MarkEzra et al., Suggestion re controversial Probe QB map

[John Kettler]

Having now looked at the Red end of Village-Hills-Damaged (Damaged (912x816) 274 Probe, what doesn't look bad at all in terms of apparent C&C for REDFOR frontally, falls apart in the face of a wide US defensive deployment, which provides keyholes, from various positions, negating much of the apparent C&C seen initially. A wide deployment is the only way for BLUFOR to effectively cover the REDFOR approaches to the housing development and to cover the approaches to the very prominent reentrant east of the railroad past the industrial area. That reentrant forms a funnel, a real tactical nightmare for BLUFOR, into the village proper.

 

Since my CM mapmaking endeavors never rose above the level of the most minor explorations of CMx1's CMBO in that regard, I claim zero knowledge of the appropriateness or feasibility of my suggestion which follows.

 

Rather than rework the map, presuming the interest, desire, time and resources to do so, my thought is to expand the REDFOR setup zone so that its front edge now runs, say, up to the rear of the house west of the railroad tracks. This would, I think, go a long way toward giving REDFOR significant levels of protection in the setup zone, but with no guarantees that there will be perfect protection from every possible angle across the entire map width and depth there. War, after all, is full of uncertainty!

 

I was going to offer another suggestion as well, which was to broadly conform the front of the REDFOR setup zone to the rear of the general tree line, but that strikes me as entirely too REDFOR favorable, since that would give REDFOR eyes and weapons, in substantial C&C, pretty much map width and ready to shoot, rather than having to first move into position. Were such a thing to be done, I fear the BLUFOR defending would have a very short life expectancy, both from DF and various forms of REDFOR FS, available from the start or shortly thereafter.

 

As I say, whether any of this is of any use or merit I don't know, but I thought I'd put it out there for discussion and possible mod consideration.

 

Regards

 

John Kettler

Edited September 4, 2015 by John Kettler

[sburke]

Having now looked at the Red end of Village-Hills-Damaged (Damaged (912x816) 274 Probe, what doesn't look bad at all in terms of apparent C&C for REDFOR frontally, falls apart in the face of a wide US defensive deployment, which provides keyholes, from various positions, negating much of the apparent C&C seen initially. A wide deployment is the only way for BLUFOR to effectively cover the REDFOR approaches to the housing development and to cover the approaches to the very prominent reentrant east of the railroad past the industrial area. That reentrant forms a funnel, a real tactical nightmare for BLUFOR, into the village proper.

 

Since my CM mapmaking endeavors never rose above the level of the most minor explorations of CMx1's CMBO in that regard, I claim zero knowledge of the appropriateness or feasibility of my suggestion which follows.

 

Rather than rework the map, presuming the interest, desire, time and resources to do so, my thought is to expand the REDFOR setup zone so that its front edge now runs, say, up to the rear of the house west of the railroad tracks. This would, I think, go a long way toward giving REDFOR significant levels of protection in the setup zone, but with no guarantees that there will be perfect protection from every possible angle across the entire map width and depth there. War, after all, is full of uncertainty!

 

I was going to offer another suggestion as well, which was to broadly conform the front of the REDFOR setup zone to the rear of the general tree line, but that strikes me as entirely too REDFOR favorable, since that would give REDFOR eyes and weapons, in substantial C&C, pretty much map width and ready to shoot, rather than having to first move into position. Were such a thing to be done, I fear the BLUFOR defending would have a very short life expectancy, both from DF and various forms of REDFOR FS, available from the start or shortly thereafter.

 

As I say, whether any of this is of any use or merit I don't know, but I thought I'd put it out there for discussion and possible mod consideration.

 

Regards

 

John Kettler

you know you can edit the maps anyway you like.  Open in editor, edit your setup zones, save, voila you have your own preferred settings.

[John Kettler]

sburke,

 

Wow! I had no idea such a thing was possible. My mistaken belief was that the in-game maps were untouchable by us mere mortals. Were someone to make the kind of tweaks you've described, does such a map then become part of the QB list (which would seem to cause problems in any other mode than solo)? If not, how does it work?

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

[MarkEzra]

FYI just saw this.  You've already got the answer I would have given.  And yes ANY Map that has a setup area and AI pathing orders can be used in QB.  The results may not always be what you hope for.  But many players adjust the maps to set their needs.  It's a very flexible game platform.

 

I've been very busy taking new scen and master maps from the Fantastic beta scen  guys and doing just that. 

[John Kettler]

MarkEzra,

 

Your avatar is clever and once I got it, cracked me up. I get that any map of the type you described is usable in a QB, but I still don't know whether the map, as amended if that's the case, now becomes part of the QB map list? And if I've got it, how does that work in 2-player situations? Presumably, the Beta is Bulge, right? Go get 'em, tiger!"

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

[Baneman]

Open Map in Editor, make changes, save ( with slight name change ) in your Quick Battle Maps folder - voila, it's now part of your QB map list.