Jump to content

Combatintman

Members
  • Posts

    4,362
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    56

Everything posted by Combatintman

  1. Yep - I agree with @domfluff - there is no misunderstanding of your original point. I agree that maybe that scenario could have included something in the description along the lines of Beginner for US and Expert for the Russian but then of course there are players who have an inflated sense of their skill level or comedians who leap straight into Iron mode the first time they play the game. It is also important to remember that the Steam hookup with Slitherine will be bringing in new players who are unfamiliar with the whole Battlefront system and probably need a few easy scenarios that they can win without doing too much in order to get to grips with the game. If they keep bumping up against scenarios they can't win without playing it more than a couple of times, they are unlikely to keep playing the game or buy another module/title. Not every scenario or campaign has to be pitched at challenging genuinely experienced players. How many threads have you seen recently along the lines of '[name of scenario] help needed' - or 'I cannot get past mission 3 in the [name of campaign] - Please help.' Or look at the thread asking how many times people play a scenario in order to win it - the balance of opinion there seems to be I just get frustrated and move on or I had to save every turn and replay and I feel soiled. My stuff is generally pitched at the novice to average player mainly for this reason and the fact that the main tester (me) is a middling player. I would rather kick a scenario out of the door that can be won first time rather than making it difficult for experienced players and then having to keep coming onto the forum to explain how to win it. Otherwise, the points that both domfluff and I raised about design philosophy, your target audience in terms of H2H, one side vs the AI or both sides vs the AI, and the constraints that you have to work with in the editor are extant and valid.
  2. While I don't know the split, the manual confirms @domfluffis correct in regard to the ground/casualty priorities for meeting engagements: "The ratio of VP awarded for terrain objectives versus casualties will vary based on the type of battle, with Meeting Engagements awarding the least VP for terrain objectives and the most VP for unit casualties, and Assaults awarding the most VP for terrain objectives while de-emphasizing unit casualties." Engine 4 manual, page 119 refers.
  3. Heaps of people who served in BAOR do exactly the same - don't worry about the BOAR thing. The image below, although having US III Corps reinforcing NORTHAG which was a role that evolved towards the end of the Cold War, pretty much sums the deployment piece on the Central Front. There are of course better and more detailed maps out there but this one was easy to find and gets the message across. I can guarantee you that in the time frame of the game - the only Brits you would have seen alongside the Danes would have been 6 Field Force/1 Infantry Brigade/UKMF which as I said earlier and the image illustrates, would have come from the UK. Prior to 1975, and I haven't researched that in detail because it is irrelevant to the time frame of the game, 3 (UK) Division apparently either had a role in Denmark/Schleswig Holstein or there was talk of it having one. If you are interested in BAOR barracks, this is a good starting point: Barracks (baor-locations.org)
  4. You could of course just make a brew while the thing is loading ... so despite what MikeyD said it is probably an omission but I disagree with @JulianJ - it is a 0 out of 10 for me. The content speaks for itself and that is decidedly not US-centric.
  5. Yeah - @kohlenklauhas pretty much nailed it. The probe/attack etc options are really only relevant if you're making a QB as this affects point allocations and VPs (I think) - if it is a scenario then the battle type appears as text in the 'Load Game' menu but the label you apply has no effect on your AI plans etc. It just gives the player a clue as to what they might be doing i.e., probe, assault or whatever ... if they read it of course. In my experience, they'll go by the description that you put in the 'Description' box under the title in the 'Description' part of the editor.
  6. No - unless there is a mod out there that does it. I doubt it as most competent Youtube vids employ mods to give the best visual effects and they generally show transparent buildings. Visually you may not like it but if you've got a battalion of troops in a dense urban environment to manage the transparency helps you to manage it. Would I like to be able to turn it off using the standard interface to take screenshots or video captures, for sure I would, but I can live with it. As I've said before, this game engine is over a decade-old and designed to run on both Macs and PCs which imposes limitations, some of which can be modded but many cannot. Learn to live with it.
  7. @Bulletpoint domfluff has nailed it - however Mrs Combatintman keeps telling me I'm not funny ... maybe she has a point.
  8. Probably due to the fact that 41 Pantserbrigade based in Seedorf/Hohne was the only significant element of 1 (NL) Corps based in Germany in peacetime. Anybody interested in the Dutch military in this period should bookmark this site: Netherlands Armed Forces Order of Battle 1985 (orbat85.nl)
  9. It is the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR - not BOAR) and the northern Germany tasking piece in terms of a Warsaw Pact attack is not true. The 1 (BR) Corps northern boundary, which was the fighty bit of BAOR, was around the Hannover area (so about 150 odd klicks south of Hamburg). The British element slated for the possibility of deploying to Commander, Allied Land Forces Schleswig-Holstein and Jutland (COMLANDJUT) was 6 Field Force from April 1977 until it was retitled 1 Infantry Brigade in January 1982. The force, which also crops up with the name United Kingdom Mobile Force (UKMF) was a United Kingdom Land Forces (UKLF) asset, not a BAOR asset. I may or may not have been a part of it in the mid-80s.
  10. The Centurion tank is the selling point for the Danes in the game period although of course the Dutch, a more likely module candidate, fielded them as well at this time.
  11. Exactly what I said on the Beta board - have a like.
  12. The answer will depend on priorities. How many Swedes buy the game; how likely is it that Sweden would have been an actor in the conflict compared to say - West Germany, the UK, the French, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Canadians, the Danes, Norwegians and Luxembourg on the NATO side; East Germany, Poland and Czechoslovakia on the Warsaw Pact side; and, how easy is it to research the TO&Es of the Swedish forces likely to be involved. Of course if modules focus on the AFCENT area, which is likely, then you can scratch the Norwegians and Danes from the above list. The answer; therefore, is I'll bet both of my pensions on not seeing the Swedes.
  13. The engine isn't designed for so-called national characteristics so behaviours are global. Any problems experienced by Soviet units equipped with radios will be experienced by NATO units equipped with radios.
  14. That was not my experience and as @George MC, whose scenario this is and is one of the most accomplished scenario designers out there, the balance of probability of your opinion being correct is pretty low. Editing is fun but if you set yourself the goal of frustrating people, no one will play your scenarios and will come onto the forum and rip them apart. Why not try it first before feeding your compulsion to make random uninformed comments across multiple threads?
  15. In a word - no. So long as both sides have choices, so in this case, if the defender had setup options then such changes could result in a different outcome. I also dispute that an H2H game would result in the same result because of the variables involved having two human players. A human attacker will be more competitive and tactically adept than the AI attacker. Additionally, it is difficult to script an AI force to achieve a victory of any sort against a human player. As JonS says in the scenario design manual, the AI force should present a challenge to the human player. Generally if I can get the AI to achieve a draw then that is good enough. There are too many people who, when making their first scenario, want all sorts of AI tools to force an AI victory and find that either they are not available or they are not skilled enough to make the AI do exactly what they want and end up giving up totally.
  16. QB points are being looked at according to another thread I saw the other day.
  17. I'm not sure this is the issue you think it is. Smoke rounds for both artillery and AFVs are a smaller proportion of the ammunition count than HE for the former and HE/AP for the latter. Once you run out - you run out.
  18. @AdamPraha - I am glad you have found something that works for you.
  19. Its a thing across all titles with crop tiles. Someone may have produced a mod that fixes it but I don't know for sure.
  20. In terms of composition it was a Tank Army but going back to what I said about relearning everything I thought I knew about the Cold War it was not called 3 Shock Army during the time frame of this game. It also only had only three divisions until 1983 (two tank and one motor rifle) vice the four that I am more familiar with in the time that I was expected to face it off. OMGs were the new buzz words in the late 80s so for the game period I wouldn't set too much store by them. 3 CAA/Shock Army's main effort would have been in the 1 (GE) Corps AOR (Hannover and immediately north of it), 2 GTA was pretty much going to be the second operational echelon for GSFG and given where it was based, would most likely have rolled through 1 (GE) Corps and bits of 1 (BR) Corps. Of course it could have been employed north and south of that option though . The most likely second operational echelon in the south would have been the Central Group of Forces and, from what I've read, the Poles, if they turned up, would have been given the northern option (eg Hamburg and all of the coastal stuff). There is the issue of the NVA - from what I can gather during the game time frame two NVA divisions were slated to come under 3 CAA/3 Shock Army's command, both were fairly high category reserve divisions and my guess is that they would get given tasks to either fix bits of 1 (NL) Corps and 1 (BE) Corps or do a bit of 'kameradenschaft' with 1 (GE) Corps in built up areas such as Hannover.
  21. @Glubokii Boy - finally, someone who knows how to use Flavour Objects properly. Really good work on the placement of your bins, park benches etc. One of the biggest problems I see with maps is people just throw Flavour Objects randomly around the place and it just looks sh1t - my favourite is placing them right outside doors so that anybody walking out of the door trips over. I repeat my earlier comment - this is bloody good work based on the images you've posted.
×
×
  • Create New...