Mission Briefings

[Holien]

43 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

I agree with @ratdeath read the missions before we must open the game. They even could offer it as an after sales service on their website. Or promote it to turn it into sales. 

I would agree this would be useful for the game and a good sales feature, mind you they would have to ensure the grammar police checked it out before publishing!!!

[chuckdyke]

10 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I would sincerely hope that the average player can squeeze out at least of 60+ hours of quality play time, before hitting the QBs or Scenario editor.  

I hope so too and will follow you. As a suggestion in briefings something like SMEAC at least the Situation (A lot of scenarios doesn't give you the time.) Mission and Execution. Suggestions which companies and their strengths. This is what I try to do when I read a scenario and sometimes it is very cryptic. Kind regards. 

[Freyberg]

I'm a great defender of BFC, but this is a pretty valid criticism - briefings are a big part of the immersion, and in comparison to all the other aspects of the game, should be one of the easiest things to get right.

[mbarbaric]

10 hours ago, RockinHarry said:

yep, didn´t mean I won´t appreciate any the extra (setting the mood) and maybe interesting historical info. I find the CM briefing screen layout is just not well suited for the overall tasks. Also considering with high screen resolutions all the text is not fun to read through with small fonts. I´d wish for more flexibility here. One screen just for text (scaleable) and other screens just for maps and graphics (making full use of set screen resolutions). But that´s a topic for many the wishlist threads.

love your improvement ideas. I'd like to add another one, though.

When I am in the mission, scouting terrain (especially in CW with many beautifully huge maps) I can't count how many times I wished I had topographic overlay. How much easier would be to read possible routs of advance, defensive positions, covered approaches...  Really wish it would be standard to add a topographic map either in the briefing, or even better, as an overlay on the terrain that can be toggled on and off.

[Redwolf]

14 hours ago, Bozowans said:

This kinda makes me want more scenarios that give you as little information as this. Reminds me of a book I was reading by a Russian platoon leader on the WW2 eastern front. Often the only orders he would get were just "Go take that town over there." His company commander also liked to go missing for long periods at a time, leaving the platoon leaders to do everything themselves. Vague orders might come down straight from battalion, skipping the company commander entirely.

The war was bizarre and confusing, filled with things like units going in circles or wandering aimlessly for miles in the wrong direction, zero coordination between different companies/battalions/tanks/infantry/whatever, or even friendlies launching entire assaults on their own positions by accident. To me, it would be interesting to see more CM scenarios that deliberately try to put the player in a very confusing situation that they have to think their way out of.

What's the name of that book?

[chuckdyke]

32 minutes ago, mbarbaric said:

I wished I had topographic overlay.

You get the effect with a cover-arc (very large) sometimes.

[Lethaface]

13 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Now as to the "why the multiple years?" question.  Well we did that because CMCW covers off a 4 year period in which available equipment varies significantly year to year.  These differences create pretty interesting and noticeable variations in gameplay.  For example in 1979 you could see M48s vs T55s and in 1982 we have M1s vs T80Bs, the balances is very different between these dates.  So we thought, "hey there is a lot of kit here and maybe players don't really know the ins and outs of all of it.  We should create different time versions so they can easily see and learn how different equipment stacks up."  

FWIW I enjoy these variations. It's good to add these I think, gives some nice quick to play battles available in which the player can try out the various formations/hardware, without having to dive in the editor.

[domfluff]

The multiple-year scenarios exist to show off one of the core thematic points of the game - the change in technology was incredibly significant. The US went from being perhaps the most technologically behind it has ever been, to gaining an unassailable lead in a couple of years.

The Armour scenarios are a really good demonstration of that - the map means that the early scenarios have plenty of scope for manouevre and use of terrain - really stretching how best to use the three tank platoons, both internally and in concert with each other.

The 1982 scenario is basically a joke by comparison - you're given two platoons of M60 and a platoon of Abrams... and you don't need the M60s. The Abrams is dominant in this timeframe, and this is the worst possible version of the Abrams.

CMSF teaches some bad habits, given the force disparity - one thing the NTC campaign is really good for is demonstrating the problem with that.

[dbsapp]

27 minutes ago, domfluff said:

The multiple-year scenarios exist to show off one of the core thematic points of the game - the change in technology was incredibly significant. The US went from being perhaps the most technologically behind it has ever been, to gaining an unassailable lead in a couple of years.

The Armour scenarios are a really good demonstration of that - the map means that the early scenarios have plenty of scope for manouevre and use of terrain - really stretching how best to use the three tank platoons, both internally and in concert with each other.

The 1982 scenario is basically a joke by comparison - you're given two platoons of M60 and a platoon of Abrams... and you don't need the M60s. The Abrams is dominant in this timeframe, and this is the worst possible version of the Abrams.

CMSF teaches some bad habits, given the force disparity - one thing the NTC campaign is really good for is demonstrating the problem with that.

That's quite interesting, and I think you are right.

It seemed that in the 70s USSR finally achieved parity with US and reached the peak of its might. But indeed in quite short period of time something cracked and  situation became opposite.

Gulf war showed it with shocking clarity.

I guess, the main reason was the rapid development of computer chips industry.

[domfluff]

There would have been a number of reasons, naturally, but a large part would be that the eighties were the end of the Soviet Union. Around this period there were a "Twilight of the General Secretaries", where multiple elderly leaders came to power, and died within 24 months or less. This is also one of the reasons why the war in Afghanistan continued on for quite as long as it did.

Gorbachev was the first General Secretary to be born since the creation of the USSR, and he was the last.

That meant that if the US did gain an advantage, even if the Soviets could have adapted or caught up, I suspect that there wasn't really the leadership for that kind of change to happen.

[dbsapp]

That's political dimension with so many "ifs".

What's more calculable is strictly technological part. In the beginning of the 90s USSR unexpectedly found itself with weapons conceptually not that much different from WW2 era, where as US leapfrogged to something reminding of Star Wars.

It was much more complicated then that of course. E.g. ironically it was the same 90s when Soviet submarines for the first time became trully silient and relatively undectable for their American counterparts. 

Anyway, during arms race some important link  in the technological chain was lost by Soviets, and I would say it was microchips and cybernetics.

[Artkin]

15 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Finally, as to the the "cheating" US Campaigns ported over as standalones, there are 10 in total.  Well the thinking here was that these should really be bonus content.  First, not everyone is going to finish the US Campaign, or play all its battles, so this gives the player a chance to play and try any of them up front.

I'm actually kind of glad you guys did this, since the Uncam tool crashes when opening CMCW campaigns. Super unfortunate since I Uncam every campaign I have. 

 

As for the briefings, yeah they're pretty bad. Opened 1 scenario and immediately came across a ton of huge, blatant grammatical errors. 

 

I think the OP might be referring to a lack of CMCW QB maps. Which is the only thing I've noticed... speaking of my CMCW QBs crash every time after clicking OK in the QB menu. I will reinstall eventually

[RockinHarry]

2 hours ago, mbarbaric said:

love your improvement ideas. I'd like to add another one, though.

When I am in the mission, scouting terrain (especially in CW with many beautifully huge maps) I can't count how many times I wished I had topographic overlay. How much easier would be to read possible routs of advance, defensive positions, covered approaches...  Really wish it would be standard to add a topographic map either in the briefing, or even better, as an overlay on the terrain that can be toggled on and off.

Exactly! Another keyword is simplicity. That map overlay just needs the prominent terrain features. No multi color this and that and overload with unnecessary info. Sort of sketch map, black and white (or black on grey to make it more eye friendly). I personally don´t even need victory locations and their values shown. Prefer figuring out "important" terrain for given mission myself. That´s part of the challenge and mission designers IMO should avoid giving a player too much of a prescribed play path. This also allows for much greater flexibility in setting up a mission in general.

[Bozowans]

2 hours ago, Redwolf said:

What's the name of that book?

Tank Rider by Evgeni Bessonov. He was in the war from 1943 on to the end, eventually becoming part of the spearheads going into Germany and encircling Berlin.

[domfluff]

11 minutes ago, Artkin said:

I'm actually kind of glad you guys did this, since the Uncam tool crashes when opening CMCW campaigns. Super unfortunate since I Uncam every campaign I have. 

Scancade works for me.

[mbarbaric]

19 minutes ago, RockinHarry said:

Exactly! Another keyword is simplicity. That map overlay just needs the prominent terrain features. No multi color this and that and overload with unnecessary info. Sort of sketch map, black and white (or black on grey to make it more eye friendly). I personally don´t even need victory locations and their values shown. Prefer figuring out "important" terrain for given mission myself. That´s part of the challenge and mission designers IMO should avoid giving a player too much of a prescribed play path. This also allows for much greater flexibility in setting up a mission in general.

Battlefront should create a tool that automatically reads the terrain from the map and creates a simplified sketch-up of key terrain, hamlets, woods, roads, hills, valleys...  

[RockinHarry]

9 minutes ago, mbarbaric said:

Battlefront should create a tool that automatically reads the terrain from the map and creates a simplified sketch-up of key terrain, hamlets, woods, roads, hills, valleys...  

a dream coming true indeed. In fact the only wargame I found doing that sort of a thing is Armored Brigade. There´s a map mode that creates sort of a simplified Topo Map (layer) on the fly.

Edit: GT Mius has a similar feature as well.

Edited May 12, 2021 by RockinHarry

[Vergeltungswaffe]

36 minutes ago, Artkin said:

I'm actually kind of glad you guys did this, since the Uncam tool crashes when opening CMCW campaigns. Super unfortunate since I Uncam every campaign I have.

I wonder why, since it works for everything else but SF1 campaigns.

24 minutes ago, domfluff said:

Scancade works for me.

I loved scancade when it was the only tool we had, but since uncam came out, I've liked not having to put Java on my new computers.

[Artkin]

2 hours ago, domfluff said:

Scancade works for me.

Thx will try. 

 

2 hours ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

I wonder why, since it works for everything else but SF1 campaigns.

I loved scancade when it was the only tool we had, but since uncam came out, I've liked not having to put Java on my new computers.

Eek! Yeah I don't like how Java masks running programs. I USED to know most of the running processes in task manager. Now I can't even name 1/4. 

SvcHost is another nasty process.