Paper Tiger
-
Posts
3,617 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Paper Tiger
-
-
I'm winding up work on my 'USMC Gung Ho!' campaign and when that's done, I'd like to start a new version of the same campaign but this time with German Gebirgsjager units instead. But I'd like to give it a German name instead of 'Gung Ho!', a title which demonstrated my pedigree as an old ASLer.
So the daft question is, what would be an appropriate German expression to use instead of Gung Ho!? I've googled it and got 'ubereifrig' or 'wild entschlossen' among others and of course, I'm clueless. What would you German speakers prefer I use or would something else be appropriate. I don't have to be able to pronounce it, just spell it and that's what copy and paste are for.
BTW, I was planning to use the title 'Tally Ho!' for the Brit version.
-
Yes, I plan to revise both. In fact, Hasrabit is probably going to be my next project after this is finished later this weekend. Why Hasrabit and not Dinas? It's because I was still learning the craft of map making and scenario design when I made Hasrabit. The maps are largely okay (and one or two of them are surprisingly good) although I'll have to rework some of the rather blocky and weird looking compounds I used way back then. I'll also need to expand some of them dramatically but that's not the issue. The issue is that I used the old 'paint a set-up zone and paint the group set ups' system which I abandoned not long after so the AI is absolutely abysmal compared to what I can do with it now. US airpower was used because there were no Syrian air units in the base game as well so you still here 'Take a look at that!' with a US twang from time to time because there are US spotters. Besides, I get to work with the Republican Guards and the Special Forces in that campaign so that should be fun.
Dinas is in a much better shape and many of the maps are good enough as is. However, I feel that this is my 'great work' and so would like to make sure I do the best job of revising it. I've been using Dinas maps in Gung Ho! and so these new versions will be used in the revised campaign but they'll be further improved. For example, Gung Ho's opener, 'Meet the Flintstones' uses a third generation version of Dinas' opener, 'Petani' (third generation because the original Gung Ho revised it already). I almost did a fourth revision a couple of weeks ago as I want to expand the map much further but doing so would require replacing all the AI units again correctly and checking that AI plans are not affected and ... AARGH! ... I just can't...
'The High Chaparral' mission is an improved version of Dinas' 'Orchard Road',
'Meet the Detectives' is a MASSIVELY improved version of 'Sabatani',
'Bridges' is a MASSIVELY improved version of 'Where Farmers Dare' and
'Al Qusayr' is an improved version of 'Sulit'.
I also found that I revised several Dinas maps for the British Forces scenarios I made so many of Dinas' maps have already been reworked and improved since. Of course, they'll all be further improved regardless. That's just how I roll.
So in a way, a revised Dinas is already under way. A new folder has already been created with the most up-to-date version of these maps in it so it will get done at some point later this year.
As for this project, new artwork has been done for the campaign menu, the campaign briefing written and all the AI plans checked so I'm pretty much done with it. I just need to give it one or two more passes to make sure I haven't missed something. And of course, my favourite, more proof reading (Dear God, the typos!). I'm probably going to drink a lot of tea and listen to some Thin Lizzy while I work today and then figure out how to upload it all to the new site.
-
And there it is...
Obviously, I have to polish it up but the variants are all done, and it all compiled without a hitch. I'll spend the day tomorrow checking that everything's okay but it's a load off my mind to know that the script is working as intended. It's a new script and I haven't made one of those for a few years.
-
AI testing is now over and I'm in the process of making up the alternate versions for the campaign as well as the amended briefings and artwork needed for them. Once that's done, I'll get the campaign briefings and artwork done, compile it and test it over the weekend. Of course, I'll go through each mission carefully to make sure that everything is set up properly but when you're doing this all by yourself, there's always something that gets through the net though so I'm curious to see what it will be this time.
(For those who remember, there was a real stinker of a placement error in the original version of The Road to Dinas)
Even though it's likely all that will be done later today, there's definitely not going to be an April 1st upload because what could possibly go wrong with that? Hopefully, this should be wrapped up and uploaded early next week. I'm pretty burned out with this particular project now and want to get started on a new one instead. But it will be a fresh experience for you guys even if you've played the original version.
-
You have to go to Matrix and open My Page and find the game you want there.
Then you post your BFC key there and the game is registered. You then have to find the game on mY Page again and ask for a Steam key which is what you use to activate the game on Steam. You don't use the BFC key.
Apologies if that's obvious. Only trying to help out another gamer in distress.
-
It's been a very, VERY long time since I played these missions but if you tell me which mission you're struggling with, it might jog my memory. I don't recall having many problems dealing with the combatants in the Khabour Trail but then, I usually didn't bother too much about preserving everything.
-
A quick word about the missions themselves. I play the game in Real time and I don't PAUSE the action very often so I tend to focus in one one area of the map and leave the other areas to manage themselves without my supervision. This means that the missions will be reasonably small, certainly a lot smaller than the battles you're probably more familiar with. I don't manage battalions in Real Time with any efficiency but I can manage a reinforced company without any trouble. So all the missions will feature a maximum of one USMC company with some attachments. This is my sweet spot. as it happens, a USMC platoon manages the same as most companies. the manpower and firepower they have is awesome but it's easier to manage a platoon than a company, even when the squads are broken into three teams.
I also like to have a slow-ish start with a small force on the map at the start with the rest of the force arriving in stages. I often find it much easier to manage quite a large OB in this manner as I get it set up and into the action before the next packet arrives. However, both Watching the Detectives and Al Qusayr have the entire OB on the map at the start so they both have a faster pace. On the other hand, CAAT among the Pigeons is very small with only about twenty units to manage. And most of them arrive 10 minutes after the mission starts. You start with just three units but there's plenty to do.
I also like to play with all the bells and whistles so you'll have access to a lot of artillery and air support in these missions. The USMC is a light infantry unit but with the artillery and air support is more than capable of going up against the best the Syrians have.
-
Well, it's been a lot more work than I'd anticipated. This is a rework of my old USMC campaign, a six mission campaign I put together shortly after the British Forces module for CMSF 1 was released. I spent SO much time making 'The Road to Dinas' that I missed playing with the USMC, which has turned out to be my favourite US formation to work with.
I thought I was just going to have to make up a new core unit file, sub in the new units and tweak a few bits and pieces to take advantage of the new systems but I ended up pretty much redoing it all from scratch. Anyway, let me show you the old maps and the new versions. Each picture is taken a 6 am in the morning from the same position so that you can see main differences.
The first mission is Meet the Flintstones. This is a NIGHT Missions and this is the old map...
And this is the new map...
As you can see, it's pretty much doubled in size. If you've played the original, it will probably feel reasonably familiar with the old version.
The next mission is The High Chaparall and the map for this one has changed very little. it's a DAWN mission.
And here's the new...
It hasn't changed much although there was a LOT of deforestation which took place to the new. Apart from the map, it's been reworked very substantially and the AI improved.
The third mission was a real problem for me. It was originally called CAAT Fight and it took place on this map...
The problem wasn't with the map but the battle itself. It was rubbish! It was an interesting idea and was inspired by the first episode of Generation Kill but it wasn't anywhere near as much fun as that episode. So this one got a new map and new forces with the same concept:
I really enjoy playing this one. It's a NIGHT mission and, like the original, you only have the CAAT units to work with. But it feels completely different and I find it a lot of fun to play.
Now we come to the HUGE reworks. These took over a week each to fit up and the missions needed to be redone entirely, new AI forces, new objectives etc...
the first of these is Watching the Detectives. here's the old map...
And here's the new...
It's more than doubled in size and there has been very substantial enhancement of buildings complexes etc. This is a DAWN mission and has gone through several iterations before the right battle was found for it. it's a tough mission with the player attacking down a slope in full view of the defender with little cover to work with. it took many attempts to make this feasible and I'm happy with the end result. You need to take this one slowly.
Then Mission 5, Bridges. Once again, the old map has been massively expanded.
And the new one is almost entirely different...
There are some similarities but as you can see, it's almost entirely new with new, more realistic villages added. Again, finding the right battle for this map has taken a lot of time and this is the mission I'm currently playtesting. it'll probably change a little before I finish with it but I've finally whittled down the forces on both sides so that i can carry out the mission without having too much at my disposal.
Al Qusayr
The map for the last mission is almost the same. there are some significant improvements for it but you won't see these from such a wide angle. the mission has also been redone with new forces added and all-new AI.
And there it is. I'll go into each mission in a little more detail later. This is very close to finishing now. I expect to have finalised it by the end of this month.
-
This is basically me just musing although there is some news in this post.
I'm in the final stages of putting together the first of three short campaigns, USMC Gung Ho. I thought there would be a very quick turn-around on this project because it was already largely finished and fully tested. I thought it would just require a new core unit file and a few tweaks here and there to take advantage of all the changes that have come over the last 10+ years. Well, was I wrong. One of the missions (CAAT Fight) was just absolute rubbish. I have no idea how I thought it was fun on any level. That required a whole new mission which I'm very happy with and much more in line with what I wanted. I ended up massively expanding two of the maps as well, (Watching the Detectives and Bridges if you're interested). The opener also got overhauled and expanded as well but not to the same degree that those two did. The AI forces in each mission have been reworked as well and the AI plans totally redone. So, it's been a lot more work to fix than I'd first thought.
Anyway, it's close to the end and if you're familiar with the campaign design process, this is when I, at least, start to look forward to my next project. I've been focused solely on Gung Ho for the last few weeks and the AI is done for all six missions and final testing is under way. But, at this stage, I feel like I've seen it all with this campaign so I've started looking at Hasrabit and boy, did I get a shock.
Hasrabit is basically my first real project and the AI design sucks! I opened up a few missions and had a look at placement for both and was very disappointed. Then the AI plans and was even more disappointed. I'd rate the current standard as unplayable but it's definitely fixable. The maps are actually quite good although a few of them would benefit from improving and expanding, particularly the armour clashes. I used to think anything over 1km in one direction was H-U-G-E.
And back then, it was. Computers are just so much more powerful nowadays that I can manage the massive firefight that results in the first five minutes of the Gung Ho finale without so much asd a hiccup. That would have dropped to about 2-3FPS on my old rig.
So, once Gung Ho is finished, I plan to get to work on Retribution and Hasrabit together. Red v Red is where the real fun is at for me so I'm excited to revisit the latter and to start work on the former. I expect the Brit version of Gung Ho won't take too long to finish though but no promises. I don't want to fight 'Meet the Flintstones' again for a L-O-N-G time.
-
Be warned that I spent rather a lot of money trying to find a game that fulfilled all the itches that the CMx2 engine scratches. There really is nothing like this game - there are better games/sims but they don't have editors that allow you to recreate real world locations and then fight on them, to script the AI rather than have a generic AI that just rushes at you.
However, if you are looking for games that are 'better' in some respects, Microprose's Regiments is the biz. Less work to get into than the Eugen series of games as you don't create 'decks'. And I'm waiting for 'Age of Wonders 4' to drop in a few weeks time. I expect I'll spend some time each day playing that.
Creating maps, missions and campaigns with all the associated artwork and research is an enormous amount of work for one guy. Thank God I never tried modding as that sounds like a major time sink in itself. It's good to take a break from time to time and play something else - I'm feeling the burn as I playtest the final mission in my 'new' campaign because I haven't played anything else since getting back into this - not even Mah Jong. However, my 'burn' is an impatience to get started on a new CM project.
-
Yikes. I guess that's the masterclass of briefing artwork. I get a stress headache considering the work that must have been involved in doing that for a campaign with many missions. I think I'll stick with what I'm doing.
This was just a trial to see how to upload photos to this forum from a new hosting site since I'm not using Photobucket any more. But it's been very useful to see what other do for their briefing artwork.
-
43 minutes ago, RockinHarry said:
Yeah, there´s various styles for sure to choose from. Which to choose is rather matter of (own) taste, as one can´t please all potential players anyway. CM briefing and maps layout is fairly **** IMHO. Otherwise one could help and communicate to a player much better. I also wonder the editors terrain overlay layer can´t be toggled during game play. You can add any sort of map on top of the play area and avoid the hardly readable and ugly map text stuff, if toggled on. I tend to avoid it entirely if not necessary for a particular reason. But oh well. BFC stopped inventing usefull things long time ago and so be it. The caravan keeps moving.
Here´s example briefing map for how simple I go with basics. There´s bits of additional detail info in briefing (own forces composition, reinforcements, but not points given for doing/taking this or that) and designer notes (special things like mods to use and such), but that´s optional and just for those who really want reading. I also "hide" small things in short text lines. I.e if the player should preserve (or not) own forces. This as indicator that it migth yield "points" if not taking too many losses. But bothering a player with "math"... no way. He/she who likes it can play Paradox games. lol
That's a really nice looking format. I was thinking along those lines for WW2 missions, for the tac map at least. I find heavily de-saturated works nicely for modern era for my taste. Operational maps come in handy for folks who know very little about the conflicts covered - the old grog breed seems to be dying out nowadays so it's not a given that folks will know the history. But that's along the lines of what I was considering - 50-50 op map and the rest used for the OB reinforcements. Or even just what is necessary for the Operational to use in the Strategic box instead. That would work for Montebourg. If the player doesn't know where Normandy, Luxembourg or Italy are, well, I'm not overly concerned about informing them
A lot of my early works just have nice pictures in those boxes.
They don't even look good nowadays, especially 'Hasrabit', some of which are absolutely ghastly. My old campaigns badly need an update.
-
All true. I really don't like being misled by briefings except when it was the historical norm to do so - i.e. every German tank was reported as a Tiger. The mission itself is all that really matters and no briefing or artwork is going to make the experience of playing a stinker any better. But a bad briefing or artwork can diminish the experience of playing a winner. The briefing and the artwork helps build up a sense of anticipation in some readers and helps them to immerse in the scenario while others just want to get into the action NOW!
Edit to add:
I also don't like the lack of control I have over what the Early Intel parameter reveals to the player - even on 10%, it sometimes shows too much. Using that setting also 'fixes' the AI plan before the player hits 'Start' whereas it is randomised without any Intel setting. The briefing and artwork can do the intel reveal for me rather than the game settings most of the time.
-
12 hours ago, RockinHarry said:
GIMP is great for doing all sort of things. Using it for years now and it´s getting better and better. No need for PS and other paid stuff. I do my own CM tac and and strat maps with it, but add only that info that would be available to a real commander. No fancy sh*t and info for what the player gets for doing this or that, victory points wise. Overview map in sketch format just showing things of importance. The less colors and useless terrain info, the better for a player. The more experienced at least. (avoiding info overload with unnecessary stuff)
Yes, that's the best way to do it in my opinion too. However, and perhaps this is a rather controversial observation, I suspect that there are an increasing number of gamers who do not read, (of course, they CAN, they just find it all too much work - "TLDR!"). They just want to get into the game asap. This is especially true on Steam which is where CMx2 games are increasingly heading. Of course, nothing is ever Black and White and back in the days when I was designing, some folks complained that briefings deliberately misled the player and that was another reason for displaying the most crucial information on the tac map. I'm moving back towards my old idea of using the Operational map to display the OB and reinforcement schedules and the tactical to show the player's victory objectives only. Both are on display when you read the tac map so this would avoid some of the clutter I see on the map above.
What you see above is just me getting the panel sizes correct and a mock-up. the picture of the village, while pretty, communicates nothing of any importance to the player. I'm working with overhead photos of the entire map (as far as that's possible to do anyway) and de-saturating the colours as much as possible. I've toyed with the idea of drawing a battle plan on the tac map but who's going to follow that? It'd be seen as just another 'evil designer' trap to 'mislead' the player. And I wouldn't blame them as I use multiple AI plans and at least one of them would be a counter to that plan.
I quite like the idea of showing the VP conditions because there are often subtleties in them which an alert reader will appreciate and see that there's more than one way to skin the cat (Sorry Ginger. I'm not talking about you.) You don't need to capture or preserve everything to win. Pick and choose your objectives and go for the win that way.
For WW2, I found a Filter setting in GIMP called 'Old Photo' which produces something very similar to the aerial recon photos I see in my Battleground Europe books and use to help me to construct maps. I suspect I'll be using that a LOT for my Normandy missions.
-
You really can't go far wrong copying the official CM artwork. It looks very slick. Or you can develop your own style: that's how I roll. I feel like I'm cheating copying somebody else and prefer to do it all myself but that's me. It helps that I enjoy learning to do new things too. Who knows if these skills will come in useful for some other aspect of my life?
If it's a SNOW map, it seems to me a black and white map like yours would be better.
-
Looks okay to me. Is that a snow map? I haven't seen any of them in CMx2 ever.
I'm FAR from being anything other than a complete novice with GIMP.
I can do the absolute basics: import layers, move them around, add opacity to a layer, etc and that's about as far as it goes right now. That's all I really need to do.
-
This is the last substantial barrier to reworking my old CMSF campaigns - the artwork was terrible (done with MS Paint and Picture Manager) and has to be redone and I have to learn how to use GIMP to make new artwork for the missions.
Of course, it also allows me to make all new campaigns as well.
I'm going all in with getting 'Gung Ho' ready for next month. This is my entire focus just now.
-
Doh! I thought I'd be able to delete the original post. I was just trying to see if I could link screenshots with this site.
In case you're curious, I've been learning how to use GIMP to create the artwork for an upcoming campaign and that's the basic format I've arrived at today. It's still a WIP. I expect screenshots of the new campaign and an announcement will follow shortly now that I know how it works.
-
Let's see if this works
-
8 hours ago, Erwin said:
Been enjoying one of your scenarios in "Die Kunst..." After playing a lot of WW2 as well as CMBS and CMCW, suddenly CMSF2 seems easy lol. But, maybe CMSF2 engine and features makes CMSF1 scenarios seem easy.
Interesting observation. Unpacked campaign missions are purposefully not as difficult as stand-alone missions because, unlike the stand-alone, the consequences carry forward after the mission. And the German Panzergrenadiers were a particularly fragile unit to work with in a campaign - (only 7 men but still a fun formation to work with.) I purposefully dial down the difficulty a notch or two when making campaign missions, particularly the missions that come later in the campaign because, inevitably, a lot of the actual testing of any mission is done as a stand-alone, the complied testing coming towards the end of development.
I'm actually testing missions 5 and 6 of Gung Ho just now like this and need these missions to be reasonably easy to beat with the full core force because the campaign player won't have anything like a full roster when he plays these missions. At least Gung Ho! is not an official, paid-for campaign so customers can't (reasonably) complain that 'they paid for this content, that it's their hobby that they should be able to complete it without all the stress', so I can get away with making it tougher this time.
Otherwise, if it's an engine comparison, I'm actually finding CMSF2 more difficult to manage because units no longer utilise cover as effectively as they did before. It's been 10+ years though so it's likely it's me that sucks.
-
Their MG ammo is bugged? Since I'll be using both, I checked both the mech and the non-mech airborne and you're right - 100 rounds each.
I guess I'll have to work around the issue then. I'm not sure I want BMP-3s in all my missions so those little cars will have to do when they're choppering in. I guess it's not too much of a fantasy to say that they were choppered in. The 'why' is obvious.
Yup, 'Carry On Up The Khabour' would really be in very bad taste for a Syrian Civil War campaign
but with our British tongue-in-cheek humour, it's not actually bad for a British Forces campaign. I probably won't do that now as I'll be using the Khabour maps for the Syrian airborne campaign instead.
Red v Red is where the game really shines for me too. I've got a system for keeping Blue v Red 'interesting' but sometimes, you just want to crush your enemies, see them driven before you and to hear the lamentation of their women.
-
Not quite. It's certainly my concept and I did six of the missions for it:
The Borders are Burning
Ghost Towns
Al Bab
Minakh Airfield
Audacity
Bridges of Valhalla
I don't know about the revisions. I was absent when the reworks were done although, I have to say, looking at the missions I did, not much has changed. I suspect my AI set up and planning systems were too much of a PITA for others to tinker with. It would have required somebody to redo the AI from scratch if they'd made any changes to either of those systems. There are still only 8 AI groups and I recognise the AI plans as mine.
I'd say that the latest version is the one to work with. I can't see any reason why newer versions wouldn't be better in some respect.
-
Well, sensitivity about PC issues aside, this has been brought to my attention again and I've identified some of the maps I was using and have opened a new folder. I expect work on this will begin quite soon. Of course, it will be for CMSF2 and not the CMSF1 game. I really couldn't go back to that again. Too much has changed for the better IMO.
-
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. After reading my concept, I think it's a really good idea and also have identified the first two missions in the campaign (Suburban Hell and Al Hasakah). So I have created a new folder called 'Retribution' and shifted in five maps for the time being. I think this will indeed be my next project after 'Gung Ho!' and it will consist almost exclusively of Red (player) v Uncons missions, at least in the first two stages.
I put an enormous amount of work into creating those maps and it would be nice to get a bit more mileage out of them and to use the Syrian Airborne, a formation I haven't done anything with.
Coming soon - USMC Gung Ho!
in CM Shock Force 2 Maps and Mods
Posted · Edited by Paper Tiger
That's a good point. Thanks. UPDATED might help to differentiate it from the earlier version.
How does that look?