Harold Jones Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Since my play PC is currently located in a different state than I am all I can do is read the postings here and whish I was playing. So, I got to thinking about scenarios and I wondered how many people are planning on building scenarios and that sort of lead me to wonder whether people will be designing historical scenarios or whether they find it more fun to design and play scenarios that while plausible are not strictly historical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aacooper Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 One problem with the demo scenarios is that they are fiction (other than that they give a great feel for the game). I get into historical scenarios more, I´ll try and make as realistic a scenario as I can in a reasonable amount of time, and I hope the included scenarios are historical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Looks like most of the scenarios that are going to be included with CM are going to be historical ones. But I got to tell you something, there isn't a whole lot of low level resource materials out there for CM's level of combat. VERY little. Even divisional histories are very vague about small sized battles. The two demo scenarios could have happened very easily. In fact, both were based in part on bits and pieces from real historical battles. Personally, I like the ahistorical stuff more, since the designer has a complete freehand to craft an interesting and balanced battle. But the great thing about CM is that nobody has to make a choice since the editor is included Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Deans Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 " isn't a whole lot of low level resource materials out there for CM's level of combat" Have you ever ran into any Regimental Histories of Commonwealth infantry battalions? This is all they deal with. Rob Deans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 I love the chance to recreate a small battle. While hard to find, there are source materials that can provide reliable info. Charles MacDonalds, Objective Schmidt provides great mapsand accurate troop dispositions, ect. So I think it is very doable at the Company,Plt, or squad level, Just have to read more! Sometimes, just trying out a tactcal move in a certain topography is just pure fun. Especially after I've been slaving over books, maps, and photos til I'm nearly Blind...LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Clinton Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 I have to agree with Steve, at least from my exper. finding stuff for this scale and smaller is tough. I have been gaming with minatures on this scale for 30 years and IMO the best source you will find are personal narratives. With the web now you can find a LOT of stuff just using a good search engine. Using these supplemented with OOB and other sources it is possible to piece together engagements of this size. But you will not find any good single sources that will say "...and there were 13 squads with 3 .30 cals and 4 Shermans facing...." So you have to guess and fill in the gaps. If anyone finds better sources for God's sake post it! ------------------ The Grumbling Grognard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Yeah, Scott is bang on. You can find stuff here and there for sure. I have several books that go into GREAT detail about Battalion sized engagements. But the vast majority of sources out there cover Regimental at best. The problem is that each bump up the OB ladder the less detail you get about what is below. I have a unit history of the 17th SS for example. It describes some of the details and key features of a battle, and perhaps headcount, but is vague when it comes to the US forces. I also have books that describe x company fighting against "mixed force of German infantry". Boy, that is VERY helpful Contrast that with divisional/corps level resource materials out there!! My shelves are about to collapse under the weight of the incredible data I have at my fingertips! Yup, the small unit stuff is out there, but it is very spotty. Divisional/regimental histories (at least the official ones) are also VERY expensive. Generally around $100 USD for a used copy. So there we run into a resource issue Anyways, my point is that for every one you find in print there are probably 1000 that are not. So ahistorical battles are not necessarily that ahistorical if done correctly. The two demo battles are based on real circumstances, just not specific details. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Wouldn't it be possible to recreate battles using boardgames? The Gamers (www.tgamers.com) has a system called Tactical Combat Series which I think contains some great battles. The rules sometimes describes key actions quite well, even on squad level. Then you have other computer games, which might also be a source for info. But I guess people will want to create their very own, this-has-never-been-done-before battles With all the hard-core grognards out there, I think I'll stick to create what-if scenarios. Hawk ------------------ Our's is not to reason "why", our's is but to do and die! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Jones Posted November 9, 1999 Author Share Posted November 9, 1999 I agree that finding accurate and complete descriptions of battles at CM's scale is very difficult. Also, the stuff that is available is usually about the more famous battles. I can forsee many Bulge scenarios just because there is so much source material out there. One resource that should be availabe in the Military History section of most state university librarys is back issues of Calvary Journal/Armor Magazine and The Infantry Journal. Iowa State University has a collection of these magazines dating back to the '30s. I remember that the wartime and immediate post war issues had a lot of articles and school problems dealing with combat at the bn/co level in the ETO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Clinton Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Hawk: Sure you could base CM scenarios on existing board game and PC game scenarios. But it would seem that you are making the assumption that these games OOBs, maps, etc. are accurate. IMO, this is not a valid assumption. All of these games had to draw on the same sources we are talking about using directly and thus are prone to the same information gaps and errors that you would be if you did it yourself. But, if you trust the game designer to do their research and like the scenario/game it sure can save a LOT of time and effort. I think everyone has at least one favorite ASL scenario that they are chomping at the bit to 'convert' ------------------ The Grumbling Grognard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest L Tankersley Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I think everyone has at least one favorite ASL scenario that they are chomping at the bit to 'convert.' <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hmmm ... Cold Crocodiles, anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS was 71331 Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 While I expect many Squad Leader games will convert nicely into good CM games, there are a few OCMH [Office of the Chief of Military History] books that cover small unit actions. "Small Unit Actions in Korea" has perhaps twenty articles giving good detail on at least the US TO&Es for the situations. The commies, though, usually are organized as "three swarms make a horde, four hordes make an inexhaustible reservoir of men." My favorite is "An Artillery Batallion in a Perimeter Defense" in which the HQ battery and one 155 battery defend their position against a few companies of Chicoms while they continue performing called fire missions. "Small Unit Actions of the German Campaign in Russia" has a similar set of interesting battles. There was one in which a single Russian KV2 heavy tank with no infantry support got astride a German division's main supply route, and it took the Krauts a few hours to deal with it. One soldier was able to place a demo charge which immobilized the tank, and a few hours later an 88 was towed in to destroy it. Anyway, if you're after real actions to game, there is material out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Don't forget though, that scenarios for other games (computer or board) have been playbalanced for that particular game. I have done a SL scenario once to see how it works (I made Buchholz Station from SL) and it turned out to be VERY different from the board game version. However, it is nice to see such a scenario in CM, because you can easily see the shortcomings of the other systems, especially the traditional I GO U GO games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest L Tankersley Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 I would expect that SL/ASL scenario conversions to CM would focus on capturing the general terrain layout, force mix, and "unique features" of the scenario. The victory conditions of some ASL scenarios wouldn't really translate all that well to CM I don't think, anyway. For instance, a "Cold Crocs" conversion would feature the British tanks and infantry with arty support attacking the town defended by a couple 88s and infantry, with the Crocodiles showing up as reinforcements on the flank. I'm sure due to different VCs it would play quite differently, but the general feel would hopefully be similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark L Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 I may be wrong here, but isn't it also true that most historical battles were generally not at all "balanced" affairs. In order to make a good game from one, you need to either adjust the forces or the victory conditions for one side. I prefer scenarios in which both sides can pummel each other equally, rather than artificial balancing victory conditions (i.e. OK, I'm getting overrun and every one of my units will be toast, but if I destroy 20% of your force or you don't accomplish your objectives in x number of turns, I win) So I guess that means I prefer historically-based scenarios. Doesn't really matter to me if the OOB is exact or not. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Jenkins Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 Try http://fge.if.usp.br/~loos/ASLIND.htm. There are many potential maps and scenarios there. Although ASL was not privy to any information that BTS is not, they WERE awesome games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 Scott: Yes, I'm aware of that. There are however a few designers I trust more than others. Mark L: Most battles where definitly NOT balanced (which is a big problem in game-designing). All commanders would try their very best to get every advantage they could over their enemies before attacking. I'm currently playing in a miniature campaign from Barbarossa on the russian side, and believe me, it gets tiresome to be on the receiving end all the time (we're still in the first month). The only balanced battles so far has been when the Germans have overextended themselves, or fumbeled their orders. So I agree with you, historically based battles will probably be my cup of tea. There are a lot of old German defence positions around my hometown Bodo (one of the most important airfields and harbours in northen Norway during WW2), and it could have been fun trying to figure out what would happen if say, some commandos where going to raid the flak batteries guarding the airfield before a bombing mission. Hawk ------------------ Our's is not to reason "why", our's is but to do and die! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Daly Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 "Although ASL was not privy to any information that BTS is not,they WERE awesome games." I better description would be they ARE good games and still actively played by many ... I love the feel of CM , but it sure ain't going to stop me playing ASL ( well not yet anyway ... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Rock Posted November 11, 1999 Share Posted November 11, 1999 It all depends on what you mean by "historical" or "historically based". One of the common problems with a scenario that is to close to a historical situation is that the commanders start with too much info. You know this is the action where the Panthers shredded the Shermans just before the P-47s showed up and slaughtered the reserves on the other side of the ridge, and the Germans were only saved by the last minute arrival of six Stugs, two Marders and an artillery barrage... If the players don't know the details beforehand (eg obscure actions) this is less of a problem, of course. A big database of battles will help here. If "historically based" is interpreted a bit more broadly to refer to a type of action (eg a typical company level assault on a village) than the problem goes away. I suspect I'm in the minority opinion here, but in a sense this is a more realistic protrayal of the type of problem most COs had to face: patchy knowledge of what was up ahead in terms of terrain and enemy. In that sense it's a more historically accurate simulation of COs mental processes - more on discerning opportunties and problems on the spot, less on after-action analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark L Posted November 11, 1999 Share Posted November 11, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>It all depends on what you mean by "historical" or "historically based". ... If "historically based" is interpreted a bit more broadly to refer to a type of action (eg a typical company level assault on a village) than the problem goes away.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I meant that too. The Riesberg scenario feels like a nice "typical" US action to me. Mark [This message has been edited by Mark L (edited 11-11-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts