Heirloom_Tomato

Looks like you posted this while I was typing. Totally ninja'd me...

If you are on a PC you will need to look in your documents folder. The pathway will be similar to this: C:\Users\X\Documents\Battlefront\Combat Mission\Red Thunder\Game Files The X in this case is your username. The scenario folder is in the Game Files section.

@Casus_Belli I think the idea to turn off the clock has some very valid reasons in a battle against a human opponent. The other person can make the smart decision for themselves as to when the battle is truly lost and end it, no matter how long it takes, 2 hours, 4 hours or 12 hours into the battle. I have often fought to the end of the clock and wished for a some extra time to keep the fun we have had going a little bit longer. I really like this idea. However, The AI system has limits and must be programmed to follow those limits. Even with the inclusion of triggers, the AI must still follow some sort of timetable to mount an effective fight against you. Without the limits of time, designing a fun and enjoyable scenario would be very difficult. Once a scenario has reached the end of the time limit imposed by the scenario designer, the AI is effectively brainless. Yes, the TACAI is still functioning and units will shoot at what they can see, but other than running away, they will not move. So the fun battle you have been enjoying and wish to have five more minutes or hours of will cease to exist, and instead will become a glorified turkey shoot. To me, turning the clock off against the AI is almost like cheating, the AI has no more moves "brains" and will only react in self-defence. Don't believe what I am saying? Here is the scenario Lonsdale's Block from the Market Garden module. I have modified it to have 4 hours and up to 15 minutes of extra time, the maximum available in the scenario editor. The AI plans are designed to last for 1 hour, so there should be a minimum of 3 hours available to you after AI plans end. I suggest playing the battle and trying to win in the one hour you have been given. I then suggest you pay extra attention for the next 3 hours to see if it is as fun as the battle you played while the AI still had "brains". I don't think you will have as much fun playing the battle after the AI plan runs out as you did while the AI still had "brains". https://www.dropbox.com/s/7d9jshngu873rtw/MG Lonsdale's Block 4 hours.btt?dl=0

I have just uploaded four Quick Scenarios to the Proving Grounds II, two medium and two large meeting engagements. These Quick Scenarios feature a Battlefront supplied Quick Battle map that I have added units to each side and set up the victory parameters. The briefing supplied only contains information about the map, nothing on the units you have or on what to expect facing you. The medium battles are roughly company in size and the large battles feature several reinforced companies. Each file has three versions; Regular, Professional and Expert. The units, map and AI plans are the same for each version of the battle. The only difference is the victory conditions parameters required to achieve a total victory. For example, the Regular battles require you to destroy 50% of the enemy forces and take less than 30% casualties. The Professional battles require you to destroy 60% of the enemy forces and take less than 20% casualties. The Expert version requires you to destroy 75% of the enemy forces and take less than 10% casualties. I hope you enjoy them and can provide some feedback on how to make them better.

Thanks for considering the idea. I was hoping it would be something simple, like if you can share ammo, you can consolidate. But since it is on your wish list, I am happy!

Is this going to be possible for just squads or for whole platoons as well? If all three sections of a platoon have suffered casualties will we be able to join them together to make one or two complete sections? Can it please work for crew served weapons in the same platoon? I have had it happen over and over again where i have three AT guns in a platoon. One gun gets knocked out and has two crew men die. Another takes four casualties, but is still operational. Can the knocked out gun crew join the depleted crew to make one complete crew?

From the Battlefront store site: This bundle includes both "Combat Mission Fortress Italy" and the first module, "Gustav Line", in one attractive money-saving package! This bundle uses the v2.0 Engine until we have a chance to update it. Until that time we have discounted this bundle an additional $10 so that you can upgrade to v3.0 without further costs. I bought the bundle when it first was available and I paid $75 for the bundle and then i bought the upgrade to 3.0 for another $10 later making my total $85. At $75 you get a good deal and I will second or third the statement that this game is worth the money.

@Vergeltungswaffe Positive feedback goes a long way to keeping the motivation levels high! I picked all the forces, for all the battles, with everything set at "typical". I wanted to have a consistent factor while choosing units and this one seemed to be the best solution. And FYI, I am working on some more for Red Thunder.....

In play testing one of these battle the other night this exact thing happened to me. I had done a good job of keeping my men alive and thought for sure I was going to get the points. In the last five minutes of the battle, the AI made a last effort for the victory location and killed off two or three more of my men. I missed the points by one guy. The destroy units option seems like it would be a better fit as the main scoring mechanism, and then adding bonus points if a certain threshold is met.

I been putting together some quick scenarios for CMFI and had a request to do the same for Red Thunder. I am wondering what the consensus is about the differences in setting the battle parameters. I know the Russians had a higher tolerance for accepting casualties but how much higher? If the German side is set for say 30% friendly casualties for a meeting engagement, what should the Russian equivalent be?

Thanks @Heinrich505. After looking in the editor at all the various TOE provided, there is a very wide selection of equipment I have never seen in a scenario particularly from the Italians. Some of the formations they have are very unique and would provide a challenge to fight as and against as well. I have been trying to choose some of these to give players a different feel to each QS battle they play.

For me, map making is the least favourite part of the whole process. I enjoy adding units and working up the AI plans. With the use of triggers and all the AI groups now available, there are lots of options! While I enjoy playing the scenarios researched to the nth degree, I find the plausible scenarios to be just as much fun. This is the reason I have been using the quick battle maps from Battlefront for the Quick Scenarios I have made. If anyone has maps they have made and would like to see a scenario made from them, feel free to send them to me! I would be more than happy to add units and some AI and see what kind of battle turns out. Like @kohlenklau said, I don't bother with the Strat, Op or Tacmaps. A well written briefing should provide the player with enough details to allow to figure things out once they look at the actual map. While it certainly does present more polish to the scenario, it is not something I have the skill for to do properly.

@Vergeltungswaffe Here is a link one medium meeting battle for Red Thunder. I have included three versions of the exact same battle. They are regular, professional and expert. The units are the same, the AI plan is the same, the only difference is the degree of difficulty in achieving a Total Victory gets more difficult between the battles. Let me know what you think of the battle! https://www.dropbox.com/sh/58kkh10eqlslc2c/AACR-P8GWaohEdKcDK71Vaota?dl=0

Thanks for responding @Heinrich505 I am glad you enjoyed the battle and hope you find the other ones to be as entertaining. I would like to clarify that the AI plans are the original ones which came with the map from Battlefront. I just add the units and the set the parameters. A quick question about the battle, did you find the forces used on the map to be realistic? As I continue to make more of these battles, I would like to know the force selections I am using represent the types of battles people hope to play.

I found the game itself loaded faster, loading and saving games processed quicker with an SSD. My game play itself however did not change at all.

I checked out the tool and it confirmed what I was thinking. I have also play tested a couple of the scenarios with the updated scoring system and it works great. It is possible to achieve a total victory on the hardest level but it takes a lot of work, one mistake is OK but two mistakes and a minor or tactical victory is all you will achieve. I have 14 tiny probe QS battles laid out and am finishing up with the AI groups. I hope to have these battles available by the weekend. I am finding the AI does not place fortifications in very wise locations. I need to place these myself and give them an AI grouping with no orders to get them to stay put.

Wondering about the idea of giving these QS battles a difficulty rating. Since I set the parameters for the battle, I could raise or lower the thresholds, making it harder to achieve a total victory. For example, set the enemy casualties to 50% and friendly casualties to 30% for a regular match. For an elite match, the enemy casualties would be set to 60% and friendly to 20%. Then for the hardest level of all, Iron, set the enemy level to 75% and friendly to 10%. The battle's difficulty level would be identified in the name, for example Tiny Meet QS 001 Iron, Tiny Meet QS 001 Elite, and Tiny Meet QS 001. Simply pick your challenge and play. Would this work or am I overlooking something with regards to how the victory point system functions?

@Vergeltungswaffe What type and size of Red Thunder battles are you thinking of?

I have just submitted the first 16 Tiny Meeting QS to the Scenario Depot III.

Glad to hear it is working for you!

So I guess I was wrong about all the files being updates to version 3.0.

This bundle includes both "Combat Mission Fortress Italy" and the first module, "Gustav Line", in one attractive money-saving package! This bundle uses the v2.0 Engine until we have a chance to update it. Until that time we have discounted this bundle an additional $10 so that you can upgrade to v3.0 without further costs. This is right from the store listing on the purchase page for the Gustav Line Bundle

try to reinstall the cmfi gustav line bundle and see what the version number is. I think there was a thread or discussion somewhere that all the new downlaods were now at the latest version. It is possible you went down a step with the patch.

Command Lines work for me. What does your game say is the version number in the bottom right hand corner of the main screen? For reference, mine says v1.20. I bought the Gustav Line bundle, added the patches and the version 3.0 upgrade. I believe it is the 3.0 upgrade which adds the command lines.

I had no problems with it. The battle features units from the Gustav Line module. do you have it?