Sgt Schultz

I think Regulars act regular enough under most situations. If they are in C2 of a non-minus leader and have better than Low Motivation, they are effective. Conscripts are there so designers can make your lives a living hell on Earth. (mwuhahaha) Now these are just my personal preferences, and are subject to modification as circumstances require... Leadership means never having a moron in the chain of command. Minus leadership numbers are for scenarios(make 'em squeal). Zero or +1 is fine for me. Regular/High Motivation is about as low I like to go when I have a choice in the matter. Usually initial presentation units like scout teams and the like. Nothing will save them, so why waste points? Vet/High for offensive combat troopen, 'schreks/zooks, and first wave armor. FOs Vet/Norm. Reg/Extreme or Vet/Extreme make dandy defensive units. If V/Es stay in C2, they will usually stay in place to the bitter end. Crack/High or Crack/Extreme for towed guns or if a single tank is all that can be purchased in the vehicle category. Elite Experience and Fanatic Motivation are what I call "quarter-dropper" options. Arcade settings. They have their place in certain scenarios in single units.

Could this particular instance be caused by crowding? That seems like quite a few troops in a confined space. How large was the building? How many troops total on that floor? I have no clue as to whether or not this is modeled, but they may not have felt there was room to properly deploy without swinging around and hitting a buddy with a hot barrel, along with the other infinity-minus-one variables ofc. I try not to put more than a team in any building that takes up less than two full tiles.

Nothing like being surprised by your own AI plan while playing scenario author test mode. (smiley not allowed due to 5 pics) The 1100+ meter diagonal across the map unintentional keyhole shot that killed a Sherman woke me right up ... and I didn't hear the report until well after the Zippo brewed up. There are 1300+ meter areas that I knew about, but that one caught me. The Evil One, and friend passing through. ________ Amis on the move ... 3 out of 4 burning tanks are there at battle start as flavor objects. Last on the right was the Sherman flambe' surprise. _______________ Ninja 'schrek firing prone from a wheatfield... _____________ ... makes for a nice flat trajectory ... __________________ ... leading to the inevitable ... _______________ More to come later.

Hedges look sad as vinyards, unless you are making freshly planted ones I suppose. Troops can move through the naturally occuring breaks in the low bocage. By using low bocage, I can create a plethora of tactical problems for vehicles. Placement and angle of vinyards can shape the battlefield nicely.

I use experience to get a higher rate of fire for troops and better 1st-shot results from guns. It is more of an observed results thing than any hard and fast testing. I dislike Greens due to their tendency to throw a huge wrench in even the most basic plan. If I want the units to stand fast ... I use Motivation tweaks rather than taking Regulars to Veteran. Extreme/Fanatic troops usually aren't going anywhere until you pry the guns from their cold dead fingers. Now I suppose you could(within reason) get green/fanatic troops to use less ammo yet hold their ground... if they were well led and in C2. Conversely one could supposedly get Cracks that are just at the end of their rope and put them at Low Motivation. Blast away, then run away. Defenders may want to consider High/Extreme Motivation for crucial troops. It may be more useful than Veteran/Crack troops. Nothing hard or fast, as I believe that both metrics(Exp/Motivation) share some effect variables. -

Update - Two days in a row off work did wonders. I was able to tweak the defenders to 8 groups and 7 reinforcements. It's not as epic as that looks... reinforcements like single vehicles, off-map mortars and ad-hoc understrength platoons. As soon as I get the Ami reinforcements the way I like them, there will be a H2H-only beta test version released. If I get any takers and input before i finish the defender plans, I will adjust accordingly before full Human vs AI Defender release. there will be at least 3 plans for the defender. Will post some testing screenies later today ...

Beautiful map!

OK, 2nd test. This time I made sure everyone had a movement order right to the opposite bridge edge before moving on... just in case. Orders Phase - - here we go ... Next turn Orders Phase - still more or less on track, though the Sherman is looking iffy. Everyone decides it's not worth it. The Sherman drives into the river and pops back up, and even the crawling troops turn around and crawl away. 3rd orders Phase - Still on track according to that ...

In the interest of my own edification, I did a quick and dirty test. 1 tank with a SLOW mover order, one platoon with various speed orders and combos of orders to cross yonder bridge. They ALL decided to walk 1.5 Km around to the ford down the valley, rather than attempt that. Now granted I overdid it on the hedgehogs, but that is only three pieces of wire. --

Ami hannomags will also carry 4 60mm rounds of HEAT along with that mountain of small calibre rounds. Now while I do not agree that we should be able to loot wrecked vehicles, as they are usually burning, I did have a suggestion earlier. We have crates ... look in flavor objects. I am fairly certain they 'exist' as far as the engine is concerned, because satchels can blow up most flavors. Under "Fortifications" tab we get ammo crates. Medium points, huge ungodly rarity. The largest on-map weapons system is the German 150mm Infantry Gun. One crate could give 4 rounds HE and 1 Smoke. Scale up the amounts as calibre comes down. Crates can only be placed in a Fortification(foxhole/bunker/trench), Truck/Halftrack(taking up one passenger slot per crate) or Building tile. Once placed, they cannot be moved(remember they are fortifications), only Acquired from. Give the ammo bearers something to do, and keep designers from having to put halftracks into basements. My $.02

OK folks, it is starting to look like decision time for Schultzie. Your input is as always appreciated. Map is done. Forces are done with caveats(more later). Too many different attacking forces/reinforcements to make effective AI plans for attacker. Human Ami attacker only no matter what. Now here's the rub. The battle/force I envision for the defenders probably cannot be done effectively by the AI for various reasons. Towing guns and deploying them properly among them, as well as too many small groups that should have individual guidance. I have backup plans in the making that address these issues, but it means a more boring, and possibly non-optimal/gamey battle for any Human defender. Example - There is a 150mm Infantry Gun in this battle(always been my favorite German defensive unit). It cannot/should not start the battle on the map. Trust me on that one. I can either have it 'appear' magically in a proper place, which btw kills replayability, or try to make the AI tow it in and deploy it properly, or have the crew push it into play from out of deep woods(o what fun). While I CAN make the AI tow and deploy, getting it to do it effectively and consistantly is another kettle of fish. Not to mention that every towed gun means two groups. One for the gun and one for the truck/halftrack. There are other things going on in that vein as well that are slowly turning my brain to mush. So it comes down to this ... H2H only sooner, or Human attacker vs altered-force-German AI defender later. I refuse to have whack-a-mole on one of my maps, and I also want a Human defender to enjoy him{her?}self. 'Tis a bit maddening it 'tis. Which will get played more? I know it is not always easy to get a partner for longer PBEM battles, and some folks like to play the AI a time or two. I could release it H2H and turn a different version loose for you guys to play with as far as plans. That way folks get to play it, and play with it, and I can move on to next project.

There is nothing really wrong with your deployment or the game engine. It looks like you want "impassable" and that is not an option even in real life unless you bulldozed a rubbled building to the bridge end. While I may have played around more with obstacle deployment in that particular case, what you should realistically expect is a SLOWING and CHANNELING of the enemy into your kill zone. Less obstacles and spend the difference on two LMG teams and a 'schrek team covering that bridge, and you have a death trap. Place obstacles at edges and leave center open in a small slot. The TacAI will choose point of least resistance and then try to squeeze everyone through the gap, to their deaths.

This will be solved once we get Soviets and the "Commissar's Mercy" pistol shot. Seriously, the only real flaw I see is the tiring of an entire squad because one wounded soldier is trying to drag his entrails after the rest of the squad. BFC had to stop the 1 troop is 1 troop detail somewhere, and go to abstraction, and that is where they drew the line. My suggestion is differing AI value placed on wounded, depending on battle type. Meeting Engagement or Defense... all aid possible. Probe, not so much. Attack, even less. Assault, leave the bugger lie, we have things to do. This could possibly be implemented by having wounded turn into casualties faster. Example - Assault. Yellow wounded AI attacking troop gets 1 minute on the map, then disappears as a casualty. Attack - Wounded gets 2 minutes. and so on ..

I get you xian. I was aggreeing with George's response to the fellow suggesting multiple versions. Got forced afk before finishing. All of this response loses meaning the smaller the battle considered. One 'toon versus one 'toon means a single LMG team is a game-changer. While I agree with your suggestion in principle as one cool option to have(under a different guise)... in practice not so much. The issue I have is the difference between a human who just picked up the game last month versus... let's say Rune or Winecape. Sometimes a battle is just going to go south for some people while at the same time it is going to be a cakewalk for others. The number of units available is usually a minor variable in the greater scheme of things unless it is a sizable percentage of total force. Adding and deleting units requires more testing with consideration of the experience level of the human playing taken into account. Then there is the 'historical accuracy' question that is a concern to many designers. Not to me of course, which is why I like the idea. Now instead of using just as an AI thing, how about say three settings... Elite - Core units Regular - Core + 1st additional unit(s) Green - Core + 1st and 2nd additional unit(s) It is still basically three versions worth of testing... no... more... one for each permutation. But it gets a single release. I would do it, but some might not want to put in the extra time. As for AI plans for attacking. Again, for smaller battles sure it works. However, combined arms company-or-larger takes too many groups for an effective attack. I would rather have eight more groups than this concept if I had my druthers over coding time. Your idea may be a much larger help/lower workload to smaller RT battles, which may explain my ambivalance. I am more of a PBEM company or larger type.

I agree. You are the all-powerful Steve of BFC... so let it be said, so let it be coded, so let it be done. Throw another Red Bull in the jar and put the brain on it.

Aye George.... these puppies don't just make themselves. If I want complete balance for either side I will make a Meeting Engagement. Anything else is Human vs AI, as my attacks involve more than 8 groups on the offensive. If a player finds that one side is 'too easy', they can submit a comment to the designer and/or mess around in the editor to tweak the battle themselves. Spend a few weeks in scenario author mode tweaking, and you may see what is being asked.

The Eastern/Ami side --- SW - Center - NW - The Watchtower - Northern Bluff - -

New, improved and in the correct forum this time. Two Ami Companies attack a hasty German defense. Forces are being tweaked and plans made. If I ever get a day off work it will be ready for testing. The map from the German side and two views of the objective areas. NE corner - Center - SE corner - Northern buildings - Southern Buildings -

http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1217 Not to be too much of a self-promoter, but here is my scenario "No Exit". The two comments I got said it was good for H2H.

Building may be too small for that team, and/or the window arrangement may not allow unless facing is changed..

I agree that it would be a great future addition to have various buildings with easily detected protection factors available in the editor. Even a simple color code like the UI has for vehicles would be fine for me. Red to blue for various HE/AP metrics. Farmhouse and Stout Farmhouse, Wood or Stone Barn options, etc. As for the current system and its balance/drawbacks/etc... It may be a case of the buildings going into the most-played maps and battles are just of the weaker types due to other considerations such as historical accuracy of appearance, rather than strength. If it is a non-modular structure of two stories or less, I would advise that troops larger than 3 man teams either stay out or hide while inside. Still haven't tested damaged buildings but I am willing to bet they are weaker than undamaged versions. I think the upper floor issue works fairly well as is, even though it may seem unrealistic at times. No, real troopers didn't all do their best Norman Bates impression every time they came to a window. But, they wouldn't be sticking their noses out an upper story window en masse in the first place either. One soldier(grey line for us) would peek and report back. Again, small numbers of stealthy troops. An HMG team in an upper story may seem like a great idea... but your results will most likely show you the error of that decision. They are exposed while firing, cannot run away, and their entire action spot has a chance of dropping to the bottom floor... which would have all sorts of detrimental effects for all concerned. Not to mention that more enemy will most likely see them than they can shoot at. LOS and tracers work both ways. The invisible window issue is known... just not fully addressed as of yet it seems. Unless they are modeling non-damage openings.

My desktop is set to 1680 X 1050. So whatever that translates into in CM-land, and then I crop the UI out. If you have less pixels to start with, you have less after the crop.

The Covered Arc command is your one true friend on the battlefield. Keep the facing the same, just keep a short covered arc on those mortar teams. They do seem to go into rapid fire mode according to their perceived threat level. But uber, infinty-minus-one variables may account for rate of fire. edit - one may be ... they don't think of themselves as holding the power of steel rain their hands... they are 4 guys.. and that's a freakin' tank... aaaahhh kill it.

I was fairly certain that the eye-rollers and the "its been done to death" crowd would win out on apathy points on this thread. Love to be proven wrong. It's been a great read. Out of all the wonderful back and forth, this one grabbed me... Close to what I have always thought, but not quite. My what-ifs always seemed to come back to the leadership. "Almost" just is never good enough on the level they played at. The number of 'almosts' Germany had going for it at numerous times and places has always astounded me. So many pieces were almost ready. Wider war with America could have been avoided in many ways, at least until it was too late to matter. Germany would have given back all of Western Europe to appease the U.S. and Britain, and had everything else West of the Urals. While I obviously still enjoy these discussions, I am very grateful that Germany had leaders that were just that short-sighted and venal. "Never Compromise" was a real winner of a diplomatic policy wasn't it? Been slapping my forehead on their behalf since I was 12. Racial idiocy 101. Turning Gestapo into Dept of Human Resources, and finding productive work for everyone the morons in charge didnt like, until the 'unwanted' got their own province in the Russain Greater Reich may have juuuuussst possibly been a better option. Much better plan in the long run than killing millions of civilians, and inciting almost continuous uprisings in various parts of the occupied areas. "Those people are welcoming us, kill them." is another winner policy statement. The resource, and greater politcal disparities were of course insurmountable for Germany. In the long run. A real military/political window existed imho. Not for some kind of mythic victory for Nazis. A state that reached from the Ardenne to the Urals was possible. So instead of a wolf laying eggs, I always thought more along the lines of... if one could have cured the rabies, the wolf could have survived without needing to learn to lay them. My Harry Turtledove idea was Valium and a great group therapist... around 1938. J/K, but something along those lines. Some calming influence, be it the removal of Hitler by whatever means(illness, random chance), or a general "ah ha" moment once they realised the true economic tiger they had by the tail. Too late to stop, but not too late to put professionals in charge. Put the Prussians in charge of the military, get out of the way and turn them loose on Russia while the Leaders keep the West at bay. Americans hated, or were apathetic towards, Commies and Nazis both. It was "6-5 and pick 'em, I need a job.". Put Scheer-like people in charge of industry and go to Total War economy in '40 or even earlier. Italy screwed Germany fairly well too, for which we can be thankful. I believe I once read some German saying of the time... "If Italy comes in against us, we will need 5 Divisions to hold the Alps. If they come in for us, we will need 25 Divisions to shore them up." Not only came in for, but at the worst possible time. yay fate. Rommel ... in Russia instead of the desert for the entire campaign... goosebumps. Guderian as head of combined OKW/OKH supporting him... The campaign is taking shape as I write. Must ... have ... Modules... edit - Manstein gets to be boss. Guderien gets Army Group Center. Raus' 6th and Rommel's 7th in the Race to Moscow. Campaign coming someday. -

Canada Guy... I will be happy to offer my meager opinions on any maps. PM me. As far as screenies go, this is my method ... 1. PRNTSCRN in game 2. ALT/TAB out 3. Open M$ Paint 4. CNTRL/V(that puts the screenie in Paint) 5. Crop the UI out and save as JPEG(NOT BMP the bandwidth killer) 6. Save to Photobucket(or similar site) 7. Link to here. 8. Accept praise from the public for your artistic mastery(hopefully).