More (Official) Small Scenarios

[Stagler]

What if someone wants to play as the US forces moving into the FEBA?  What if someone wants to play as the force guarding the supplies?  That's what makes smaller ones so difficult.  Anything that involves one side getting the drop on the other side is going to be difficult to pull off.

 

That's why you make them Red/Blue vs AI

[ASL Veteran]

Furthermore, small scenarios don't require AI plans, if you just make the player the attacker and are willing to accept a static AI defender. I do understand that Battlefront requires official scenarios to be 100% playable from all sides, but there is no such constraint for user made scenarios. You could make a small 30 minute, 800mx800m scenario with briefing, graphics and full playthrough in a weekend. You'd be working on it all day, but it's possible.

 

 

The OP was asking for 'official' scenarios so as far as the OP is concerned the constraints do apply.  Jon S has definitely made successful small scenarios, but then he works well at that scale.  Big maps can also be very detailed as well, so just because a map is smaller doesn't necessarily mean it will be made better.  It all just depends upon how much time and effort a designer wants to invest in the map.  I think that if you created something with a map that was 800 x 800 with leg infantry on it that had a thirty minute time limit you would get a lot of complaints.  Not every player plays at a pace that would give them a chance for success on a map that size with a time limit that short.  Just because a smaller scenario has an hour time limit doesn't necessarily mean that it will take you an hour to play it.  There has to be a bit of slack for players who prefer to play a little more cautiously.  It also takes the AI time to move around on the map so that has to be accounted for as well since the time limit can't be so short that the AI plan can't proceed through to completion.  Some of the 'official' campaigns have been designed around tight time limits and there are entire threads dedicated to players complaining about the lack of time in those campaign scenarios.  Some players like the tight time limits and others don't like the tight time limits.  When you make something you need to make it so that as many players as possible will enjoy playing it in whatever fashion they choose to play it.   

[Sim1943]

Thanks again for the replies everyone.

 

As ASL Veteran pointed out (Do you still play ASL? Have been enjoying it again recently myself), time limit doesn't necessarily mean a 'small scenario'. I don't know if its something that could be clearly defined, but I think that its just the overall experience of the scenario: its well balanced, the OOB is manageable and I can play it in about an hour. An hour of playtime can get through a 30 or so minute scenario.

 

Ive been thinking about this, and maybe I will put my money where my mouth is. After CM:BS, Im going to give scenario design a whirl and upload to the Repository - something I have yet to try out. Ill see how long it takes and Ill see if I can encourage others to create 'small' scenarios also.

[ASL Veteran]

Thanks again for the replies everyone.

 

As ASL Veteran pointed out (Do you still play ASL? Have been enjoying it again recently myself), time limit doesn't necessarily mean a 'small scenario'. I don't know if its something that could be clearly defined, but I think that its just the overall experience of the scenario: its well balanced, the OOB is manageable and I can play it in about an hour. An hour of playtime can get through a 30 or so minute scenario.

 

Ive been thinking about this, and maybe I will put my money where my mouth is. After CM:BS, Im going to give scenario design a whirl and upload to the Repository - something I have yet to try out. Ill see how long it takes and Ill see if I can encourage others to create 'small' scenarios also.

I haven't played ASL in decades.  I actually never owned the game because my friend owned it and we all played each other with his game.  I was fortunate in that I had several friends who all played.  We were pretty relaxed when playing, but inevitably the games would turn into rules fests because people would forget things or do things that you weren't expecting them to do etc.  Often we would have a designated rules official who would arbitrate rules disputes.  Once CMx1 came out I almost never went back to ASL at all, although I did play a few games before quitting entirely.  As we got older too most of my friends moved to different places and it became more difficult to get a game going.  We never got into the Vassal system so now ASL is completely dead for me.

[Sim1943]

I haven't played ASL in decades.  I actually never owned the game because my friend owned it and we all played each other with his game.  I was fortunate in that I had several friends who all played.  We were pretty relaxed when playing, but inevitably the games would turn into rules fests because people would forget things or do things that you weren't expecting them to do etc.  Often we would have a designated rules official who would arbitrate rules disputes.  Once CMx1 came out I almost never went back to ASL at all, although I did play a few games before quitting entirely.  As we got older too most of my friends moved to different places and it became more difficult to get a game going.  We never got into the Vassal system so now ASL is completely dead for me.

 

I too would have fit that exact description if it hadn't been for my rediscovery of ASL two years ago. First with VASL PBEM play, then I started looking for people who play in Arizona. Now am enjoying ASL on a semi-regular basis: face to face, VASL live play and VASL PBEM play. Love the system and have been having a blast playing again.

 

I often wonder how many CM players now realize that CM was an attempt at computerizing ASL? ASL and CM are the only games I play anymore.

Edited December 24, 2014 by Rison

[ExurbanKevin]

Given the success of small elite units doing MOUT during the GWOT, it would seem to me that small unit actions would be a natural fit for this game. Night raids, attacks on C3i, recon, the possibilities are limitless.

[kohlenklau]

Hi Rison,

 

I have an idea. Long ago in some other thread I proposed this and I can't remember anyone taking me up on it. I guess nobody did.

 

Maybe you need a "QB AI Purchase Buddy"?. I can help you out with a few.

I just ran a test and here is how it would work. 

 

Step 1: 2 People are "QB Player" and "QB AI Purchase Buddy". They need to make sure they have same version of the game. 

Step 2: "QB Player" starts a QB and sends screen shot of settings to "QB AI Purchase Buddy". Of course force selection is human for both sides.

Step 3: "QB Player" then selects his own side and sends screenshot of purchase screen to "QB AI Purchase Buddy". He can add notes for any desired details on tweaks.

Step 4: "QB AI Purchase Buddy" then fires up "old Bessy" and creates the QB to the above specs and of course purchases the AI forces with human craftiness.

Step 5: "QB AI Purchase Buddy" then saves the game and e-mails/dropboxes it to "QB Player".

Step 6: "QB Player" opens the save game to see the map with his forces in their set-up zones waiting for him to adjust their positions and enjoy the game.

 

Swim buddy, drinking buddy, dive buddy. Now "QB AI Purchase Buddy". We got to stick together! 

PM me if you want to run a test to see how long it takes. Or do it with another person who is your actual buddy from PBEM HTH battles.

 

LOL. Way back in CMBO I would have my now ex-wife go to the screen when I couldn't see and adjust the dropdown menus for the AI force composition... 

 

Good luck.

[PeterH]

I would also like more minor small missions please! Not some not quite as good compromises, but actual missions etc!

 

Dear fluffy god what the hell has this new forum done to my erstwhile tasteful signature?!

Edited December 28, 2014 by PeterH

[sburke]

I would also like more minor small missions please! Not some not quite as good compromises, but actual missions etc!

 

Dear fluffy god what the hell has this new forum done to my erstwhile tasteful signature?!

LOL was just gonna ask.  Embedded video now works better...except for sigs. 

[Sergei]

Dear fluffy god what the hell has this new forum done to my erstwhile tasteful signature?!

The software will automatically embed Youtube share links but you can still provide them as text links by pressing the Link button in the interface (left of Image button), like so: http://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ

Edited December 28, 2014 by Sergei

[Vergeltungswaffe]

I often wonder how many CM players now realize that CM was an attempt at computerizing ASL? ASL and CM are the only games I play anymore.

 

I'm going to say that BFC will disagree with that statement.

[A Canadian Cat]

Yeah, it has to be debunked every year or so. Now where is that article that describes the history of BFC...

[Sim1943]

I'm going to say that BFC will disagree with that statement.

 

At this point, I honestly don't remember where I read it - been playing CM since the beginning. Was there no correlation between ASL and CM?

 

If theres not, that's fine, still love ASL and CM and am still of the opinion that CM is the closest we can get to ASL on the computer.

[MikeyD]

My advice as of this moment. If you own another CM title practice up throwing together quick little scenarios. Just for the practice. Don't bother with them being artistic or even any good. If you can figure out how to get the AI to move a squad from one location to another at a designated time you're 3/4 the way there. Everything else is gravy. You main enemy is 'intimidation'. Once you're no longer afraid of the AI the AI becomes your b_tch. 

[Buzz]

My advice as of this moment. If you own another CM title practice up throwing together quick little scenarios. Just for the practice. Don't bother with them being artistic or even any good. If you can figure out how to get the AI to move a squad from one location to another at a designated time you're 3/4 the way there. Everything else is gravy. You main enemy is 'intimidation'. Once you're no longer afraid of the AI the AI becomes your b_tch. 

Excellent advice MikeyD.

 

I would add setting aside a designated amount of practice time / 'toy box' time .... for throwing together quick little scenarios. It is easy to get distracted or frustrated and then the enemy 'intimidation' slows or halts learning new skills. I am still learning but hope to get some small scenario skills ready for a test in Black Sea.... n' slap dat AI b_tch around a bit

[LUCASWILLEN05]

I enjoy playing those big battallion plus size scenarios but I don't always have several hours to play. Obviously you can save and play over multiple sessions. Having said that small scenarioslasting up to an hour that I can play to a conclusion when less time is available are also lots of fun. A game involving perhaps one or two companies, say a recon probe or a small local action is just as much fun as the larger action and more suited to some people's experience as weell!

 

A good mix of scenario sizes please :-) One might find inspiration from the battlwes fought over the summer of 1943 in much the same place. It would be interesting to see how these actions would play out between modern U|S, Ukranian and Russian forces.

[George MC]

Good thing about modern is unit sizes are comparably small for the real estate available. So huge maps or smallish maps (depending on whether open or closed terrain) can both have a limited number of units on them. 

[BletchleyGeek]

The 'trick' is to have a good concept #before# you start messing about in the editor.

I need to quote this because it quite explains why I have almost a dozen stillborn scenarios amongst CMBN, CMFI and CMRT, sitting in my hard disk. Sizes going from minimalist Platoon on a 300 m wide map, to reinforced Bn on a 2 km wide map.

The hardest is to find the concept... and then find the time to make it work

Edited December 31, 2014 by BletchleyGeek

[DavidFields]

I completely agree with Rison/Chad post #15.

 

But this point has been made so many times, to a usually very responsive company, with so little result, that I have decided there must be some real structural reason it is not being done.

 

Again, I also believe the first time through a scenario is the most exciting run.

 

My calculations, with Wego:

 

A 30 minute fight, taking in real time 15 minutes a turn, decided by turn 20:  Takes 5 hours of real time to play (plus the initial planning time--which can be the most enjoyable part.)  Can conceivably be done in one setting.  Or, even though the first run through can be the most fun, if one really screws up, and finds that out 10-15 turns in, one could go back and replay the first turns with only a few hours lost.

 

 

An hour fight, decided by turn 50, say:  Takes, for me, about 12 1/2 hours.  This will involve multiple days, and re-orienting oneself (like re-sitting down to a puzzle) each session.  Find out that you messed up something 1/2 way through...maybe something not obvious, and maybe it was just how the terrain/forces turned out that made my action an error, and artillery issues can be particularly a problem.....yes, yes, I can take the loss. But, hey, if we are going to retry the scenario to try to get the win, 12 + hours re-hashing it is a bit much.

 

Let's not mention the 2 hour battles, where people need every one of the 120 minutes.  And let's not mention that if there are more than about a reinforced company of troops, given all the squad splitting, TA, way-points, checking command (I like the ~ hint I recently ran across), 15 minutes is way too optimistic for me to make a turn.

 

I know, there are some incredibly fast movers/players.  I start thinking I am some mentally "slow" or odd person.  But then I see a thread like this, which pops up regularly.....I read the explanations....I still don't get it...but there must be a real problem/block/business issue or absolute corporate resistance on this issue.

[Sim1943]

Finally playing my first scenario - the first 'TINY' one. In the briefing, Pete specifically mentions this thread as his reason for making it.

Thanks for listening Pete!

[Pete Wenman]

 

P

[poesel]

Same here - thanks!

[Macisle]

I completely agree with Rison/Chad post #15.

 

But this point has been made so many times, to a usually very responsive company, with so little result, that I have decided there must be some real structural reason it is not being done.

 

Again, I also believe the first time through a scenario is the most exciting run.

 

My calculations, with Wego:

 

A 30 minute fight, taking in real time 15 minutes a turn, decided by turn 20:  Takes 5 hours of real time to play (plus the initial planning time--which can be the most enjoyable part.)  Can conceivably be done in one setting.  Or, even though the first run through can be the most fun, if one really screws up, and finds that out 10-15 turns in, one could go back and replay the first turns with only a few hours lost.

 

 

An hour fight, decided by turn 50, say:  Takes, for me, about 12 1/2 hours.  This will involve multiple days, and re-orienting oneself (like re-sitting down to a puzzle) each session.  Find out that you messed up something 1/2 way through...maybe something not obvious, and maybe it was just how the terrain/forces turned out that made my action an error, and artillery issues can be particularly a problem.....yes, yes, I can take the loss. But, hey, if we are going to retry the scenario to try to get the win, 12 + hours re-hashing it is a bit much.

 

Let's not mention the 2 hour battles, where people need every one of the 120 minutes.  And let's not mention that if there are more than about a reinforced company of troops, given all the squad splitting, TA, way-points, checking command (I like the ~ hint I recently ran across), 15 minutes is way too optimistic for me to make a turn.

 

I know, there are some incredibly fast movers/players.  I start thinking I am some mentally "slow" or odd person.  But then I see a thread like this, which pops up regularly.....I read the explanations....I still don't get it...but there must be a real problem/block/business issue or absolute corporate resistance on this issue.

 

I have a similar play speed: about 2-5 turns an hour under Wego, depending on many variables. I like to watch the replays several times and catch every bit of goodness from close up. I also usually use very detailed commands, with each unit having stacked moves and pauses, etc. If I've got a company or more, it may take me 15-30 minutes just to get my commands in.

 

That's the way I like to play. I'd rather take a week or more to play a scenario at the speed that is enjoyable to me than finish a scenario in one play session. Finishing in one play session has zero value to me. I enjoy the process. The end result is just the cherry after I've eaten all the ice cream and whipped cream to get there.

 

Having said that, I've found that larger custom QBs really offer a lot of meat in the CM series. If you take a good map, throw in a quick AI plan and/or alter the current one, and choose a good spread of units, then knowing what the other side has can really be mitigated.

 

I spent an hour making a custom QB in CMRT where I had a mech battalion and two companies of tanks and I got several weeks of great entertainment out of that hour of setup.

[GraemeA]

​Could someone please give me some idea about the mix of scenario sizes - are they mostly big ?

 

I ask as someone who bought CMRT and only played 2 or 3 scenarios and then gave up in disappointment.  Nothing wrong with the game, but if I load a scenario and am confronted by a sea of icons, I lose the will to continue.

 

​Thanks

 

​

 

​

 

​

 

​

 

​

 

​

[Sergei]

Tiny:

August Storm

Going to Town

Opportunity Knocks

Small:

Ambush

Phase Line Green

Hold the Line

Objective Delta

Platoon House Alexandra