]Eden's tanks[/bOG] Eden