WimO

COMING SOON! "Operation Coup de Main" should be done for Christmas. As of today all individual (12) scenarios have been completed and tested 'free standing'. Appear to play okay. Tested in both "scenario author" and "iron" modes. Campaign compiles okay after discovering that one should not substitute the word 'and' with '&' in the syntax. The next and final phase begins tomorrow and will consist of evaluating if the Refit, Repair, Restore and Rest values strike an appropriate balance between the situation and game flow.

I bought and external disk drive to connect to my laptop via USB. Good to have one around.

@Ithikial_AUDone. Yup, the problem was USA trenches, foxholes and wire mixed with British due to inattention during the selection process. And thank you for the mention of the significance of the "FIRST" formation purchased. I'll remember that.

Operation Coup de Main - another humbug. At this point the nine scenarios completed to date have been debugged and are satisfactorily following the campaign script except for one silly issue. At the scenario level, sometimes an allied victory is declared as a British Army victory and sometimes as an U.S. Army victory. I check through all of my unit purchases to confirm that they are indeed all British. There are no U.S. units (except maybe a trench or foxhole or two). Can't firgure this one out. I might try replacing all fortifications in case any were purchased as U.S.

Understood. Thank you.

@Ithikial_AU Thank you for the explanation. Your clarification of the game computing final victory from accumulated scenario VPs makes me believe that I need to be careful about terrain vp values across scenarios. Specifically I mean that total values should be relatively similar across scenarios. For example, if the value of a total victory in scenario one is 300 pts then that in scenario two shouldalso be 300 pts. Time to re-evaluated my scenarios.

You are showing me something in the line below that I have not seen befor. It is the segment "_minor defeat" after "[NEXT BATTLE IF LOSE]". I was using only "[NEXT BATTLE IF LOSE] // campaign end". Is the "_minor defeat" necessary on that line? [NEXT BATTLE IF LOSE] _minor defeat // campaign end

Operation Coup de Main campaign update. Play testing has started on the campaign script. I expect a few more months of work debugging. Recently had some time away to deal with creative burnout and work on some home renovations and furniture restoration. Back at the campaign now.

My "Operation Coup de Main" campaign is now undergoing play-testing of the campaign script. I played through the first two scenarios a few times and in the most recent test I purposely lost the scenario "Tracked Vehicles Approaching". The script ended the campaign as it was supposed to because the airlanding troops failed to hold the bridge, but then it awarded me a Tactical Victory for the campaign overall. That was NOT supposed to happen. It was supposed to be a campaign defeat. I checked that it gave me the [BLUE] player victory message and not the [BLUE] player defeat message. Very strange. Does anyone have any idea how this happened?

I am a frequent user of Falaise's 22.5 degree roads in the maps and scenarios that I have designed. The look is great but I have run into some movement issues in some of my scenarios. I want to reinforce what has already been said, Falaise's 22.5 degree roads are really 'highway' road tiles redrawn to look like paved roads, allowing them to blend in with same. The map designer has to select 'highway' tiles to use them. I have mod-tagged my copy so that my scenarios automatically call them when needed. The movement issue observed: In one of my scenarios where a 22.5 degree road forms the causeway across the Merderet flood plain between Cauquigny and La Fiere I noticed that both vehicles and infantry have a problem following a long 22.5 degree path. I hypothesize that the issue might be related to the fact that the terrain is composed of square tiles and that all movement is still orthogonal or in multiples of 45 degree diagonal increments - regardless of the road angle. As a result vehicles and troops frequently wander off the road in that scenario unless I use very short movement paths. Perhaps the original highway tiles disguise this issue by making a normal highway twice as wide as a road. This way the irregularly moving troops do not 'appear' to be leaving the road. I have noted that Falaise's graphic examples posted above contradict my experience. That is very interesting. I have no answer. BTW: I continue to uses Falaise's roads as they are a great improvement to map making.

I am currently working with the most recent engine update. Old maps and scenarios load and function satisfactorily. If I make updates then the maps will be usable only with the current engine. I hypothesize that flavour objects are located relative to s single fixed map square. For example a0:a0, upper left corner. If that is correct and you grow the map to the right and down, then objects should not move, but if you grow the map up and left then they shift. This is just an example from my hypothesis. What is obvious is that if you remove a square that has a flavour object, the object itself is not removed from the programj's list of objects and it wants to put it somewhere.

@PEB14 Bonjour Piere: I run into this problem all the time ... but ... I also always use the expanded and modded flavour options provided by modders years past. The problem might be an issue confined only to the expanded flavour objects ... I don't really know. I have found no easy solutions. My own way of managing it is to create a large master fully populated with flavour objects. When I want to cut it down I first change all of the ground tiles that I am going to cut off to "sand". Then I remove all roads, hedges, buildings etc from those sand tiles. Then I go into 3D map view so I can see the flavour objects on the sand tiles and remove them. Once that's done I return to 2D and cut off the sand tiles. It's labor intensive but keeps things the same on all maps.

The following tells you how to play scenarios as two-player co-operatively using the PBEM system. The sequence below is crucial to ensuring that both players will be watching the same combat results. One player will initiate the 'GO' for the turn and the other will be watching the replay. Here we go then... TWO-PLAYER CO-OP PLAY SEQUENCE PLAYER ONE: 1. [Skip steps 1 through 3 on the first turn of the game.] Press the small REPLAY arrow button at the top of the panel. (You have now watched the same outcome as Player Two.) 2. At the end of the replay the screen says ‘DONE” 3. End the turn by pressing the ‘GO’ button (the big red button at the bottom). 4. Give your movement and shooting orders. 5. Save. 6. Email to Player Two. PLAYER TWO: 7. Give your movement and shooting orders. 8. Press "GO" (the big red button at the bottom) to run the turn 9. After the computer plays the turn and the screen says ‘DONE’, SAVE the game immediately. DO NOT "END" the turn by pressing the big red button again. 10. Email to Player One.

I will try to have my campaign ready for Xmas. Try. Also ... anyone is welcome to use in whole or in part any of my maps, scenarios or mods. Or to modify them to your taste. They are out there for everyone to enjoy. No need to ask my permission.

@PEB14 The following are included in the scenarios ... Halftrack (SPW 304(f)) Halftrack (SPW 304(f)-3) Support Halftrack (SPW 304(f)-10) Self-Propelled Gun (75mm PaK 40) auf Gw39H(f)) Would have like to see an (f) version for 8.sKp.'s SP 20mm AA but had to substitute another option. For the unavailable Reihenwerfers I substituted 81mm MTRs with equivalent ammunition and shooting 'barrage' equivalent.

No worries. Feedback that helps me do better is always appreciated.

I did the same for my "Bloody Buron Overhaul". Provided two or three save files so that players can bypass the 20 minute bombardment if they want. It also prevents players from altering the historical bombardment.

Ah... right. Whoops. Brain fog on my part. Right, my last suggestion does not work.

If your scenario does not allow the player 'free' deployment, then you, the author can play the first turn, (deployment only, no movement or shooting ) order the tank commander to button up and save the turn. Then instruct the player to begin the game using the Turn One save game file. I have done that on occasion. However this solution is not acceptable for the scenario I am working on at the moment.

Here is a list of scenarios completed to date but not yet integrated into campaign. I have not yet determined if and how any branching results will be included . The current scenarios are different from the ones already uploaded due to new and more complete information. They will be released as free-standing scenarios at the same time as the campaign is released because the free standing scenarios will differ slightly from 'unpacked' campaign scenarios. The first scenario will have a choice between an 'easy' historical option in which the Germans were caught completely by surprise or a 'more challenging 'What If?' variant where the Germans have been alerted that the invasion was imminent and are standing to. Players will choose which path to follow. Coup de Main v2 (historical): The coup de main assault on the bridges by the British Airlanding troops. Coup de Main (What If? variant): As above but the Germans at the bridge are on Alert Level II. Tracked Vehicles Approaching: The first German response to regain the bridges. 7th Para Moves Up: 7th Para moves through the Oxf and Bucks to expand the perimeter at the canal bridge. First Contact in Benouville: As "A" Coy moves into position they encounter scattered Germans A Brief Encounter (Le Port): A column of German vehicles wants to pass through Le Port. 9 Platoon Patrol: 9 Ptn B Coy is sent west to patrol the end of the wooded spur. Panzers vs Paras (work in progress today, revising large scenario): Benouville heats up - seriously. An Argument Over T (completed but will be revised): The enemy has penetrated through to the T junction above the bridge. Not yet started .... Crisis in Benouville: "A" Coy is surrounded, the Germans are in the school house and the Mairie and still control the northern half of Le Port. All the troopers of "A" company are either dead or wounded. "B' Coy has been bled badly and "C' is scattered. It's DO or DIE. Pipers and Snipers: If you survived the crisis .... time for some mopping up in Le Port Well Done Lads!: Finally relief in the form of elements of British 3rd Infantry up from Sword Beach.

That thread did not help. In CMBN armoured vehicles always start unbuttoned even if you order them to set up buttoned during scenairo design.. Makes no difference. When you start to play or playtest the scenario, they always start unbuttoned. Blah. Telling them to Hide does not work. Telling them to be Cautious does not work. Telling them to use only lower levels does not work. Silly.

I have never been able to figure out how to make the AI vehicles "button up" in the scenarios I am working on. As a result the vehicle commanders suffer casualties. Anyone have a solution?

NIne out of possible twelve scenarios almost completed. Two might be dropped due to lack of interesting subject matter. Had to modify a few scenarios based on newly acquired information. Spending last few days writing and rewriting a complex AI script for a large and long German attack on a complex map. The thought came to me today that scripting a large AI plan is like creating the coreography for a theatrical production. Every new impulse demands another play test to check the timing and effect.

Greenfish Icon Editory Pro (a free utility)

@kohlenklau@Aragorn2002@PEB14Thank you all for the feedback and helpful suggestions. I need to think on this for a while.