Heirloom_Tomato
-
Posts
1,432 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Posts posted by Heirloom_Tomato
-
-
My daughter has been playing a few battles with me from time to time and I think is starting to get the hang of how things work. Her boyfriend tried to play the CMBN demo against me over Christmas and very quickly got frustrated by the number of units he needed to figure out how to manoeuvre. To make the process a little easier, I built a couple of very small quick battles for them to try to fight the AI, with a very small force. I wanted to teach them how to properly fight with a small force, so hopefully a bigger one would be more manageable, a lesson I need to relearn all the time if you ask anyone of my PBEM opponents!
This got me wondering if anyone here is interested in these battles, and if introducing them as a daily challenge would hold any appeal? I would post a new small scenario every day and you would have until I post the next scenario to add a screen shot of your results. Highest score with the lowest losses wins the day. My plan would be to create some battles for each of the 4 WW2 titles, one title for each week.
Before getting too carried away with this idea, I have 3 battles for CMFI+GL ready to go. You can find them here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/rcse7lwjhh7evk3/AAAaaP3xFpX856IasIER4Dzia?dl=0
The rules are quite simple:
Play as the Allies, Trees turned on, and in Iron mode. Post a screenshot of your results.
Please give them a try and let me know what you think of the idea.
-
1 hour ago, CMFDR said:
Oops, my bad then, sorry Heirloom Tomato
No worries! These battles are an essentially a blind quick battle. I took the qb map, added reasonable forces, and assigned them to an AI orders group. I changed very little if anything with the maps. I left the name of the quick battle map alone to give credit to the proper person who did most of the work on the battle. Any future ones I do, I will change the name and include the information in a breifing note.
-
The game already gives you an opportunity for command delays. Play in Iron mode, set the trees to on and turn off all the icons. If you want it even tougher, play this way in realtime, without pauses, instead of WEGO.
Your troops will still have all the spotting and sound contacts info, and relay this information up the C2 chain, the only missing link is you. Since the big complaint seems to be that the player can see or knows too much information all the time, this takes away all of the advantage. Unless you can see the enemy on the map with your own eyeballs, there will be a delay between when you first notice your men firing their weapons or dying and you giving them orders to react.
If you think the CO should be able to have regular status updates, turn the icons back on every 5 or 10 turns.
-
I built this little map tonight after supper as well. It is the field beside my house shown worked on the left and then they way it looked this spring as a lush field of hay on the right. The farm has a sand ridge, several wet holes and about 4 different soil types in the 25 acres, in game 150 meters by 600 meters. The view here is from the west looking east. The first time I worked this field, I assumed it was all dry and good to go because the east portion of the field was fit. The field was covered with corn stubble after a near record harvest so there were no areas of the field that had drowned out and were without plant material, a typical giveaway of a wet hole. At the Northwest edge of the field, the sand ridge was dry but not the little hollow between the sand and the pond. The disc I was pulling got bogged down in the wet ground and I almost got the tractor stuck. Fortunately, I was able to get out without assistance but made a big mess. With the ground worked, it is fairly visible, with a full growth of hay... good luck finding it if you didn't know it was there. Can you even see the wet hole in the field on the right? I was travelling at 4.5-5 mph when I noticed the problem and still was lucky to stop in time. If you were in tank, cruising at 15 mph+ and hit that wet hole, for sure bogging is an issue.
For my two cents, I think the game give you all the details an actual trooper would have. Look at the ground conditions in the game, and then recognise any ground other paved surfaces has a chance of bogging if conditions are damp or worse. Make an effort to stick to the higher ground and ground with some sort of vegetative cover. The hay field on the right will have a reduced chance of bogging due to the root structure of the plants. But if the conditions are wet or muddy, that won't make a big difference. Remember, crew experience goes a long way to preventing bogging. Just like at work, all the new inexperienced guys seem to find the wet holes....
Here is a link to the file if you wish to check out the terrain types used.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4ftkpyl7j8sgbbb/Terrian Example.btt?dl=0
I would also like to add, I hope Battlefront seriously considers adding another ground condition to the game for all the upcoming modules, and that is thawing. At work today we were trying to plough some of our last soybean stubble. It has been a wet fall/early winter and we have a couple fields left to go. This morning there was a good frost in the ground and the first few hours went real well. Around 10 am the sun came out strong and started to melt the frost. We broke a chisel plough tooth and it took half an hour to fix it up. In the time we were fixing the chisel plough, the ground became to soft to continue. The reading I have been doing the last few years about the Canadians fighting in Holland, this same thing happened to them. The tanks could support them for the start of the day but as the sun warmed things up, the tanks bogged and had to be left behind. Attacks would falter and need to be tried again the next morning when the ground was frozen enough again. I would love to see the same kind of thing happen in game. Start the battle and vehicles can drive just about anywhere, but as the fight drags on more and more will be lost to bogging. It would be a great way to add a time element to the battle as a reward for those who move quickly and it would hinder those who take too long. I know the game already models this with regards to rain, so I would hope it would be easy to implement with frost.
-
1 hour ago, MikeyD said:
I do wonder how often players these days go into the editor to play. You only see a few people (a.k.a. tpr) doing 'test scenarios' to test theories anymore. You certainly don't see many players excitedly uploading a new scenario they just built for everyone to try. Which is a shame. The editor is your playground. Here's a screenshot of a scenario map I threw together just last night after supper (no, really). If you're worried that opponents will take unfair advantage of you because of their better knowledge of terrain, I'd bet most players wouldn't have a clue which terrain type was under feet on this particular map
That right there is beautiful!
-
The vehicle pack adds flamethrowers to the game and that alone is worth the purchase in my opinion. If you play Commonwealth forces, the Churchill Crocodile is a great tank to choose as it is effective against enemy armour and devastating against infantry.
-
I went there this summer with the family and it is indeed a great place to stop in and check out. We went on a weekday and pretty much had the place to ourselves. The only tank we saw them driving on our visit was a Stuart. However, the weekend before they had a whole bunch of the tanks out and driving around shooting at each other. I would like to go back sometime when they have them out and in action again.
-
Interesting read. Thanks!
-
1 hour ago, WriterJWA said:
I'm just getting warmed up to the idea of developing a scenario, so forgive my lack of knowledge. Instead of creating a band aid ("morale ballast") to prevent early surrender, why not just have the various troop qualities better reflect a realistic surrender threshold? So instead of having to create some kind of off-map spirit leader that keeps them in the fight, they can rely on their own troop quality (ie., green troops panic and surrender at X value, veteran troops at Y value, fanatics at Z value).
I believe you talking about two different things, each of which is already present in the game. The entire enemy force will surrender when a certain set of conditions has been met. I am not sure exactly what the level is but lets go with 45%. If we assume the enemy has 100 men, once 45 of them have been KIA or WIA, the battle is over, the enemy surrenders to your awesome playing skills. It doesn't matter if they are green or elite, low or fanatic motivation, once 45% are casualties, the battle is over. The morale ballast is used for the situations where you want those 100 men to fight to the last man, no matter what. A good example would be a delaying force, left in place to slow the enemy down in a suicide mission. Without the morale ballast, they would quit the fight after losing 45 of the 100 men. Yet in this situation, the remaining 60 enemy troops could still cause a significant threat to your men. So a morale ballast of 1000 men is added to arrive on the 4 hour mark, ensuring those 100 men will fight to the very last man.
The second part is the individual troops themselves. The can and do surrender if they are cut off from their parent unit, surrounded and facing overwhelming incoming fire. Here, experience and motivation play a significant role. Elite fanatics will fight to the last man, to the last bullet, to the last breath in their lungs. Poorly motivated conscripts on the other hand will surrender, throw down their weapons and raise their hands in the air, rather quickly if cut off and surrounded. Depending on the situation you wish to depict in your scenario, choosing the appropriate troop quality will play a very important part of the battle.
1 hour ago, WriterJWA said:Money no option. . . I think I'd be far more realistic to have an exit map edge for an AI. If a combination of their morale and their command structure falls below a certain threshold, and X number of objectives are in control of the player, they make a bee-line for the exit. If they come under fire in the process of doing that, then they stand a higher chance of surrender. Alternatively, the en masse surrender feature could be removed and replaced with individual surrenders only. The verdict will be apparent at the end of the scenario or if the player elects to cease fire.
What you are suggesting here is possible to setup using terrain triggers. Set the AI plans to have the enemy troops keep pulling back every time your men reach a certain area of the map. Once the last terrain trigger has been tripped and you wish the enemy force to withdraw, set an AI movement point for the exit zone. As more and more of your men leave the map, there will be a greater chance of individual units being cut off and surrendering. From a points perspective, the enemy force could be given a friendly casualties threshold. As the men retreat and exit the map, they will stay alive and earn points. If the player has points attached to how many casualties they cause, each man who exits will deny the player points. Again, the only way to prevent the mass surrender is to have the morale ballast, which will in turn allow for more opportunities for individuals to surrender.
If you would like to see the following in action, shoot me a PM and I will set up a battle to show you how it works.
-
The CMFI bundle is my favorite one of them all. No other WW2 title covers the same length of time July 43 to May 44, range of weather, hot and dry to cold and snow, terrain variety, flatter agricultural land to steep mountains, or range of nations. The upcoming module with extend the title to the end of the war, adding even more variety.
-
Since I have no idea how to unpack and repack a campaign, and really no interest either, I chose a stand alone scenario and added more time. The scenario I chose is Fight at Vallebruca for CMFI.
This battle has been modified to add more time for the American attacker to complete the mission, nothing changes for the AXIS player. In this version of the battle, you will have 1.5 hours to complete the mission, double the original 45 minutes. However, there is a cost to using more time. At the 45, 1 hour and 1:15 minute mark a recon platoon will arrive on the map as reinforcements. These units have a DESTROY objective for the Axis force and must exit the map to prevent the Axis player from scoring points. The EXIT zone is at the far end of the map, deep within the AXIS territory. As the American player, you will need to have solid control of the map to allow them to exit without suffering losses.
I suggest if you think you have won the battle at the 44 minute mark, select a ceasefire and take your victory.
In my play testing, a turn 1 ceasefire gives the AXIS player some points for destroying the recon forces even though they have not yet entered the map. To counter these points, the AMERICAN player has been given bonus points in the same value.
The only other changes to this battle are to switch the original destroy objectives for both players into CASUALTIES and CONDITION victory values. Keep your losses below 40% and inflict more than 40% on the enemy to secure these points. I have made no changes to briefing screens, tac or operations maps. I have also left all the AI plans the same, so after the original 45 minutes pass the AXIS forces will have no new AI orders.
Here is a link to the changed scenario:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5eknikjq5jo7n0o/AADJRF-3Tfc3iFCVzsEQlt7Wa?dl=0
Please give it a go and let me know what you think. If anyone has another scenario in mind they would to see have more time added, I am open to suggestions.
-
4 hours ago, Badger73 said:
You are all being silly Frisians! . . . .
Leave us Friesians alone, we are the best part of Holland!
-
After having vehicles become immobilized what I felt was too many times, I built a test map 2km long with a "road" of every terrain type and made five variants, very dry, dry, damp, wet and muddy. One tank for each road, and send them off to see who gets stuck first. The quick summary is if the ground is damp or worse, anything other than a road leads to potential problems. So then the question becomes, how badly do I need this tank to cross that terrain and what happens if it gets stuck?
I also setup fences, walls and hedges to see how many times you could go through before trouble arrives. I think 5 times through hedgerows with a Rhino tank leaves you immobile. Fences and small walls are fairly similar if my memory is right.
Crew experience also plays a major role, in my opinion. I have battle going on now with a green tank crew. I avoid grapevines in CMFI at all costs but this crew took a ricochet off the turret and freaked out. Slammed the tank into reverse, straight into a vineyard and then tried to make a right turn. They got immobilized in 15 seconds. The joys of WeGo PBEM.
Create a map for yourself and see what you find. Each vehicle reacts to the different terrain tiles and ground conditions differently so try out a few of your favorites and see how they do. It will get you using the editor at the very least and hopefully spark your creativity to create a scenario for the community.
-
2 hours ago, slysniper said:
I will also play this and give some feed back if you do not mind.
The more feedback, the better. The challenge in this scenario is not just to beat it, but rather to beat it and suffer no casualties.
-
Creating scenarios is a challenge and most of the ones I start to make are played be me once or twice and then another idea comes up I would like to try so the original one ends up being left for another day. I like the special forces type of scenarios @slysniper @Sgt.Squarehead and @Combatintman were talking about and took the time to make one I felt was good enough to be released to the community. Here it is: http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-black-sea/cm-black-sea-add-ons/vega-force/ Give it a whirl and provide some feedback.
On 11/20/2018 at 11:31 AM, SimpleSimon said:Before I /ignore you Squarehead maybe you'll at least do yourself the dignity of answering my questions and naming some scenarios you designed? If you have any respect for your own work you will at least do this. It will also give me the opportinity to see if I was wrong about you. Up to you.
I have read through this whole thread and this comment really gets me. I am curious @SimpleSimon, which scenarios have you made and released to the community? I am interested in trying out one you have made to see how it compares to other community or Battlefront made scenarios.
-
2 hours ago, IanL said:
Can you actually set that *and* use the suggest button? In other words dose the forces chosen via the suggest button respect the selections you make in the soft factors controls? I can test it out myself and I will but since I'm not at my game computer now I can ask here first
Works every time
-
I see the following in 4.0
P-47D 32 points 96 rarity
P-51B 30 points 150 rarity
P-51D 35 points 175 rarity
All three require an FO to access them while in battle.
-
10 hours ago, Erwin said:
CM1 featured more randomness in units one would receive at an experience level plus a variety of weapons possessed by any unit. For some reason. CM2 only offers standard cookie cutter units that are all identically equipped.
Are you talking in Quick Battles or the game in general? The editor and the quick battle selection process allows you to modify so many of the different soft factors virtually guaranteeing you anything but cookie cutter units.
-
From the Manual:
When a squad is given the Combine Squad command, the squad will reorganize itself into two teams (if it originally had three teams), and will even out the number of soldiers in each team, moving soldiers from larger teams into smaller teams. Restrictions - can only be given to multi-team Squads that are currently not split. Example - useful for consolidating soldiers in squads that have suffered casualties, keeping the firepower of teams relatively equal.
Consider loading up a tiny quick battle and play a hotseat battle against yourself. Spend your time testing out commands, movement orders, and seeing how the troops react to the battle.
-
12 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:
DEFIANCE!!!
I think this guy might have been the inspiration for the scene at the end of Saving Private Ryan! @MOS:96B2P did a plane save the day?
-
1 hour ago, General Jack Ripper said:
Then again, I barely play Commonwealth forces due to my utter disdain for Canadians.
I agreed with everything you were saying up until this point.
-
On 8/25/2018 at 11:57 AM, Erwin said:
- Engineers who blast a wall but do NOT run thru it. (Currently we have to time it out so they blast right at the end of a turn.)
12 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:- You can do this already, just place the BLAST waypoint in the action spot the engineers are already located, they will blast the wall and then stay put.
I learned a trick from someone on these forums for using Blast. Get the Engineers into position for where you want them to blow the hole. Using the Blast command, place the way point to the action square or two immediately to the right or left of where you want them to Blast. They will set off the demo charge and then move to side, instead of charging through the opening.
-
I loaded the file and it worked without issue. Are both you and your opponent at Engine 4.0?
-
7 hours ago, Elcloudy said:
Hello, everyone. I’m new to the forum and CMx2.
I’ve been on the fence about buying the BN complete bundle or FI + GL for a while. I haven’t read about those Engine 4 bugs. Are they really that bad so as to wait for the new patch?
@Josey Wales, your videos made me interested in CM. Great content!
If you have never played CMx2, you will have nothing to compare things to, so when the bugs people are complaining about show up, they may bother you less. I have not stopped playing any of the games and have adjusted my playing to how the game currently works.
After you buy CMFI+GL and/or the CMBN Big Bundle, and have played few scenarios or a campaign, if you find the 4.0 issue to be a big problem for you, there are a few things you can do to make the issue less obvious.
1. Play PBEM battles with a trustworthy opponent and agree to take the same level of experience for your units, say all Green or all Veteran. This will ensure both players are dealing with the same quality of troops and have them react the same way to stress.
2. Have all units with the motivation level set to High or better. The stronger the motivation, the less likely the troops are to break and potentially make a wrong decision. High seems to make them react the way I want them too.
3. Use on map mortars only, no off board arty. Infantry can have some strange reactions to a heavy arty bombardment. Limiting the battle to on map assets only will reduce the impacts as the shell sizes are smaller and ammo counts lower.
4. At all times remember your opponent is playing under the same system and rule set. What caused your men to react funny, die a horrible death, and make you spew your cold beverage in a rage filled tantrum? Whatever it was, do it back to your opponent and he will see the exact same problems. The worst part is tho, and I swear it is true, my opponents never seem to have the same problems I do.....
5. Learn to use the scenario editor and build maps. The editor can be more fun than playing the game some days. It will also let you test out all the crazy ideas you could dream off. I like to take quick battle maps, modify them to suit the little idea I have in mind, and then go test them out. I am currently setting up platoon sized engagements and trying to play them with the icons off. Consider the editor to be the sandbox of your dreams!
Daily Challenge
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
You are right, my post was not clear on specifics. I was thinking to start the daily battles on February 1st and posted these ones up as a teaser for what the battles could look like. I was hoping for feedback on the idea, the length and size of the battle, the scoring parameters and the timeframe given for players to complete the challenges.
Given the first responses are already suggesting a week timeframe instead of daily, perhaps that is the route these should go.
As for which battle to play first, it doesn't really matter. I posted them for feedback purposes only and to hopefully spark some interest in the community. My plan is to try to make battles using some of the lesser used units and vehicles. The CMBN battle I am working on features units included with the vehicle pack.
If there is interest in the idea, I would post up a new battle on February 1st, it will be a CMBN battle, and players would have a week to post their results.
A note about the battles posted already, the AI has multiple setup options for each battle. If you play through once and get a poor result, don't expect the enemy to be in the exact same location the next time.