PFMM

No it's not a given under any circumstance. The one reason people design scenarios for this and any other system is they want people to play them. Why should any person play their scenario instead of any of the other hundreds out there clamouring for attention? If you were to adhere to your guidelines most scenarios would play pretty much the same. It's also worth bearing in mind that most historical battles battles of any age are much the same. They also tend to be either hopelessly lopsided, tedious, indecisively dull or repetitive. This is why you see the same battles published over and over again, there are very few interesting conflicts. In over thirty years of gaming and a number of years actually involved with it (as a programmer and tester) I've seen these discussions more times than I care to remember. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, far from it, but I will point out that while everyone seems to disagree on almost anything there is one on which ALL agree. A bad scenario is one that is not played.

While yur points are relevent, you have failed to point out that, also, it is players who have both an agenda and preconceptions. And they will seek the scenarios by designers that they desire. And they will write essays like yours, which will, by necessity be diametrically opposed to yours. And round and round it goes.

Playing this head to head via IP. Slow going due to its' size and length. Currently at turn 22. I'm the Soviets and will provide a more detailed report later. For now it's been very enjoyable and challenging, interesting map and force mix (from my side). I have not looked at the history of this operation for over twenty five years, but if I remember it was a Soviet shambles with most of the force shot within sight of the beach, gaining little if any ground. Seems I am making steady gains instead. Curious.

Der Alte Fritz, From my side of things I expected to have to push hard and fast, bypassing points of resistance. I was so concerned with going forward quickly that my opponent was able to spring ambushes on me, and I lost three KVs, another immobilised and one or two SUs knocked out in quick succession. Despite this I was able to overwhelm his main point of resistance and move on. As to the flag, I thought this scenario was about exiting? In any case I was too cautious and blew my oppertunity doing neither. My opponent felt that after his cover was blown he was reduced to crawling around trying to get at my main force. He would have liked more ability to channel them. I would have liked more artillery to suppress any potential points of resistance that I'd have to bypass. Maybe some conscript heavy artillery that the Soviets would advance behind might be interesting. It's a long map after all. Will try to give the new scenario a try next weekend.

Interesting, I am under the opposite impression. I thought that it inevitable that the Germans would have taken Stalingrad. They had complete control of the battle in the city, and had developed tactics and units dedicated to fighting in just such an environment with notable success. I think the city was about nine tenths cleared by the time the Soviets launched their offensives. As to Aachen, didn't the Allies suffer casulties in the order of fifty thousand in a matter of weeks? Gave them quite a shock if I remeber.

I'm a sucker for Soviet heavy tanks and tank riders, so when a friend suggested this I jumped at the oppertunity. Overall I enjoyed it and have only a few quibbles. The briefing was a bit vague with regard to the plan of attack. Would like to see more use of labels to mark the terrain and tell me which way to go (ie German trenches here, important hill here, exit here and so on). The Soviet artillery felt a little weak for an attack of this magnitude. Similarly, I would have liked to see a few more of the heavier SU's present. My opponent felt there should be more mines, tank trenches and wire for the Germans. The map seems a bit deeper than required. Can't desribe it but the setup zones felt odd. ATRs for the Soviets? An unusual choice to my mind. Lastly, have you ever consider presenting these sceanrios together as an operation? Many thanks.

It's one matter to convince people when everyone is set against you because of your own actions and you are all stuck in the same **** together. It's completely different when all you original goals have been achieved almost bloodlesly. And the Phoney war illustrates this well. The Germans gain both another easy victory and fool the Russians which then convinces them this will be the status quo. The Allies are unable to persecute a war because noone believes them that the Germans are a real threat. In point of fact it was the Allies who came in for some stick over their conduct. The Germans mounted a successfull propaganda campaign that displayed the Allies as aggressors against the peace loving Germans (which was true in part as raids were being conducted ny the Allies on German military sites).

So, instead of selling an easy quick war with little discomfort to the supporting populace, you will now tell me how they will accept a long hard war with great personnal sacrifice. Meanwhile, all the other countries are going to idly sit on their hands while you visibly gear up for world domination. I think not.

"Professional cannot be made relative to nation or time." Wrong, so hopelessly wrong. Your judgements of people are not absolute, it's merely your belief in them.

The paradox of this project is that it is engaging in the form of speculation that was the hallmark of the NATO/Warsaw pact conflict which is being overlooked. In short a conflict which noone knows what will happen and everyone has an opinion. At least it has T62s,T72s,etc. in it. If I mod the textures and the sound files maybe I can pretend I'm in North Germany. Will M60 tanks and M113 APCS be in the release?

Finally had some time to try this one and I think it shows it's T-72; Balkans on Fire heritage. Things I liked; - refined graphics engine - better presentation - code seems to run smoother And they're including a Matilda! Looking good.

No effect at all and just eye candy. Expensive eye candy too.

Been a while since I played this but I think when you first go to a new station the computer will keep control until you press a key. Usefull for training if your having trouble aquiring targets. I think the game was underdeveloped, and while fun, left alot to be desired. I remember one action in which my tank was penetrated in the glacis over twenty times, all bar one of the crew dead, all the damage lights red, and I was still able to shoot and drive.

Back from the holidays in time for this. Very nice indeed MikeyD. What? No privates on parade this time!

CMC the hope that will not die! On a more relevent note there are some interesting points in this thread, and while we are are on the subject of having multiple scales of resolution I'd make one point that seems to be lost on a lot of scenario designers. This is the lack of penalties for players who mass all their troops magically in one location. The super or killer stack. It doesn't matter if one drives two tanks down a road or fifty, as I can can coordinate them better than any ballet and they're less vunerable as I can mass all my anti aircraft guns along with them. In reality it would be a complete **** up with more own losses than those inflicted by the enemy. And it also feels ridiculous to tell each of ten, twenty and even more than thirty tanks where their gun barrels should be pointing.

I think it depends. For myself it's mostly visual. Big tank with big gun beats little tank with little gun, and so on. Not the best but it's adequate. I also rely heavily on the scenario briefing as well for an indication on how I am to behave, with the more I'm told the bolder I become and the less I'm told the more cautious I become. However, if you're a tournament type player the answer is yes you do examine the numbers. The game engine is broken down and studied to the point of insanity. It's always interesting to see what they turn up as, in my experience, everyone tends to adopt it into their playing style (such as the half squad exploit).

-E, the moment you get the chance, play one of the historical sets (campaign or scenario, it matters not). They are one of the best things to happen to ASL I don't need to learn ASL, after over twenty five years I can't forget. However I know someone nearby who if I even so much looked like I was going to repurchase let alone play it would kill me in an instant. Such is life.

Yes, time WILL tell. Any bets on when CMC for CMAK will be released?

Thanks for the input. As I'm a player of this game and not a scenario designer I've never been frustrated by any of these considerations, but they don't sound like bugs. More design limits. Not what everyone wants, but the best that can be done. Given these limitations it's hard to see how CMC will improve anything if it's not going to address the design causing the problem. And on modern machines too. The coder in me (15-18 years in various guises for those interested) feels quite a bit of pity for the people working on CMC.

It's news to me. I've been playing operations (always against live opponents) for years now and have never found them broken. I'm curious now, how are they broken?

I wonder why people are so interested in this release? Given the scale of CM it's not really suited for anything much larger than a battalion action over a few days, such as an operation. Which it already has.

These recon threads to my mind illustrate the results of three unrelated points of view. The first is the player myth of recon units lurking in their super stealthy vehicles spotting the enemy with their super seeing scopes. The second is the compromise that is CMBB that allows instantaneous feedback so we can game. So I can sacrifice my pawn(light tank) to your castle(AT gun) so my knight(HE thrower) can take it. And lastly the reality, which has these formations in a multitude of roles which are difficult to render with a single system.

A recon "unit" is a platoon to battalion sized organisation who keeps tabs on the enemy. An armoured car is a piss weak tank.

I'd say from the evidence it's more of a profession with lots of overtime invested.

My first exposure to Novorossik was Jack Radey's "Black Sea Black Death" boardgame by Peoples War games. As I think he's currently rewritting it, it might be worth checking out. As I understand it the Russians made two landings. The first being the well known one of a landing on the western shore combined with a ground offensive on the eastern shore which turned into a shambles. The second was a direct landing into the city itself which succeeded. Whatever the case, I'm interested and looking forward to it Renaud.