jim crowley Posted August 27, 1999 Share Posted August 27, 1999 Just like to start off by saying that 'watching' the unfolding battle over at TGN is becoming very addictive. Well done to everyone concerned. Superb! The scenario being fought out seems to have been very well put together and brings me to the point of this post. The HPS games (Tigers.. Panthers.. etc.) were supplied with a very limited set of scenarios. The Steel Panthers series came with a very large selection of scens. and a flexible battle generator. As a result, I tended to play the weaker game system (SP) much more often, because it presented greater variety. I think the number (and of course, quality) of scenarios provided in the release version of CM will be very important, in allowing players to realise the full potential of a ground- breaking system. To that end , I wonder if there is any possibilty of having some sort of Scenario 'Variator'? What I mean by this is, having played a standard scen. a couple of times, you will generally have a good idea as to units involved and set-up etc. thus the element of surprise and hence replayabilty is greatly diminished. If, however, the scen. could be randomly (or semi-randomly more like) altered by say a small, medium or large amount, at the players choice, the replayabity factor would be greatly enhanced. In effect twenty scenarios would become eighty. Don't know if this is viable (or even desirable to others) but thought it was worth suggesting. Cheers Jim Crowley P.S. How did that Stug knock-out the Jumbo? My stats say it can't be done; not at that range with that gun anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Meier Posted August 27, 1999 Share Posted August 27, 1999 Jim, I believe they have come up with the fact that the Stug got very lucky and had a "critical hit" on the Jumbo. I believe there is some code that says that there is a 1% chance that a round will hit a critical area of tank. If this area is hit then the armour is degraded up to 50% for the peneatration calculations. I believe in the questions to Steve topic (#1) is where you will find the actual discussion. Also the Jumbo was engaging targets 180 degrees away from the Stug so it had to rotate its turret around to get a shot off at the Stug which explains why the Jumbo didn't get any shots off at the Stug. [This message has been edited by Ron Meier (edited 08-27-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted August 27, 1999 Share Posted August 27, 1999 I haven't read what Steve said in the above thread (it's off-limits for me as allied player to preserve fog of war), but I would assume the 1% thing is true. My Jumbo was unfortunately facing his turret almost 180 degrees in the wrong direction... Anyway, just to remind everybody once more - if you have questions with regards to the game, please post them in either Fionns or mine of Steve's thread. Fionn is reading the other posts (and so am I), and both of us would hate to stumble upon extra intel about the other side. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 27, 1999 Share Posted August 27, 1999 Jim, we are going to ship with a decent number of scenarios, historical and not, as well as some campaigns. You can alter these to your heart's content in the included scenario editor (the same one we use). People will be uploading scenarios in large numbers I would think. That battle took me about 3 hours to set up and a few more to test out the balancing (played to about Turn 10 or so twice). Also you can use the Design Your Own feature to make games on the fly without the editor. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 27, 1999 Share Posted August 27, 1999 Jim, The AI can (optionally) do its own unit setups even in a "set" scenario, so you enemy dispositions won't always be the same, even in a 1-player game. Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 27, 1999 Share Posted August 27, 1999 *Sigh* I just checked this out figuring that this was about scenarios shipping with the game or something. LEt me make this CLEAR.... I DID NOT KNOW MARTIN HAD A JUMBO UNTIL NOW !!!! Now, I do... Let's just keep ANY talk about such things to the appropriate forums. I check ALL threads except the "Ask Steve" and "Ask Martin" threads so please don't mention these things anywhere else. FWIW Martin might NOT know I have a StuG and I CERTAINLY didn't know he had a Jumbo.. Knowing it is knocked out is even more destructive to FOW.. Anyways, since I knocked out his last tank about 8 turns ago this isn't too destructive of FOW but please just keep it to the appropriate threads. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Meier Posted August 27, 1999 Share Posted August 27, 1999 Sorry guys... I messed up by answering, no excuses... I will be more aware from here on out... I just get so excitedd... Once again I apologize for my screw-up... Name the punishment... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted August 27, 1999 Share Posted August 27, 1999 Hmm... let me think of something REALLY tough... how about - you are allowed to receive your copy of CM one week after its release EARLIEST! No problem, Ron. Luckily what happened is history and although Fionn now knows that he doesn't have to fear that Jumbo anymore, he does NOT know what's lurking just around the map edge... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 28, 1999 Share Posted August 28, 1999 Gees Martin, I was thinking of burning Ron at the stake or something but holding his copy back for a week seems kind of "cruel and unusual" not to mention extreme Anyways, no problems Ron all's cool since it was just a simple slip and everyone makes them from time to time. (I've made more mistakes during this battle than I care to mention hehe.. or rather, sub-optimal decisions.. But when every suboptimal decision kills men it sure feels like failure. ). Anyways, your punishment is to not do it again (unless you want to try to convince Martin that his orders specifically order him to ADVANCE towards my positions over open fields in line abreast formation slowly.. You're allowed tell him that Ps. LOL you only answered anyways.. Now I'd better clarify that by saying I know Jim only made a simple slip so that's cool too.. I just wanted to really reinforce that even something innocuous could give away vital information (just like in real life) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Marks Posted August 28, 1999 Share Posted August 28, 1999 Moon, thankfully no one slipped and told Fionn about the M1 Abrams bug that they are still trying to eradicate from the beta you are playing. On a more serious note, I want to thank you guys for taking the time to draft the AAR reports. They are immersive and really are giving me a good flavor for the game. I can't wait to read about the next turn. Keep up the good work. Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 28, 1999 Share Posted August 28, 1999 Ron, not to worry. Fionn SHOULD have known by now that the dead tank was indeed a Jumbo. In fact I was about to tell him myself There was a bug that prevented updating spotting info for dead vehicles. As Fionn continued to look at it and get closer the dead "M4 Medium Tank?" should have changed to reveal its true self. Yes, even after being knocked out vehicles can yield their secrets Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSY Posted August 28, 1999 Share Posted August 28, 1999 Going back to the original topic, I agree with Jim. Having some kind of variable placement or even variable units on scenarios is highly desirable in my opinion. One possibility if you can't come up with the randomization code is to allow the scenario designer to come up with a number of possible initial unit mixes and placements and then pick one at startup. I think I've seen this used before (perhaps in Harpoon 1?). Anway, I definitely vote for some kind of randomizer on scenarios. This would greatly increase the games replayability. Its always a dissappointment when you've just played a great scenario and realize that next time you play it it's not going to be any fun because now you know exactly which hills the Panther and Tiger are hiding behind. Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim crowley Posted August 28, 1999 Author Share Posted August 28, 1999 Humble apologies to all (grovel, grovel) regarding the Jumbo slip!! Just didn,t think that one through. I'd like pick up on critical hits in a new thread. In regard to the scenario randomiser idea, Patrick has expressed what I was thinking much more clearly than I did. Although it is good to be able to alter existing scens. what I was suggesting was an optional random method of doing so; to retain at least an element of the unknown, not only in location terms but also in unit composition terms. Thus a small alteration might yield one bazooka team, more or less. A large alteration might add or subtract a tank, etc. This might alter play balance in those instances, but IMHO replayability would be greatly enhanced. By having the computer randomly pick one of the alteration possibilities, you could never be certain exactly what you are facing, no matter how often the scen. was replayed. And the basic flavour of the scen. would be unaltered. Once again, apologies to Fionn and Martin - keep up the good work, you're both doing a brilliant job. Cheers Jim Crowley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannon Posted August 28, 1999 Share Posted August 28, 1999 Boy I'm sure glad you guys caught the blame on that one. I thought I had given it away with my "What is a Jumbo?" question, but I was afraid to apologize and confirm anyones suspicions. I would hate to have to wait on my copy of CM. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 28, 1999 Share Posted August 28, 1999 NOTE TO FIONN AND MARTIN -> THIS IS OK TO READ Patrick, pretty much have everything you are asking for. The player has the freedom to set up his forces within the constraints the designer has laid down. In the scenario Fionn and Martin are playing on Fionn could position his village forces wherever he liked, but ONLY in the village. The releif force was required to be in at least two seperate pieces, but I could have easily made one. Again, Fionn could set up his guys anywhere within those two areas. This prevented him from putting tanks from the relief force into the village, or replacing the FJ in the village with more expendable troops from the relief force. These restrictoins enforce the concept of the scenario (wouldn't be much fun if Fionn teleported his village forces to his front line now would it ) From Martin's side he had some choices to make too, but I don't want to get into specifics here Also, some units can be designated "floaters". These units can be placed in any deployment zone. Say there are three zones with infantry in each. I could put 5 tanks up as "floaters" which would allow you to decide where they start out. For DYO (Design Your Own) games everything is custom to that particular instance. Map, forces, intial starting positions, etc. You can also load a premade MAP and have the DYO provide custom forces. Having premade scenarios have variable forces isn't really going to add much to the game. And since you will have litteraly endless scenarios to play we don't think you will play the same one more than 2 or 3 times tops, and the AI (or other player) will set up its forces differently each time. Should be plenty of flexibility here. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSY Posted August 30, 1999 Share Posted August 30, 1999 Sounds good. As long as the AI gets to setup its own units and does so differently each time we run the scenario, I'm happy with that. Variable units as well as locations is better, but just different locations will improve replayability many fold over fixed units and fixed locations. Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted August 30, 1999 Share Posted August 30, 1999 I find that I eventually forget all force allocations etc. can replay the scenario just like it was brand new. Of course the better scenarios are little more memorable and it takes longer to forget what's going on in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Rock Posted August 30, 1999 Share Posted August 30, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>That battle took me about 3 hours to set up and a few more to test out the balancing (played to about Turn 10 or so twice) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think that's the most impressive thing I've read on this thread! Three hours seems to me a rather modest investment of time for a rather interesting tactical problem. Of course it could just be that I'm easily impressed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted August 30, 1999 Share Posted August 30, 1999 The scenario editor is indeed amazingly easy to use. You'll spend more time thinking of what to do than actually putting it down on the map (with a little experience). I've made a historical map of Schmidt and Kommerscheidt (Hürtgenwald) within two hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts