Jump to content

For meta-gaming


Recommended Posts

A battalion-level game that could help with an operational veneer:

http://www.gmtgames.com/p-395-normandy-44-reprint.aspx

Good suggestion! Definitely on the list of games appropriate for a meta-layer...but...

The scale of N44 is what I find problematic ( "Each hex represents 3.8 kilometers (or 2.3 miles). Most units are regiments or brigades though most of the armor units are represented as battalions.")

Personally, I find boardgames whose counters are battalions and companies to be the highest scale I'd find comfortable for the best fit with CMBN and the minimum amount of "translation" (i.e., conversion rules to figure out where in that 3.8 km the battle is actually taking place, determining man and vehicle strengths for a CMBN order of battle, etc.)

Many accounts of Normandy say it was really "a battalion commander's fight." So at that level you get all the combined arms goodness, yet a small enough scale that you can fight battalions vs. battalions and lower in CMBN in full detail and play out the campaign at a good pace.

The most direct translation, of course, would be a purely tactical boardgame (counters are squads) but then it's too long and drawn out a process to play the campaigns out, due to the shorter time scale. That would seem unmanageable to me.

I've started a meta-game using the Panzer Grenadier boardgame series (counters are platoons and units of 5 vehicles) but at 15 minutes per turn, the gain in specific detail and "translatability" comes at a price of a much slower pace of play at the boardgame level.

Another option is games where the counters are companies (the Grand Tactical Series from MMP, for example). That is highly compatible with CMBN and I'm planning to use their OMG game "Where Eagles Dare" as the op layer for a Hell's Highway campaign in CMBN.

(Well, that's the next several years of my hobby life planned out...:))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've still got my original copy of Victory games' 'Omaha Beachhead - Battle for the Bocage' (copyright 1987) which is at a reasonable scale:-

Infantry as Battalions

Support assets e.g. ATG and Armour as Companies

1 Hex = 1 Kilometre

The scenario represents the first ten days of advance from the initially tenuously held Omaha beachhead. Link-up with Sword and Utah is abstracted by mapedge objectives and the map goes about 70km inland, certainly as far as Caumont.

Look it up if anyone's interested or PM me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, VGA Omaha Beachhead looks excellent for a CMBN op layer. Only issue I see is the apparent lack of a Vassal or Cyberboard module for it -- really helps with the mapping to be able to snap screenshots of the game board, to be be able to leave the game set up, play against a remote opponent, etc. But Cyberboard modules are not hard to create if you have a decent scanner at home. I've made two already for games that didn't have them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

After much thought and trial and error I have gone firm on Panzer Campaigns Series as operational layer for tracking units with CM.

The fantastic flexibility of the editor is the secret to it.

All the best,

Kip.

I second that, i'm currently working on the CM OOB and CM maps for the Panzer Campaigns Normandy 44 operational scenario #17-Buron-1 (see signature), which i will make available to to the CM community as soon as it's finished.

Also my signature contains a link to a re vamped version of my tutorial on how to set up a Panzer Campaigns / CM operation and the rules i use when playing one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kip,

Just curious...

Is it easy/feasible to stop a Panzer Campaigns game, export the OOB, fight the battle in CMBN, and then import or re-edit the op game to update the units and positions to resume play?

(That was always the obstacle with other good PC operational games, like Battles from the Bulge.)

Do you find the Panzer Campaigns maps accurate compared to Google Earth, for locating battles and making the CMBN maps? The hex scale (1 km) and time scale (2 hours) seem just about right (1km).

How well do you find Panzer Campaigns models morale, supply, weather, command-control, FOW, and the "friction" that prevents commanders from being able to move troops when/where they want?

Do the Panzer Campaigns unit attributes translate well to CMBN (experience, fitness, leadership. etc.?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it easy/feasible to stop a Panzer Campaigns game, export the OOB, fight the battle in CMBN, and then import or re-edit the op game to update the units and positions to resume play?

Yes, the PzC units can be edited using the PzC OOB editor at anytime during the game without corrupting the PzC PBEM game.

Do you find the Panzer Campaigns maps accurate compared to Google Earth, for locating battles and making the CMBN maps? The hex scale (1 km) and time scale (2 hours) seem just about right (1km).

I am currently running the PzC Carentan scenario as a CM operation with 2 players per side and i checked the real WW2 map before i started it and the PzC map is accurate.

How well do you find Panzer Campaigns models morale, supply, weather, command-control, FOW, and the "friction" that prevents commanders from being able to move troops when/where they want?

All supply, weather, CC and FOW are in the game and work well.

Do the Panzer Campaigns unit attributes translate well to CMBN (experience, fitness, leadership. etc.?)

Yes, see my tutorial below.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see this thread -- op-tac campaigns are really what raise CMBN to its ultimate level!

Noob's links and tutorial answer a lot of my questions. Bravo to all his work to make that campaign system -- it looks like a terrific system. The intricacies of using the Panzer Campaigns editor with CMBN are off-putting to me, but at least the tutorial would make it approachable.

It seems especially good for tournaments and multiplayer campaigns.

But since I do my operational campaigns solo (and just play the generated battles HTH) the boardgames seem to work fine for me. I probably spend just as much time fiddling with an editor, but in my case most of my time goes into the accuracy of the CMBN battle mapping (which I enjoy) and not as much into the details of the OOBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see this thread -- op-tac campaigns are really what raise CMBN to its ultimate level!

Yes, the campaign / operation is the highest form of CM play, like the Test Match is to Cricket.

Noob's links and tutorial answer a lot of my questions. Bravo to all his work to make that campaign system -- it looks like a terrific system.

Thanks for the compliment, it's also an evolving system as i am using the operation i'm running at the moment to refine it, so it's worth re reading it now and again.

But since I do my operational campaigns solo (and just play the generated battles HTH) the boardgames seem to work fine for me.

So play the scenario linked at my signature against the AI, that way you get full FOW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Noob

How good would you say the operational AI is in PC:N44 ?

Does it give a real challenge?

When you make your CMBN maps, do you use generic maps with the setup/exit zones dictated according to your campaign rules? Or do you make maps of the actual places and terrain?

One thing I've come to believe strongly is that accuracy of the terrain has a huge effect the way CMBN battles play, and on outcomes -- way more effect than accuracy of the specific numbers of soldiers/vehicles/guns in the OOBs. The next-most significant aspect IMHO is the "soft" factors (motivation, experience, leadership, fitness).

But I can get away with a lot of fudging and guesswork on OOBs and soft factors in my campaigns because I'm my own "referee," and I'm forced to translate what I'm seeing operationally into tactical situations for CMBN. In a multiplayer campaign you'd have to have a more objective system like Noob's with PC:N44, so players would feel their strengths and casualties were being tracked fairly and accurately in a transparent way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Broadsword, Noob, hi,

The way I go about things is may be a little different. Clearly I could cover pages explaining the detail, but a very quick explanation goes like this.

PCs is used solely to track the position of the units. There are two master files. One for Allies, one for German. In the German one all the German units are correctly positioned with their strengths, whether digging in and the rest, accurately given. But in the German file the Allied units have been edited for FOW. If in contact, may not be at the correct strength, if behind the lines may not even be shown., and so on.

The actual CM strengths of the units on the PCs map are recorded/tracked in Excel tables in the usual way. You can use Word or paper and pen.

The players issue orders after examining their respective files for that turn. I then implement their orders on my master files and determine where battles will occur in that turn.

Now the players have a choice, they can resolve a battle either at the operational level or at the CM level. This allows CM battles to happen within far lager PCs scale games. If a battle is to be resolved at the operational level it is done using the formulas from T N Dupuy. (Just whack his name in Google and Amazon and you will find his work.) This gives three results. Defenders casualties, attacker’s casualties and distance advanced if any. As his work is all about “predicting..” outcomes I add a roll of the dice at the end with the predicted result set to seven and increasing or decreasing if another number comes up. I don’t want the formulas giving perfect predictions.

If the players choose to resolve at the CM level they play the games and generate a result.

The results of the battles are then recorded on the relevant units Excel files/tables and the units moved by me on my master files in PCs as needed.

A German file from PCs is then sent to the German players, Allied file to the Allied players and then next turn begins.

PCs really a is wonder for this. They come with OOB and maps all ready to go, well ready to be very easily edited. But PCs are used as just one tool in a mix to tools.

The one big disadvantage of my system is that all players need the relevant PCs game. To view the files I send them in its editor.

BTW.. I think the key is using a method other than PCs or CM to resolve battles at the operational level as well as resolving some at the CM level. It allows very small numbers of players to play within this far larger operational environment.

All interesting stuff....

All the best,

Kip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

Quick add on....

Building CMX2 maps is hard work... This is the time consuming bit. Will be far easier when we move East as Eastern Front terrain is far quicker to build. A catalogue of generic maps that are then edited may be the way to go.

But quality maps matter.

All the best,

Kip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed about the need to resolve larger (or more lopsided or dull) battles using the op layer instead of CMBN. It speeds campaign play and saves CMBN for the real nail-biters.

Good to share our insights so we can learn from each other's experiences -- we've all evolved very distinct ways to run op-tac campaigns, yet we're all finding they lead to the same goal: Fantastically meaningful and exciting CMBN battles that impact (and are impacted by) the wider situation around them.

The operational game one uses can be as complex or as simple as one likes -- the main thing is to have one, because of the compelling situations it creates.

For example -- I received a tiny little "pocket" bonus game from Against All Odds magazine, "Stand at Mortain," that fits in a business envelope and has just a few simple counters and rules -- yet it could probably be used to govern a small CMBN op-tac campaign (I think someone posted -- or was working on -- an authentic CMBN map of the Hill 314 area of Mortain recently, so you might not even need to make a custom map for that one.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Broadsword,

Fantastically meaningful and exciting CMBN battles that impact (and are impacted by) the wider situation around them.

We do agree... operational context with all that brings with it adds massively to CM.

You no doubt know this... but there is a guy building a “companion...” game for CMX2. With the approval of Battlefront. Am hoping it will be an operational layer but have no inside info on it.

All the best,

Kip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actual CM strengths of the units on the PCs map are recorded/tracked in Excel tables in the usual way. You can use Word or paper and pen.

Hi Kip, i used to use tables but now i build all the forces in the CM scenario editor at a Divisional level, so for example in the PzC Buron operation i have separate CM OOB files for elements of the 3rd Canadian Inf Div, the 12th SS Pz Division and the 716th Inf Division.

When a CM battle is to be fought i just load up the relevant map, then import the CM unit files, then delete the units not in the battle.

You can also use these CM OOB files to track the casualties and morale, fitness and supply instead of using paper.

The players issue orders after examining their respective files for that turn. I then implement their orders on my master files and determine where battles will occur in that turn.

Now the players have a choice, they can resolve a battle either at the operational level or at the CM level. This allows CM battles to happen within far lager PCs scale games. If a battle is to be resolved at the operational level it is done using the formulas from T N Dupuy.

I'm definately going to check this Dupuy formula out, at the moment i give the defender the option of making a forced retreat with morale penalties if the odds are too much against them in any upcoming CM battle, however the formula you mentioned would at least allow the defender to stand and fight with a considerably smaller force if they wished without having to create a CM battle, thanks for that.

The one big disadvantage of my system is that all players need the relevant PCs game. To view the files I send them in its editor.

That's why i asked Tiller games for permission to create a reduced version of PzC Normandy 44 with a CW scenario to distribute as a demo, that way all players involved have enough of the PzC game to play the scenario that comes with it.

Also Tiller have a bulk purchasing discount - 40% off if 5 games are bought in one purchase.

A good workaround for avoiding all the participants having to own a PzC game is to have only the two opposing CO's own the game and do the operational moves, then any surplus CM battles can be farmed out to players in the CM community as PBEM scenarios, with the operational situation and the CO's expectations written in the CM battle briefings.

If the players perform well they can play the units they used again in another CM battle, if not they get the sack :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Broadsword,

We do agree... operational context with all that brings with it adds massively to CM.

You no doubt know this... but there is a guy building a “companion...” game for CMX2. With the approval of Battlefront. Am hoping it will be an operational layer but have no inside info on it.

All the best,

Kip.

Where did you find this out ?, the reason i started doing my system was because of the demise of CMC, so if someone where to come up with something tailor made for CM that would be awesome, or even a map generator like in CMx1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Noob

How good would you say the operational AI is in PC:N44 ?

Does it give a real challenge?

I don't know as i don't play PzC as a game against the AI or humans, the best thing is to try it.

When you make your CMBN maps, do you use generic maps with the setup/exit zones dictated according to your campaign rules? Or do you make maps of the actual places and terrain?

I use any QB or custom maps available that fit with the operational terrain with some modifications if necessary (after asking permission from the creator), especially for hexes that are clear, fields or woods/forest, the biggest problem comes with operational terrain containing villages and towns, i think, as you mentioned, they need to be as accurate as possible as most of the big CM battles will be fought there, for example in the PzC Buron scenario i am going to have to build the town of Buron, and Carpiquet Airfield as they are point victory objectives.

I have an aerial photo of Buron from the time which will make an awesome CM map when it's finished, in fact i'm even thinking of paying someone to do it if time becomes an issue, as i would like to release it before the Market Garden mod comes out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Noob, hi,

I understand, you simply track unit’s casualties within the CM editor.

The guy developing the companion game advertised for programmers in the Mods section of the forum. Very briefly, for about a day.

All the best,

Kip.

Yes, i make a note of how many men a Company has lost before they either exit the map or the turns run out, then i subtract that number from their starting strength, then convert the new number for Company strength to a percentage to determine the new headcount setting in the CM editor.

I also regard any lost MG's, Mortars or Zooks as being replaced if the Company has an intact supply line, not having to track lost support weapons really makes life easier.

Once the headcount is set and the new motivation and fitness values have been set i overwrite the whole Divisional OOB.btt file.

One thing to note is that the Company headcount for the PzC foot units is pretty much always higher than their equivalent CM Companies so i make a note of the relative strength values of the two sides in a given scenario, these are displayed in PzC as a VP point value, once i have edited the PzC units to conform to CM values i then add or remove certain units if the relative difference in strength values has changed.

However i am in the process of editing the whole PzC.oob file to conform to CM which i will make available on my tutorial website when completed, i will also edit the PzC scenarios to retain the relative strength differences so players with a copy of PzC Normandy 44 can just overwrite the original PzC oob and scenario files and they will have a CM ready version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

Quick add on....

Building CMX2 maps is hard work... This is the time consuming bit. Will be far easier when we move East as Eastern Front terrain is far quicker to build. A catalogue of generic maps that are then edited may be the way to go.

But quality maps matter.

All the best,

Kip.

There's an official PzC demo set on the Russian Front, Mius '43 which could be used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How good would you say the operational AI is in PC:N44 ?

Does it give a real challenge?

No, it's utterly inept. It can /sort-of/ hold things together for a day or two, but after that it flounders completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...