WimO

Hartelijk bedankt for pointing that out JM. The file has been corrected. Le Port Filiolet is now available and duplicate Hill 112 removed.

Aragorn 2002: Where in Nederland are you? Anywhere near de Duivelsberg in Gelderland? If you've ever been there I'd be curious to know how my Teufelsberg map compares. I got the idea when I stumbled across an article on the web from 'De Gelderlander' that wrote about amateur archeologists excavating the 'schutters putjes' on de Duivelsberg.

I have a collection of over 400 MB of building skins that I created for Normandy and for the Netherlands. I especially like the proper Dutch (Nederlandse) look to the houses. I have asked Shane how I can go about uploading that much material to CMMODS III. So keep your eyes open. I would also like to u/l Falaises's two church skins to CMMODS III since his Normandy stones colour and Dutch brick looks much more authentic.

Yes, JM, it will be the 'last'. I have decided that even if there are still errors, bugs, or negative feedback, I am just going to live with it and spend any more of my time tinkering with them. Anyone else is welcome to make any changes to my creation that they like.

I have this morning uploaded the 'final' versions of my creations including: (1) Normandy and Netherlands Master Maps (7 maps) (2) ASL/SL to CMBN conversions. (11 Scenarios) (3) Kandu's Original Scenarios (6 Scenarios) (4) 82nd Airborne in Normandy standalone scenarios (29 Scenarios) (5) Mission Boston - Objective La Fiere; a short, five mission, linear, 82nd Airborne in Normandy campaign. A longer version is still in development.

CORRECTION! CORRECTION! I earlier stated that campaigns are either won or lost without victory grades. I was wrong. Just this moment I completed a play test of my shorter, 5 scenario version of my Mission Boston Objective La Fiere campaign. I had set it up so that if you lost any one of the five historically critical scenarios the campaign would end. I got only as far as the very hard fought and exciting end of the fourth scenario in which I got a draw which was not good enough. So I got booted without completing the campaign as expected. But then SURPRISE! SURPRISE! SURPRISE! (to quote Gomer Pyle USMC). It awarded me a WIN and not just a win but a graded win - a Tactical Victory! No way?! What the FUBAR? It was supposed to be a loss. I have no idea how that happened. No idea how to fix it. Months and months of full time work and bug swatting agony and now this! I wonder if I progressively increase the VP values from one scenario to the next if that would solve the problem. .. modify ... recompile ... retest ... yawn.

PEB14: Your assumption is correct. With campaigns it is just win or lose. Degrees of winning or losing only occur in the campaigns individual scenarios. As K's note above shows, the campaign.txt file requires a single victory and single loss text. Even the degrees of winning and losing individual scenarios don't matter much because the campaign author sets a level of victory to continue to the next scenario. For example, let's say that in one of my campaign scenarios I set the 'to continue' level at Tactical Victory, it would mean that if the player achieved a draw, minor or major victory, the player still 'loses' because they cannot progress through the campaign (or perhaps kicked into another branch). To me, this makes perfect sense relative to real life. Sometimes a draw is adequate (for example holding ground) and somtimes you need a much stronger victory, for example when taking ground - did you do well enough to be able to hold it afterwards?

Thank you for the great mod France 1940. Played with it a bit today. Looks great. A lot of work on your part. Appreciated.

What I mean is that a map created by 404 cannot be used by 403?. I did not mean that a map created by 403 cannot be used by 404?.

I'm still on v4.03 and put it in the battle folder and could not see it in the menu. Maybe 4.04 anything created in 4.04 is not backwards compatible? Seems odd for map..

I tried to load the map in CMBN but was CMBN was unable to see it. What game version was it created under?

When I learned of all the bugs in my 82nd Airborne campaign I decided on a three pronged remedy. One prong is to examine all of the scenarios and maps that I have ever created and update or fix any issues I find. To do so, I have temporarily removed all of my creations from the repository. After I have reviewed them and tweaked where necessary, they will be re-uploaded ... all at once. The second prong is to begin by fixing only five of my campaign scenarios and compile them into a shorter campaign. I did this to create a playable version in less time. The five scenarios are Manoir Leroux, Angriff der Grenadiere, No Better Place to Die, Saul's Run and Le Motey. These have now been completed and tested as free-standing scenarios but not yet as a campaign. The text files have been rewritten to be more campaign appropriate. A.I. plans have been tweaked and tested with and without player opposition. I am satisfied with the results. The campaign has not yet been tested to determine if the settings for Refit, Repair, Resupply and Rest are set properly to keep the campaign moving forward. The third prong, is fixing the longer campaign. This is presently in progress but I intend to pause it as of this weekend to test the five scenario short campaign.

You should think of the 999 m height as a differential or range and not as an absolute 'above sea level' which I incorrectly suggested in the preceding post. For example, if you wanted to create a mountain at 1500 m above sea level the lowest you could go would be (1500 - 999) or 501 m above sea level. On your map '0' would represent 501 m above sea level and 999 would represent 1500 m above sea level.

MAP AREA: 4256 m x 4256 m is one example of maximum map size but I suspect that it depends on the total number of 8 x 8 m squares. The sample here is 532 squares x 532 squares. Total number of squares = 283,024. Maximum size in one direction = 8000 m x 2288 m (1000 squares x 286 squares or total 286,000 squares. To achieve maximum map size it is important to expand the map area equally in both directions from your starting point. MAP ELEVATION: A few months back I created a 4 km x 4 km mountain map for Monte Difensa that has an elevation range from 120 to 950 m above sea level. The maximum height possible is 999 m.

Not every scenario will include the hidden 'No Early Cease Fire' fix. I might be able to avoid it with Millet Breaks out.

PEB14 is correct to state that my "No Early Cease Fire" fix results in making it impossible for the German A.I. to achieve a Total Victory or even a Major.. I have been testing various vp's in Ithikiel's Victory Calculator and the best balance I can achieve while retaining my 'fix' is that both sides can at best achieve a Tactical Victory. This is adequate to proceed through the campaign. I will advise the player to expect this possibility.

Hello PEB14: It has taken me a few days to fully understand the significant of what you have pointed out to me. It has given me pause for thought. At first glance it does not appear to affect the flow of my campaign since everything depends on the VP level of the player. However, if this also affects the VP calculation for the player then it is significant. I will put it through the vp calculator today to test and see if I need to discard or change this solution.

Quite a bit of interesting stuff in this discussion. Too bad info like this was never written up in a How To manual. As a creator, I would have like to know the degree of protection afforded by different buildings and terrain.

Since the No Ceasefire trick is turned off in the last two minutes of play and it is regulated only by two AI troopers in a kubelwagen, it has NO effect on normal scoring at the end of the game. Both sides are able to achieve any level of victory. I have play tested it many times in the past week and a variety of victory levels was achieved.

I appreciate your viewpoint Kohlenklau and I wish I had never started the converting my H2H scenarios to sp and campaign play. But since I have started on this project, my obsessive personality won't let me give up until I get it right. I don't like the idea of letting a project defeat me. Anyway, I'm retired and this is presently my main passtime, aside from springtime work in the garden starting today.

The No Ceasefire trick was not included in the scenarios that you played. It is included in the ones that I am working on now, and indeed the introduction to every scenario advises the player if the NO Ceasefire rule is in effect or not.

Jumping in a bit late here. I've been testing and rewriting AI plans for just two scenarios, 12-16 hours per day for a week now. And all that just to have the German AI attack across the La Fiere causeway. The goal is to make it "appear" as if the the German AI is being thoughtful about timing and co-ordination - which in reality it is not. It is just a V1, which once launched cannot be retrieved. Player's units shooting disrupts the plans through the effect on AI morale and the resultant debacle can leave players with the impression that the author has done a poor job programming. Whatever. It is very difficult and time consuming to create a convincing AI attack. As for the AI defending. Similar to our colleague above, I also use triggers to create "apparent" defender responses. It creates a pseudo "IF - THEN" phenemenon. I feel that it is essential in large scenarios since the player, by punching through on one flank of the AI, might outflank the whole defensive line - a favourite tactice of players. By adding triggers to flanking areas, AI units might at least respond a little. I have also come up with a solution for preventing players giving the command to Cease Fire prematurely. That is to say, selecting Cease FIre as soon as they have captured an objective and before the AI can counter ... or ... sitting on a defend objective during a campaign and ending the scenario on turn one ... thus bypassing the scenario with a victory. The solution is to have one small AI unit sit at the AI's extreme map edge on an AI-only terrain objective of tremendously high value and exit that objective just two minutes before the end of the scenario. Prior to exiting, the AI is guaranteed a Total Victory, after exiting, VPs are calculated normally.

I concur. If the spotter cannot see the spotting rounds, there will be increased delay time. Variables include, difficulty setting and in the higher settings time to FFE also depends on intact C2, position in the C2 of the person calling for fire, and whether or not they are a FOO (or vorwartsbeobachter)

I found it in that condition already a few months ago.

Thank you for pointing out Point 7 text. I will change that.