Editor: Tips about Battles & Campaigns needed

[Gen Von Television]

Thanks Pete, that's a good idea!

Do you know about the campaign compile function I was writing about, if it's a waste of time to write briefings, creating maps, etc. for each battle of the Campaign?

Back to deploy the Regiments...

[Pete Wenman]

I've never made a campaign so cannot be sure, (I'm not as brave or foolhardy as you )

however in starting to play a campaign

1. You start with a campaign briefing, in the standard layout.

2. When pressing next you then move to a battle briefing

3. When moving onto the next battle a fresh briefing appears.

I have always assumed a campaign is several battles linked together, so each battle gets it's own breifing etc, but the whole thing is held inside the camapign, which allows for the campaign overview and coreunits.

HTH

P

[JonS]

GvT,

I have a strong sense that your campaign is going to utterly suck. You have no idea what you're doing, yet you're starting with multiple battalions? That is not a good combination. Trying to create a single scenario that big would be a very challenging goal, let alone trying to tie multiple of them together in a meaningful and engaging way.

I strongly suggest you avoid wasting your own and everybody else's time by seriously rethink what you're trying to do. Start small, with two or maybe three battles following a single company that has a few and small attachments - a platoon of tanks, a squad of engineers, a section of MGs.

Once you get that nailed and working, then take your learnings and try something more ambitious.

Good luck

Jon

[Gen Von Television]

That is what I also presumed rightly, but since I never as yet played any Campaign I was just referring to the Manual where it's just hinted you wouldn't need to add the main image, and have a one time briefing using the Core Unit file to compile the Campaign...

Just now I went through the manual again and read another odd thing I would also very much like to know (it was one of my first question in this thread): when you play battles on the same map, are we sure you will lose damaged buildings and wrecked vehicles?

On the manual I read that only if you use a loop back to an already fought battle scenario (the same file) you then lose those damages.

Does this mean that if I still use the same map BUT with different battle scenario (files) the damages will be recorded as for the Core Units?

Well, in any case I already test played the single battles, and added damages and wrecks 'manually'as I saw happening in the previous scenario, though admittedly they will differ from one time to another when playing the same battle.

Yes, I like a challenge designing a Campaign without having as yet played any, and thank you Guys for helping me out: hopefully you will also benefit about it when I'll upload it to the Repository...

Not only that!

I intend to build a few branches for possible outcomes that are intriguing me as 'what if' that happened in history...

[Gen Von Television]

Jon, don't worry: the whole campaign is based on Company against Company for most of the battles.

I'm on the final battle that requires a reinforced Battalion sized scenario, and I've just started deploying the forces on the map.

It's a scenario I already made in CMX1 besides having played it quite a few time on maps and using piles of counters...

Your advices are always welcomed: would you like to be a Beta Tester?

[JonS]

would you like to be a Beta Tester?

No. Definitely not.

Currently your project has the very strong smell of a endless time sink that doesn't produce anything worthwhile.

I wish you luck though

[undercovergeek]

No. Definitely not.

Currently your project has the very strong smell of a endless time sink that doesn't produce anything worthwhile.

I wish you luck though

crushing honesty there JonS! :eek:

[Gen Von Television]

Well yes, a bit blunt, but Jon has been quite helpful to me, so I don't care and I will carry on regardless.

I have now finished and tested 7 battles each complete with several AI plans for both sides, and at the moment I'm setting up the final one at Battalion level, and thanks to Pete suggestion the deployment is so much smoother and coming out good and orderly.

You know, I've been a WWII buff since my childhood and a player with many table top games for some years. I discovered BO and the whole CMX1 series as soon as they were published with great relish not to have to deal anymore with piles of cardboard counters, dice throwing, studying SSRs etc. but this doesn't mean I can be a bright tactician, or a clever programmer for the CMX2 system.

I've just started dealing with this new game: I still have all the Modded CMX1 versions installed on my old computers.

[Gen Von Television]

i usually double click on the hq unit - that allows me at least to pick up a whole company and move it, or shift (or control) and left click highlights as many units as you want one at a time and then move the whole group to your destination

Ahem, I should make a public apology here (what, another one?!):

yes, I'm an old CMX1 addict, and first thing I did when using CMBN was to disable the [Floating Icons] playing battles... and I completely forgot about them!

Now for sure these clever device is a very useful addition to keep track of the whole Chain of Command, and a very welcomed tool to deploy the units coherently!

Cheers

[Gen Von Television]

Another puzzle had popped out recently, and hope to find some good advice: now I need the AI to be able to breach some hedgerows before the tanks arrive, but given the limited amounts of AI Groups it would be a wast to assign one to the Breach Team only.

Besides I would need at least two separate tanks' groups or single vehicles to pass through the hedgerows in different sides of the map, with two separate Breach Teams.

One solution that comes to my mind is to assign to a tanks' group a breach team that will Assault the Hedgerow, but then it will always be moving with the tanks, and it will not be a good proposition.

Another solution may be to have a breach team grouped with some infantry that will precede the tanks movements in assaulting the hedgerow, so they should blow a breach for the following tanks, even if the idea would be to have isolated tanks moving through the hedgerows while the infantry will make a base of fire to support their maneuver from another position...

How to solve this? Any idea?

[JonS]

Can you give the tank group a couple of Rhinos?

[Gen Von Television]

Nope: I'm dealing with heavy tanks only, not Americans.

BTW, where are the Rhinos nested in the OoB?

[JonS]

iirc, they are an eqpt option.

give the nutzis a sherman rhino

Edit:

More seriously, your best bet is probably to just create some openings in hedgerows in the editor. But make the openings fairly wide - at least 3 tiles. They need to be 3+ tiles wide so the AI doesn't bunch incoherently trying to squeeze though a small bottleneck. The openings don't have to be empty, you can tie the hedge together with wooden or wire fences and a gate, or with a low wall pieces, across the opening, all of which AI-controlled tanks will happily trundle over.

[Gen Von Television]

Yes, that would be an option too if not for compromising the player ability to find his own way when playing on that same map...

About the Cullen Device it became available only on US Sherman, M5 and M10 (known as Rhinos) and on British Cromwell and Sherman (known as Prongs) iirc in July.

So the problem is: the British never ever had mixed tanks' formations anyway, so a Churchill unit cannot have a Cromwell Prong, or a Sherman one, for that matter; they can have the Honeys, but these seemingly were not used with the 'Prong'.

Worst, the Germans never had this kind of devices.

So we are left with the only available solution to use a breach team blasting the hedgerows: I still have to consider if I can sacrifice two AI Groups for this purpose only, using them on just three different spots.

Or again devise a different plan from the one I tested using myself the units on the attack, and see if the AI can cope with it.

[Gen Von Television]

I've just finished checking a battle I intend to include in the Pegasus Bridge ASL conversion (6 battles ready to be tested) that will become a Campaign, and I encountered quite an odd problem with the AI doing almost nothing!

I have set up two 80 mm mortar batteries in two different covered areas (kind of reverse slope positions); both batteries are in direct sight of their commanding officers and both have a couple of Observer Teams each positioned to cover the player movements and with radio contact; I also set up some target reference points so to have more probability of hitting their targets.

The only Victory Points the AI can get are from the assigned units the player have to quickly move, while his other units have to stay put in Hide.

What happens is that just a couple of mortars start firing in the beginning towards a far reference point where nothing is actually happening, or try to target other hidden units in foxholes and trenches, while the whole infantry moving in the open, and passing by several other reference target points is left undisturbed!

I believe H2H will decimate the moving soldiers with the mortars quite easily, so it's very difficult to find a balance for such a scenario played vs the AI.

Maybe I'm missing something about the mortars' deployment in relation to the observers? Still I noticed that those useless targets where the shells were falling had been actually called by one of the Observer Teams...

Eventually I shall drop the idea, since it would be a waste of time to play such kind of battle.

[JonS]

This is a campaign right? I wouldn't bother making too much of an effort to get it playable by a human as the side that's 'supposed' to be the AI. You'll just hamstring yourself, and end up with something that's neither Arthur nor Martha.

I still have to consider if I can sacrifice two AI Groups for this purpose only, using them on just three different spots.

If you really must use breach teams, you might be bale to cut it down to just one AI group by having reinforcements teleport into somewhere near the 2nd and 3rd breach locations just before each is supposed to be blown, then they'll jog forward and blow their hole. The earlier team(s) will move towards the 2nd and 3rd locations too, of course, and probably get killed on the way. *shrug* Just pretend they're out scouting, or sumfink. The tradeoff with this approach is that it'll use 1 AI slot and 1 or 2 reinforcement slots, instead of 2 AI slots. I don't know whether you're limited for AI slots - but generally I wouldn't expect that an AI plan would be.

By the by, relying on breach teams for your AI plan makes it very fragile - if any of those teams get destroyed, or they fail to blow a proper vehilce sized hole, your AI plan is going to rapidly become worthless.

Jon

[Gen Von Television]

Well, these assumptions you make are not quite to the point again.

First of all the Reinforce you're talking about would need its own AI slot or they will sit there in their reinforcement spot on the map picking up daisies, i'n'it?

And still they would require two separate AI groups, since they are supposed to be on far places and at different times making their job.

The plan is not relaying on the breach teams: it may be a useful trick and a good surprise for the player if the AI can make it happen.

I've opened this thread not to just talk about the campaign I'm working on, but eventually to collect good advices, hints and solutions to problems cropping up in using the Editor to create Scenarios that may end up in a Campaign or just a battle.

I can see why many of the Campaigns are just H2H since to build up one (or more!) effective AI plans takes a lot of time and testing, and having the AI for both sides even more so, with the adding complication to find a balance that should be always effective, even in a H2H game.

I'm not saying you're completely wrong here: I just like to check this option out before I discard it.

As I wrote I'm not easily impressed by unfavorable outcomes and responses when the things are not working out as expected or desired.

I just adopt the scientific method of trial and error, and see if I can finally get an hypothesis becoming a theory...

[Gen Von Television]

I'd like to go back to the Mortars' problem: as I presumed I made an AI plan for the moving troops and took charge of the Mortars, and indeed it was a massacre!

Of course I have the advantage of the All Knowing Being, so I was able to plan an efficacious fire plan...

So, the conclusion is this battle may become an H2H challenge on either sides, but against AI it seems to be an easy grasp for the player playing Allied or Axis.

What strikes me is that the AI while playing either sides has shown a very poor behavior, not up to the task: basically as I wrote this is not a much interesting battle anyway, except for showing a clever management of movements on one side, and a timed use of fire plans by the mortars on the other.

I'm not so sure if these subjects may appeal some players...

[LongLeftFlank]

Just read this thread and it brought back some "fond" memories of the learning curve needed to use the Editor. Carry on, General! The community needs every dedicated (obsessive) content provider it can get!

The key trick with the AI, I've found, is not to try to go too far with a single Order. The longer the distances. especially in close terrain, the more chances of Keystone Kops or zombie behaviours. Take short bounds to good fighting positions, and don't have the guys -- especially infantry -- move on to the next Order instantly.... Let them reform and secure their new positions. Also, use "fixing and flanking" instead of flanking alone (i.e. One force takes a route you know the enemy is likely to take, and the flanking force takes an unexpected or circuitous route.)

FWIW. Also, there's a "sticky" thread in the CMSF scenarios forum called "AI Plan Doubts" that contains a lot of accumulated wisdom that remains relevant to CMBN

[Gen Von Television]

Admittedly I have not checked the CMSF forums: as I wrote I'm an old WWII buff and I'm stuck to those weaponry and tactics...

Well, talking about tacs, indeed the fix & flank has not changed much except that a base of fire can be built by a single platoon with their modern firepower! and it was the idea about breaching the hedgerows of above, even if I can always devise a different flanking movement, or a different approach altogether, developing a more substantial flanking movement, instead of using just a couple of heavy tanks.

Thanks for the suggestions about the AI movements, and will surely dig that sticky thread on CMSF forum.

[JonS]

First of all the Reinforce you're talking about would need its own AI slot or they will sit there in their reinforcement spot on the map picking up daisies, i'n'it?

No, I don't think this is correct. They'll pick up the AI plan at the next valid order once they arrive on the map. You might need to have them arrive at a specific time - rather than during a time window - but they should carry on.

And still they would require two separate AI groups, since they are supposed to be on far places and at different times making their job.

No, I don't think you would.

AI breaching group is called 'A'.

A1 is the first team, due to blow a hole at 5 mins on the left flank.

A2 is the second team, due to blow a hole at 15 mins in the centre.

A3 is the first team, due to blow a hole at 25 mins on the right flank.

A1 starts on map in the main set up area, and dutifully follows it's first orders to move to the locatio of the first breach and blow it's hole on the left flank at 5mins.

for the next several minutes A1 just sits around, watching the butterflies.

at 10 mins A2 arrives on map, teleporting in to a location somewhat near the location of the second breach.

from minutes 11-15 A1 and A2 follow a new order which has them move towards the location of the second breach, except because A1 has so much further to go, it doesn't reach it.

at 15 mins A2 dutifully blows it's hole in the centre. A1 picks it's nose.

for the next several minutes A1 and A2 both sit around, watching the butterflies.

at 20 mins A3 arrives on map, teleporting in to a location somewhat near the location of the third breach.

from minutes 21-25 A1, A2 and A3 follow a new order which has them all move towards the location of the third breach, except because A1 and A2 have so much further to go, they don't reach it, instead they just move sort of laterally across the front.

at 25 mins A3 dutifully blows it's hole on the right flank. A1 and A2 pick each others noses.

for the rest of the game, the three breach teams just sit around, or do something else you deem worthy of their time.

You'd need to fiddle about with timings, naturally, and you'd be a bit limited because the reinforcements only arrive in discrete 5min blocks. But I'm pretty sure you could do what you wanted to with just one AI group.

[Gen Von Television]

I see what you meant now: actually I can use just two Breach teams, since two hedgerows are quite close, but when I have the third following the movement assigned, I'm afraid the previous squads will move in hazardous ways... Let's see this, if I can make it work: thanks Jon.

[JonS]

A3 is the first team, due to blow a hole at 25 mins on the right flank.

that should of course read

"A3 is the third team, due to blow a hole at 25 mins on the right flank."

Cut and paste is some times a little too easy ...

[JonS]

I'm afraid the previous squads will move in hazardous ways

They probably will but *shrug* it's just the AI. Don't assign them to any Destroy objective, and let them wander around seemingly at random. If nothing else it'll give the player something to wonder about

[Gen Von Television]

eheheh

There is always someone doing crazy things on a battlefield, I presume...