Fizou

5 – Campaign Briefing and Narrative (Making Me Care)

“Words are how we think; stories are how we link.”

Christina Baldwin


Campaign briefings are a unique part of a designer’s arsenal to provide additional information and narrative to the player. Campaigns are fundamentally larger affairs either in units, terrain and/or time. There should as a result be more information to impart to the player to provide them with context, purpose and information.

The only physical difference between a campaign briefing and regular scenario briefings is that a campaign briefing will always be viewed first and can be accessed throughout a campaign by a player to go back and reference information.

I’m structuring this part of the series similar to a normal briefing itself to explain what I feel needs to go into each section. Of all the sections of this write up, this is certainly the most subjective. A briefing’s design and content can be as simple or as detailed as you want, and as we’ve seen from the community over the years, they can range from official military writeups through to personal first-person accounts. It’s a narrative. What I’m trying to say here is it is largely up to you.

For Tukums, I was in a little bit of a bind because the overall commander of the forces involved is actually on the field for most of the campaign. Therefore, writing a briefing that was very formal, like it was a well thought out and planned operation seemed to be a bit off. For a little while I was actually considering a first person briefing for this campaign from the perspective of Strachwitz, however opted against this eventually given it would be part of a stock release.

Situation

I believe this part of the briefing is the most important, particularly for a campaign where the broader state of affairs around the battle is likely going to play an influence on the player’s experience.



The first thing I do is provide the narrative for how we got the starting point of this campaign. Why is the player and his forces being asked to undertake this mission? For historical scenarios like the Tukums work it’s pretty easy since history is your guide. For Tukums, it’s to break through the Soviet lines and reconnect a land bridge with the cut off Army Group North. For a fictional scenario, in particular the modern era titles, it’s a touch more difficult but imagination is a great tool. Don’t be scared to create a little but plausible story to get the player invested.
Given the slightly larger scale of most campaigns and the type of content that needs to be conveyed I’ve always tended towards writing campaign briefings from the one command level higher than the units going into battle. So, for example if the focus of the campaign is the operations of a battalion, then write the campaign briefing from the perspective of the regiment/brigade level headquarters providing a briefing to the battalion commander (ie. the player). If the focus of the campaign is at the company level, the battalion headquarters is giving the orders. This does mean reducing the scope of the situation to suit the audience. A company commander is only going to need to know what the rest of his battalion is doing and where his force fits into their goals. A company commander doesn’t need to know every detail of Ike’s plan for crossing the Rhine. A battalion commander likely knows what his regiment/brigade is tasked with undertaking and perhaps a dabble in the Division’s overall plans if it’s a prepared operation.

The graphics should help visualise the overall objectives of the Campaign. Help position where the player’s force fits into the wider picture. Some general level intelligence on the enemy and high-level formations the player has at their command.


All stock scenarios and campaigns follow the same graphical design with the Operational graphic (the middle sized one) outlining broad unit movements and support elements available. This also makes it clear to the player which units are perhaps more important to keep alive given they carry across to more scenarios.



A campaign briefing doesn’t have access to a Tactical Map.

Mission

With the narrative set up in the Situation part of the briefing, the Mission part can then be used to provide overall goals of the campaign. Outline the end goal of the campaign, what will be different after all battles are completed successfully. It’s very easy to slip into the trap of expanding more details that should be outlined in the Situation part of the briefing.

Campaign end points may not always be designed to end in a state as intended at the start of the campaign. The multiple path dilemma. The “ideal outcome” or the “planned” outcome is usually what needs to be presented at this early point in the campaign. If a planned out campaign has multiple phases, or a briefing via a “step by step” approach may be warranted. This will give the player an idea about how much of the heavy lifting specific forces of the player is expected to carry out.

As an example, the Tukums campaign briefing Mission part is provided below and in full. Keep it short, keep it sweet, keep it clear.

It has just gone 08:30 hours. Your mission is to occur in two phases over the course of the morning:

Phase one - move your panzer and panzergrenadier force north to capture and occupy the town of Tukums, including the rail station to the west of the town.

Phase two - pivot part of your force back to the east and progress towards Riga to affect a linkup with Army Group North. The remainder of your force is to remain behind and hold Tukums.

Soviet opposition should be dealt with quickly and efficiently when encountered. You are operating largely on your own with little in the way of other friendly forces close by in most directions. Most importantly is to deal with any armour that is encountered. The 52nd Security Division is following in trail to hold the ground taken; however, it lacks any significant heavy weapons of its own to fend off any Soviet armour that may move into the area.

This coupled with the strategic map (as above) demonstrates to the player what his forces are intended to do across the whole campaign.

Friendly Units

A campaign briefing will be available to players throughout the campaign (via the menu) so it’s good to take this opportunity to provide them with a detailed run down of all forces, especially Core Units, in a tidy format that can be used as a ready reference. Also take some time to present some recent unit history to help explain why the force is the way it is. Has it just come out of another battle and 70% strength? Are the leaders particularly good/bad? Provide some context to the player so they are not surprised when they enter the first battle and are still missing half the story about what they are commanding.

For Tukums, my research had provided a pretty good understanding where most of the force had come from before forming only the day before the start of the operation around the area of Saldus in Latvia. The briefing will provide some of this information and some of the relative strengths and weaknesses to look out for as a player.

For displaying the Order of Battle itself, you are limited by the game only allowing raw text files to be imported so will need to be a little creative with keystrokes to make it easy organise. I’ve used different asterisk symbols to help distinguish the levels of the player’s order of battle.

This is how it will appear in the briefing for Tukums (excluding the surrounding briefing text):

Legend

**** Parent Unit (Higher headquarters not present on map)

** Battalion / formation level command (or equivalent)

- Element under the command of higher battalion/formation


 
East Bank Force

As is his style, Generalmajor Graf von Strachwitz has decided to lead the assault on the east bank personally.

** Heer Panzerverbande Headquarters Company

- Adhoc Panzer Company – 10 x Pz IV

- Armoured recon elements (attached from Waffen SS Brigade Gross)

**** Heer Panzer Brigade 101

** 2101st Panzer Battalion

- Headquarter element, including mobile flak (4 x Möbelwagons)

- 3 x Panzer Companies (11 x Panther Ausf G each)

Note: The planned delivery of a fourth company consisting of JzPzIV(V) as initially promised has not arrived from Germany.

** 2101st Panzergrenadier Battalion (armoured)

- 2 x Panzergrenadier Companies (armoured)

- 1 x Heavy Company (armoured)

- 1 x Pioneer Company (armoured)

** Waffen SS Ersatz Battalion [-] [dismounted] (detached from Panzer Brigade Gross)

- 1 x Rifle Company (dismounted)

- 1 x Heavy Company (dismounted)


 
West Bank Force

SS-Sturmbannführer der Waffen-SS Martin Gross commands this adhoc force from the mixed Panzer Company.

****Waffen SS Panzer Brigade Gross

** SS-Panzer-Abteilung "Gross"

- Adhoc mix of outdated Panzer III and Panzer IV variants and a single Panther Ausf D

- 1 x Tiger I. A detached company from Schwere SS-Panzer Abteilung 103 was scheduled to join the Brigade with its seven Tiger I’s, however as of this morning they only have one running vehicle, which has been delayed. The Tiger will also join SS-Panzer-Abteilung “Gross” once it arrives in the area of operations.

** SS Ersatz Infantry Battalion [-] [dismounted] (elements detached to east bank force)

- 2 x Rifle Companies (dismounted)

** SS-Panzer-Aufklärungs-Abteilung "Gross"

- Equivalent of two platoons of armoured cars. (Some elements detached to Panzer Brigade 101).

** SS-Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung

- 1 x StuG Company (12 x StuG III)


 
Though not an issue for Tukums, keep in mind other Core Units that may show up half way through the campaign. Depending on the overall narrative, as a designer you will need to determine if it’s best to inform the player in the Campaign Briefing about these units or not. Core units that arrive later or unplanned is something a commander isn’t necessarily going to know about before they set off on their planned operation. Again, this is why I personally like to imagine campaign briefings are the equivalent of a pre-planned meeting taking place with the player’s higher command.

The campaign briefing…


Enemy Units

Narrative will heavily drive this part of the briefing. What works in one campaign will be different for every other campaign. Below is only some broad level advice given the sheer range of possibilities.

For historical campaigns your research should outline what one side knows about the other’s dispositions prior to launching an assault. Campaign focused research should help you considerably here as many historians will outline what one side knows about the other at key points in a campaign. Though it maybe tempting to mention things like King Tigers being a part of the enemy force, dig deeper early in your research to find out if the forces your player commands actually knew about their presence at the time the operation kicks off. Knowing who knew what when is a great way of determining what should go into a campaign briefing.

If you need to fill in the gaps, a formation that has manned the line for weeks will know at the least what enemy division(s) is in front of them from general patrolling and intelligence gathering. This may provide a general sense of factors such as armour being in the area but won’t include a lot of specifics. General high-level statements like that. A more rushed campaign without planning would be another matter.

A fictional campaign will allow a lot of freedom with how much information you give the player but all I can provide in advice is to keep it realistic. A modern military launching an operation against a non-conventional force, (such as what is possible in CMSF2) isn’t going to go in completely blind not know estimates of numbers and equipment of the enemy.

Plans

How the player should ideally go about hitting all objectives. Not going to try and touch this one at all. Will vary across every campaign. The historical direction/outcomes of the campaign you’re a designing or the intended direction of the same historical campaign are likely the best places to get an idea about where to start. Just don’t get carried away and provide all the answers to the player.

Notes and Final Tips (Make Me Care)

A Campaign Briefing doesn’t negate the need for individual scenario briefings. Keep in mind the first thing the player is going to see once they hit continue (besides a loading screen) is another whole briefing detailing the first mission. This second briefing is the last chance you as a designer will have to know exactly where and in what situation the player will be in. Once they hit the big red button the range of possibilities starts growing. What units the player of your campaign will use, lose and what branching pathways they go down will be up to them (and the game) and outside of your hands.

As a result, with every individual briefing you will have to provide some information but be a touch more general than if creating a single self-contained scenario. For example, under the Friendly Forces section you can’t outline ever unit that the player will command in that battle since you as a designer will not know what has survived and what hasn’t when the player reaches each point. Focus on more general statements for scenario briefings such as names of high-level formations that are taking part rather than details. Remember the campaign briefing is always available for the player throughout the campaign via the menu screen so the detailed information is best included in that briefing to provide ongoing information throughout the play through.

If you’ve read this far then as a wargamer you’ll probably read a longer briefing. So as a final piece of advice: Make me care! As a designer you’ve likely poured many hours, days and weeks into this piece of work and you are asking your players to do the same. Having them open up a campaign ten scenarios in length and the campaign briefing is all on one page, there’s no briefing graphics and a lack of content about why the operation is taking place they are likely not going to commit. (I haven’t in the past). The Campaign Briefing is your main narrative tool to set the scene and tell the player why the battles they are about to play are important. Telling a player to go take that hill, then move to the village and then win is not inspiring for what could be weeks of commitment on a player’s part to play through your work. If you’ve done your research and planning (especially for historical battles) then writing up the briefings should be straight forward.

Next up… campaign scripting.

Gonna be glued to this bit! 

Ithikial_AU,
Wow... superbly explained and presented. As with others will follow this closely🙂!
Thanks..
All the best,
Kip.

March to Glorious Victory Post Number One.
  So Bil and I have a loose-agreement (I would say gentlemen's but that is probably a stretch) to not peek at each others threads.  The dirty truth here is that this isn't really an AAR per se, it is more of an IAR (In Action Report).  Full disclosure, we are only about 6 mins into the thing, so I can't really put a spin on my plan or anything because I have no idea how this will end.  So far so good  but we are in early days.  We should start posting turn summaries tomorrow but for now may I present an end-product of about roughly 32 years of military training in both line and staff positions...The_Capt's glorious Mission Analysis!  
So here we are on this grubby little peice of West German real-estate (seriously, Pete Wenman is a freakin wizard with these maps btw) facing off against what I am sure are overfed, overpaid and over-entitled Yankee capitalists all huddled in their vehicles waiting for something to happen.  So like they taught me back in the day..let's start with terrain:

So my guys are coming from the bottom, Bil and his jerks are up near the top.  I have a bunch of woods except for this defile behind a hwy bridge that I have to deploy my main force out of.  We have a big valley between us and the town of Dollbach in the center which is the golden goose we are both lining up to grab, whilst killing the other guy.  Not much to see on my map edge except a bunch of woods with some dirt roads cut through them.  
Bil has the high ground ridge up there and there are three major wooded areas that him and his ilk are no doubt hiding out in.  It is more one on the left but pretty much that approach along with the Valley is dominated by Bil's thugs.  In short, this is not an optimal starting position.
Bil's Plan.  So I have learned some time ago that you are not fighting vehicles and equipment, you are fighting a person (Capt's rule #1).  So spend time understanding and getting inside the head of that person.  With Bil it is easy because we have been sparring in CM for just about 2 decades now.  So here is what I am thinking, that Bil is thinking:

So Bil is probably going to be cautious and build a nice path to victory here.  First he is going to put out Eyes in those woodlines, then he will reinforce with teeth because why stick his neck out if he does not have to?  Then once I have watered the West German countryside with my blood (and other fluids) he will make his reach for Dollbach (Hands...dirty, old, wrinkly hands with yellow fingernails).  I will be at a significant disadvantage at this point because I will be dead, and you do not fight so well when dead (Capt's rule #2).  So my role here is to play peeky snipey from a really crappy position with Soviet gear that does not see as well as his sexy US optics...hmm...Capt no-likey, no likey...one bit.  So now the Plan:

My end goal is to make Bil more dead than me, not to get heavily invested in the West German real estate market.  So we are going to try something simple and blunt.  First, I will get Eyes on my woodline, gotta see what I can see (Capt's Rule #3).  Then I am going to put out hands...fingers really, to make it look like the land grab is my only game.  Then once my art start dropping (could be wait here cause he has EW turned on), I am going to bull rush that corridor and swing up into those hills to kill Bil (Teeth).  This is going to be tricky and I am going to take losses but I can afford them.  I get a MIC FSE in 5 and another Tank Coy-ish in 10, so I will have mass because I am betting the best he has is an Armd Cav platoon, maybe two.  So basically we will play Bil's snipey peeky game for a bit, push recon out into that town to make me look desperate and then freakin charge on the left.  Questions?
 

Literally never heard of this game until i saw it on Steam last year and i scoffed at the price at first.
5 months later I have purchased every single game and module except for CMFI, im going to buy it but my wallet lol
Massive respect to the developers for creating something amazing, that seems tailored for me personally.  I've been trying to get my friends to play but they arent tactical
Sorry if this is a boring post but I heard a podcast with a gentleman from BF and he mentioned they were testing Steam out and just wanted to provide this feedback
Stoked for F&T and CW
 

It's up to the driver software to discern when to swap over from the Intel GPU to the discrete video. With CM games most of the drivers that have this integrated/discrete setup often don't recognize CM as something that needs the more powerful discrete GPU. The more popular games have profiles within the drivers already, so they don't run into this situation. For Nvidia (and possibly AMD) setting up a profile within the drivers tells the driver that it needs to run the game on the discrete GPU.

Well modernish isn't normally my thing, however, as Bil is involved then for me it's a must buy. Anything he has a hand in is a no brainer for me.
 
Exciting.

I'm not sure about the delayed mouse input, but do you know if your CMBS Steam-installation is possibly using your integrated Intel video rather than your Nvidia 2070 ? The game may likely default to the Intel video and you may need to create a 'profile' for CMBS within the Nvidia control panel's 3D settings. This should have the game run on the Nvidia GPU rather than the Intel one. I have no idea if this will make a difference or not with the mouse input lag or not.

Alright, here we go I suppose.
First off, the idea that BFC or CM claims to be perfect is not true. Further, pointing out that CM is not perfect means nothing. And despite my tongue in cheek title, I do not think CM is perfect. As I have repeated a few times in the past few weeks now, I spent a lot of my own time showing that new tactical AI behavior introduced in v4 was flawed. I made a YouTube video showing the flawed behavior, submitted reports to beta testers along with others I play the game with (I was not a beta tester at the time) and continued to post feedback on the behavior here on the forum. Then, a few months ago, I spent a decent amount of time testing and retesting the new behavior to make sure it worked correctly and was functioning properly. 
My point is, I am very aware of flaws in CM, and I have actively worked to mitigate/fix some of those flaws. BFC does listen, its just that many times people post something that they think is a bug when it is not. 
I have no idea who you are, or that you were the person who posted that review on steam, so calling my first post a personal attack is laughable. But my response to that is simple, don't post stupid misinformed things and then complain that someone calls into question your intelligence. And it wasn't even a personal attack against you, it was literally just some dumb thing I remembered from a Steam review, not tied to a name at all. Seriously, relax.
The fact that you are taking this so personally is exactly what I was talking about. "These are just my opinions! But also, how dare you have opinions counter to my own!" k. Also, value is subjective. If the game is not worth $60 or whatever it is on sale for right now ($42?) then simply don't buy it at that price. If it is worth that amount of money to you, then buy it. 
Yikes. So let me get this straight. You claim to dislike many parts of the game, and its developers, and even its price now that it is on Steam and on sale for the first time in a while, but despite all this you are going to now play it for weeks? So you're going to voluntarily engage with something you dislike for an extended period of time. Why? Why not just stick to your opinion of "I do not like this" and move on to playing something that you actually like? Again, I did not call you personally mentally unstable, but engaging in something that you actively dislike isn't exactly healthy behavior. Well, that or its a kink, in which case you do you. 
Again, I never mentioned you personally at all, so I don't understand why you are taking this personally. You could have posted that it was you who left that review and opened this up to actual discussion, but oh well. For what its worth, I am not trying to get anyone to love me here. I don't work for BFC, I just volunteer time to help out in what I can when I can to contribute to something I like, instead of engaging in things I don't like. 
And I have no idea what a Daikanta is. 

Re-posting this as I know he was a well known figure among the early Combat Mission titles.  I remember his scenarios well from those early days of CM.  RIP "Wild" Bill Wilder.
"It is with a sad heart that I need to report the passing of Bill Wilder. For those of you that know my history, Bill Wilder was one of the first gamers to join me when I founded Matrix Games. Our first project together was the Steel Panthers World At War game. I had just recently chatted with him and it was just like old times. I will greatly miss him.
Bill's obituary can be found here and you may leave a message to his family. Leaf Cremation - Here
Bill Wilder services will be held on September 6, 2020, at 3:00 pm EST at The Church at Green Acres Baptist Church, Smyrna, GA. The service will also be online at - Here" ~ David Heath

Cringe take. A lot of this is outside of battlefronts control. Try again. 

Don't know the occasion, but these are my thoughts exactly, having been an Anglophile for about 60 years!  Same thoughts I have about our folks, too, btw!
Worth sharing, IMHO.
 
 

Reading an excellent book "Bloodlands" by Timothy Snyder. 
While describing the East Front situation in general, it has a large section on Partisan and Anti-Partisan groups and their actions and Snyder outlines the operations of Partisan leaders like Bielski and Zorin and the Anti-Partisan formations under Kaminskii, Dirlewanger and Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski.  
Interestingly the book outlines how the Partisan groups were often fighting each other as the various ethnic Communist partisans hated the nationalist Ukrainians and Polish partisans etc. while the Jewish partisans had their own agenda.
 

As a retired Light Infantry Platoon Sergeant and Sniper with 28 years of service to include several combat tours, this has got to be one of the more interesting threads I've read on a gaming site in eons. There have been some great points made by several people, and it has been very interesting to read all the differing views and opinions, as well as the shared ones. I also have enjoyed how it all relates to CM. Great stuff!
Some general points of consideration regarding combat and firefights that I would like to make in relation to this topic:
1) Most times in a firefight, there is so much noise that it's very hard to hear near misses. You might know you are being shot at by dirt and debris being chipped at you by near misses, but many times you won't hear it due to the multiple, loud weapons being fired, Soldiers and Leaders shouting out orders, and information on the enemy. It's chaotic and loud.
2) As far as U.S. Infantry training goes, when enemy fire is received, the SOP is to take cover and return fire. Almost always 'take cover' means fall prone, and then seek to improve your 'cover' position. For example, you are prone and returning fire, but there is a nice fat tree five feet to your left that would make better cover. You do what you can to move to it, usually by crawling. 
3) Usually, when a firefight starts, there is an initial round of firing, people hit the dirt, and then people start yelling. For the trained U.S. Infantry, that means enemy identification. As an example, it might sound like this "Contact 1100, 3oo meters, squad size". The direction is important obviously, as it alerts the formation to the general direction of contact as well as the distance. The element size is purely an initial estimate to give leaders an idea what they are up against. Of course this whole contact statement gets echoed back down the formation so that teams and squads at the back of the formation know whats going on. Also, it gets refined as the firefight goes on. As you can see, this equals lots and lots of yelling. Add in to that calls for medics, special weapons teams to deploy, new enemy sightings on the flanks or, Heaven forbid, in the rear, and one can quickly see how chaotic it can get. And then there are all the weapons firing and explosions. Like I said, chaos. 
4) Now, all that said, the mark of an experienced and/or well trained unit will handle that chaos much better. That is why SOP's are tantamount to success. When bullets start flying, Warfighters have to react without thinking, for best success. LOTS of time is spent training and practicing on initial contact with the enemy. It is the basic building block for all other Infantry training and operations. How your unit reacts to initial contact can make or break your unit.
5) I must absolutely agree with those above that said you shoot what you can see, and you suppress what you cannot see but suspect might be there. Also, as a trained and experienced sniper, I will always be of the mindset that well placed, accurate single shots are more effective at taking a target out then suppressive fire. But, suppressive fire has it's place. When an Infantry platoon is conducting a standard platoon attack on an objective, and you are in the Assault Element, you definitely want that suppressive fire to be hosing the objective before your assault begins, and then following in front of you as you assault across the obj. When the enemy is keeping their heads down from the barrage of M240 and M249 fire as well as some 40mm grenade fire mixed in, a trained designated marksman or sniper can more easily pick off specific targets on the obj, especially as the assault element is moving across. When all this is executed by an experienced unit, it is a thing of beauty. 
 
Anyhow, some general thoughts. I could talk about this topic for hours and days, but hopefully I've made some salient points. 
 
Cheers!

During the making of Heaven & Earth, I made a few changes to the effects & these have now been fed back to the original dropbox link (beta 4).
 
Changes
Night explosions have been improved (large explosions at night looked odd previously) Slightly tweaked vehicle muzzle fire.

Yeah, I think full video becomes available when the stream ends.
Here: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/707289746
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/707916676
 

I really hope they have someone playing who knows what the hell they're doing... 

Very good enthusiasm.

What a shame no other tactical wargame company does that.
Oh wait...
 

giving it a go, not exactly historical, but i think it will kinda give you the impression... lots more to do! 

As we eagerly await the coming of CMFR, here's a quick status update:
I'm picking up the project again after a super-long break and am pecking away at what I can do without the new module materials. The later release date means that I may or may not make release of my project in 2020. My hobby time is much less than it used to be, but I'm still hopeful and dying to get this baby out. Currently, I'm focusing on updating all the building internals to what I have identified over time as the best design for tactical play and user-friendliness. I'm making good progress there. I had forgotten how detailed some of the early pics I posted were, and so have decided to go ahead and post a current shot of the master map from the same angle as that which started this thread. Enjoy. 🙂

Not gonna lie I am completely taken by surprise with this. I never thought I would see Combat Mission in steam. I thought at the most we would see it sold on the Slitherine store. 
 
I hope this move benefits CM as a whole. I am however braced for the impact of an influx of the usual steam player base. It’s certainly going to be interesting. 

There is already a Steam page. Click "Follow" to help the Steam algorithm highlight the game for potential players. According to the page release date is Aug 25th.

Part 2: Combat
For simplicity sake, I'm going to use the scenario I made and showed above to illustrate how combat works across Tiller and CM.
Company A/1/115th Inf Rgt moves down the road until it bumps into an Osttruppen unit (1/Ost.439) however the company no longer has enough movement points to assault.

I end the US turn, and for simplicity sake during the German turn, they decide no one is moving or firing at anything. So the beginning of turn 2 looks like this:

You'll notice that company A now has all of its movement points back and is ready to assault. Company A assaults the Osttruppen, and the battle begins. Before we can dive into the CM side of this, we need to take down some important details. The hex coordinates of the hex being assaulted (shown in the bottom right) the type of terrain (shown in the upper left when the hex is selected, under the unit portrait) the units involved and their status (who they are, how many men do they have, their quality/current state of morale/fatigue) including any fire support that is in range and you decide to commit to this battle. The final bits of info are the time and date (shown in the lower right hand corner) and the weather conditions, which is shown by clicking 'Info' at the top and then 'weather.' Once this information is collected, you can jump into CM. 
In CM the hardest part of this process is finding/creating a map that will work for the battle. If you want you can make the map yourself in the editor, or you can find a QB map that is a close approximation. The latter is the method I would recommend for now. For this battle I chose the QB map called Attk Large Open QB-015. Once you know the map you simply orient it correctly (US attacking from West to East) create the set up zones and place both sides down on the map. For this battle its relatively simple, just a rifle company per side. Remember that Osttruppen were of very poor quality. I set their morale to low and their experience to conscript. Remember, this scenario is not meant to be challenging, its supposed to teach you the ropes. (Note: For Osttruppen I like to use the Grenadier Ersatz, but you need the Market Garden module for these units) One last point, if you decide to commit your howitzer battery to this fight, then go ahead and add 12 105mm howitzers to the US side as well. If you use them in the battle, then they will not be able to be used in another battle this turn. 
Now that you have the battle set up, you finally get to the good part and get to play it out! (Note: I find that its easier to just play the battle in Hotseat against yourself than it is to bother with creating AI plans)
I don't recall the exact numbers off the top of my head, so I'll make up some battle results here: US suffered 8 KIA and 14 WIA - Ost suffered 27 KIA 38 WIA 8 MIA. Again, for simplicity sake we are going to just add up the casualties for each side so we have a simple total to deal with. So company A suffered 22 casualties total and the Osttruppen suffered 73 casualties. 
Note: I would highly recommend using this battlefield career recorder to track casualties for a scenario you play out: http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=2990 Its really cool seeing the data as the scenario plays out. There are other recorder programs you can use but they're more technical. This one is more than adequate. Thanks @Ithikial_AU !
Translating casualties from CM to PzC is a bit technical, but is easy to get the hang of. The first thing you want to do (and should have already been prompted to do) is save the PzC battle. Call it something like "My CMPzC Test Battle" or something else that you will be able to instantly identify. You should now have a save file in your PzC folder called My CMPzC Test Battle.btl. You now need to convert the .btl file to a .scn file. The good news is all you need is Notepad ++ (free for download if you don't have it already) Open the .btl save file with notepad ++ and simply Save As "My CMPzC Battle Test.scn" and you're all set. Now, open up pcedit.exe (the Tiller editor located in the main folder) and scroll all the way to the bottom of the scenario list to find your save file. Open it, and use the editor to subtract casualties from both units involved in the battle, as well as to move the Osttruppen out of the assaulted hex and move the US into the hex. Simply save the file and close the editor, then head back into PzC Normandy and open the battle back up (via the scenario selection menu) and you'll see all of your edits have taken effect and you can continue playing!

 
Hopefully this quick and dirty run-through is enough to get you and others interested acclimated with the basics of the system. Once you get the hang of it it is loads of fun, and you can start making your own house rules to fit your style of play. If you have any questions please feel free to ask! Also just want to give a bit shout-out to Phil (Kohlenklau) for getting me started, and the other forum goers who helped pioneer the system!

It'll be interesting to see how successful this is. Sacrificing CMSF2 to the gaping maw of Moloch might be worth it in increased brand awareness alone.
I can't tell you how many times I've had this conversation:
'What to you do?'
'I work for a game company.'
'That's interesting. What's its name?'
'Battefront.com'
'Oh, I know that game! Star Wars, right?'
'Sigh. No, it isn't Star Wars'.