The Steppenwulf

I just had a very quick 20 min skim read of the vassal module designers guide: http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/File:Vassal_3.1_designerguide.pdf This is the sort of thing that might serve the purpose I've proposed above: Random Text Button A Random Text Button can be used to randomly select a text message from a list defined beforehand. One use for a Random Text Button could be to roll for results on a chart and then report the results to the Chat Window. However, such a chart roll may not have any modifiers applied. No modifiers we might think is problematic, but a workaround would be to use a series of these text buttons to cover each step in a process. I suspect you'd only req 2 steps anyhow (at the most 3) for the kind of automated, but finite reactions that I've typically referred to above. The output simply instructs the game master what action/restriction/impact is imposed on that unit.

I could be conflating somewhat with Tabletop Simulator on Steam. That certainly does have fully programable and animated AI. On the other hand, I'm sure that there are some modules in Vassal that have fully automated rules and tasks. So that's all the actually needed here, don't need fancy animations. it's just writing some rules that automate reactions. Theoretically though, the language and log files Vassal uses are written in Java (I think) so in theory it's possible to run an application outside of Vassal that processes the save files and outputs appropriate AI responses. Probably not realistic for this idea, without someone possessing strong java programming experience to write it, but I once wondered why the various individuals who had a stab at developing a CM campaign application, didn't run with this idea, because I would think this far easier than building a campaign app from scratch.

I'd be interested in participating in a MP campaign, especially one that is created on Vassal. Long thought this would be the best platform for an operational CM game because it offers the flexibility to evolve the mechanics and rules over time. Perhaps from my experience of WRG tabletop wargaming as a teenager and some computer games these days it seems to me that a non linear CM campaign game is best suited to lots of auto responses built into the mechanics. For instance those potential engagement situations that don't actually transpire into engagements due to counter manoeuvres, passive retreats, surrender etc.. Rather than all these situations be directed by the human player, they can be instead directed automagically and a vassal campaign has the potential to be programmed with all these mechanics. And as I say, the complexity can be evolved, even mid game if deemed beneficial. Handling how recon works (air and ground forces) is another big one where it isn't desirable for players to get bogged down in the detail - least of all play out actual recon actions. It just needs input information and output information, the inbetween stuff is taken care of automagically with some imaginatively thought out mechanics.

Don't know whether milestones might be put to good use but here's the method I used for a BN map a long, long time ago. Same method will apply to FB's milestones assuming there are flavour slots free.

Well everyone evaluates on this basis to some extent or other. I mean regardless, it's a general advertising principle that you have two minutes as a pitch to sell your product, computer games a salient example. Two minutes of CM 'action' are not playing to CM's strengths as a game. Put simply if you worked in sales and were asked to sell chess, how would you do it!??!! Yep I am referring to the 1% (or how many you want %), the figure matters not, the point is simply about maximising the games selling power regardless of how many it reaches.

And this links in with the graphics quality evaluation, also in turn to the GL video posted by Umlaut above. CM games will do best on steam if marketed cleverly; indicating in 2 minutes flat what the punter is going to get out of it. That is, specifically, an authentic tactical (and historical) experience. The entire movie spectacular as a marketing approach without an accompanying tactical (and historical) narrative will unfortunately serve these games no justice on a platform where many subscribers do not look more deeply at what a game offers, and instead make trigger purchases based on face value ones in a slick video exemplifying; fast paced action, spectacular visuals, highly immersive audio, general instant gratification. CM or its samey "movie videos" cannot compete with that. Different approach required!

here German side - there's just the single infantry unit that takes casualties, near the buildings overlooking the US dug in positions in front of the windmill and hamlet. I suspect the problem is the ditch, which is not processed by the game as representing "cover".

Unfortunately I've just discovered on my first play with the new patch that this isn't the case. Morale seems now from my observation to be overly brittle. Put reg infantry under fire so they become rattled and then they'll scoot all getting mown down in the process. Yes okay no more running towards the enemy, but it makes little difference if scooting is in the open. Exposed equals death! Very frustrating indeed after having waited so long for the patch. I suspect others will start to observe this coding behaviour soon enough and reporting on these forums the same!

Yes I've also been thinking: If we were to sacrifice 2 pigs, 5 sheep, 12 chickens, a cow and a policeman, maybe Apollo will be appeased and Covid and all the world's current problems will miraculously disappear? Just sayin....

I created and finished a large map of the St Denis Le Gast (Roncey Pocket) area years ago. I then got slightly bogged down with the OOB (it's guesswork re the fleeing Germans trying to escape the pocket) and then altogether fell out with the idea of creating faithful historical scenarios. In almost all cases they do not seem to be conducive to really interesting game play - competition format has so much untapped potential in CM! Anyway If there is a Cobra scenario interest group (even better a cooperative of content dev), it might spur me on to go back to this and get it finished !?!?

Yes I've done this. Your instructions are correct.

Quite! And it's not just WEGO that CM gets right. If Gravitem hit the spot (on balance) more than CM, I wouldn't be playing CM!

Two player campaigns! I just don't get why (comparatively) the easiest thing to implement and the change that would bring maximum joy to this game for most of the more serious players, still isn't a feature. Granted with the size of CAM files, Head to head campaigns would not be best served up as huge packages of lengthy sequences of scenarios. But a campaign with a mere 4 or 5 scenarios would still be engrossing progress from the present play limitations. Come on BF!!

If you put a defensive work model inside a flavor object (with the right order selection) and join the objects, the new object (which is still a flavour object) assumes all the custom properties of the defensive work model. It is however a pointless exercise because it's not apparent that there is anything to gain by doing it, at least from my experience. Nevertheless, my point was related to my attempts to understand how hard cover operates in Combat Mission. My conclusion is that it is hard-coded by object. More precisely the GE processes hard cover as identified by the name of the .mdr file. This makes sense since we know that all vehicles have different armour ratings. Extend that to all hard cover so; different type of buildings, walls and defensive works will all use the same method. I appreciate the point that placing 'hard-cover objects' without textures is the best way to replicate hard cover. Well... the only other way would be to take a flavour object and rename it as if it were an object that is recognised in the code as an object with hard cover, but then you'd access said object in the editor as a building or a vehicle. But that is purely theoretical and besides, hardly seems worth messing around with objects to this extent.

You are correct, I just tested tagged models to be sure and it does work! With regard to the cover aspect of flavour objects (specifically hard cover), I have spent some time running tests. Placing a wall, building or defensive work inside a flavour object does not appear to result in the flavour object taking on the cover aspects of the object. So much so that I believe that code governing hard cover is hard-coded into those particular objects and it is probably identified by the name of the .mdr file (for example only bunker.mdr will have the hard cover properties of a bunker). Any cover and concealment properties that may be experienced with flavour objects are governed by the soft cover code that apply to terrain & doodads (i.e. number of objects in an action square). Naturally I could be wrong about all this too, I'd be interested to see any tests that challenge my present deductions, or cast a better light on this.

I think that tags only work with textures, not models. If I'm right this is not possible.

And some miscellaneous signs....

City road signs... as opposed to highway signs, which are stock in SF2 & BS:-

Unfortunately there are no bump textures for flavour objects, which without, will not provide the desired effect.

Yes I agree, definitely the way to go with this and one small option problem solved!

Concrete barriers are only in Black Sea right? Is this what you mean because they can be added no problem if it's felt that they have a place in the Syrian theatre? What sort of concrete barrier are you referring to though? In the first pic below is the stock barrier in Black Sea, 2 & 3 flavour objects in my pack are simple length extensions of the barrier (for use as highway central res), 4 is planned to be included as a military style road barrier (these are perhaps limited to Russia/Ukraine theatre?, I've not seen any pics of them elsewhere, but could be wrong!) And 2, 3 & 4....

I've seen pics of the temperate colour in use in arid region (perhaps Afghan?), though I agree for use of these objects in SF2, the desert shade is the most appropriate. On a similar note, I've also seen pics of Ukranian forces using Hesco barrriers very recently ... so perhaps the temperate texture version can go in the Black Sea flavour package?! US forces would feasibly have shipped them into Ukraine, even in Black Sea's fictional politico-military context?!

So.... with Hesco Barriers it occurred to me that they are not likely to be ever used in ones or twos but only as part of a larger fortification. So I dumped the idea of just having individual barriers as flavour objects and instead created full bastion walls as single objects.Below are screenshots of what we have. Not sure what looks best though the temperate or desert look?! I must add a big caveat about these particular models; as I discovered some time ago, large objects come with issues that I believe are so bad that they aren't perhaps a good idea to actually use them (Aquilia has noted the same in his recent posts but with some neat innovative workarounds). That said the meta data values that sbobovyc script is now able to identify, offers a way forward to resolve these issues. I plan to apply some time to this and we shall see what can be discovered.

.

I've just posted an update on my flavour objects here