CMFR Cutting Room Floor - Campaign Map Concept

[benpark]

From the CMFR Cutting Room Floor. Any time there was a BFC switch over to another project, I'd try out something weird with the included tools. You may have seen a version of this in CMCW, which was an adaptation of this original concept. The idea is to have a visual to track the campaign over, with choices depicted "on map" for the campaign portion.

This is simply a map that is zoomed way out to cover an operational area. Houses are towns, large buildings are urban areas, factories are industrial areas, and so on. The scale has been exploded to represent a potential campaign level view. The player would have a small unit representing their force on-map. I suppose you could have more than one unit, t depict multiple combat groups, but that is untested. Enemy forces would probably be tied to the scenario, but there may be some area for creativity there.

The campaign script has two potential decisions per branch. That could be a choice between any number of scenarios - a choice between attacking one of two towns, etc. Something like this could used as a makeshift operational map. This concept could then be used (in whole or portion) to create branching battles on an "operational map" made from a standard map...but scaled up. I like the idea of using the entire map for this one, as it would keep a sense of progression (or not). Like CMMC, but without any extra engine stuff, and everything is tracked via the campaign script. It gives a graphic progression to the text-based campaign we currently have.

My idea was to have a few new flavor objects for the towns and smaller trees, but it can be done with what we have (and maybe a 2D mod or two). I suppose there should be some standard for what the 3D stuff means (2 small barns= town, 4 large buildings= city, etc). It's getting the practical stuff on-map, then making sure it doesn't look like a dog's breakfast in 3D.

The "operational map" where the high-level branching choices are is below - this map being for the area covered by Operation Spring Awakening. It was too much of a slog for a campaign, but the operational map remains. If you have CMFR, you will see some maps destined for this idea.

In practical terms - The choice to the player would be "take the road to Deg, or take the road to Enying", then the player will move their campaign operational map Schwimmwagen/Jeep, etc. to that "town" on the map (or any choice trigger terrain), which will be linked to that battle as the next battle in the campaign in the campaign script. I the map attached, the Germans start at the west (just because of the current map rotation - really north), heading east (south, geographically) to Simontornya or Cece.

The attached example is far too large, and was intended to be split into smaller sections. Doing something of this size would be unmanageable to make a campaign script for if the battles were numerous. Each operational sub-map would be its own campaign, with 6 or so branches. That's probably 12 sub-maps, which can be easily made from Master Maps, QB maps, etc.

If I get any free time to cipher it out, I'll attach a script example for the branching for the first round using this map, and maybe others may wish to test the idea out on their own ideas. I have a few of my own, but they need a fair amount of time to percolate.

Images, looking west to east. Hungary, Lake Balaton region.

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by benpark

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Fascinating stuff Ben.....A campaign in a map! 

[MOS:96B2P]

3 hours ago, benpark said:

If I get any free time to cipher it out, I'll attach a script example for the branching for the first round using this map, and maybe others may wish to test the idea out on their own ideas. I have a few of my own, but they need a fair amount of time to percolate.

+1.  Interesting stuff.  

I used a very simple "one" branch txt file for the mini-campaign Alarmeinheiten.  With your HQ team enter the west building for common equipment or enter the east building for more unique, rare, uncommon equipment. This was easy enough to figure out on the txt document. 

  

 

The multiple branching scripting is a little confusing.  The confusion probably comes from how multiple branches are entered on the txt document.  Do you follow branch "A" to the very end and then after that follow branch "B" to the very end?  One branch under another in the txt document?  Does the order that the branch is listed in on the txt document matter?  So branch "A" might end on map #8, branch "B" end on map #5, branch "C" ends on map #10.  I'm unsure how all of the branching (after the first branch) is entered on the txt document.  I suspect the above (one branch) is easy by comparison.            

[benpark]

Yes - this was a great use of branching. I also like the reveal of the AI Plan idea. I feel like there's probably other uses for that concept.

 

16 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:

The multiple branching scripting is a little confusing. 

The Campaign Script would have to be graphed out in my "scaled-operational" scheme. Since the CM campaign scripting choice is binary, the next choice is/must be as well. There can only be two choices per battle/iteration, so the next choice would again be one of two decisions.

A hypothetical script concept outline start:

-Battle 1/Choice 1: Using your method above - There are potentially two sub-units of a given force, deciding which Company with support, etc. to take into that particular battle. Let's say Company A and Company B of a given higher command with support.

Next, we get into Branching. So, this is just one possible rung on the ladder to start us off with the outline.

-Battle 2/Choice2 Choice A: Player is presented with a choice of areas to attack (example from the above map might be something like: SIMONTORNYA or CECE). AI side is part of the battle, as designed. Next battle would be set by Win or Loss on script.

-Battle 2/Choice2 Choice B: Player is presented a choice of one of two battles that could be anything from an attack in a different direction/rest and refit/defensive battle. AI side is part of the battle, as designed. Next battle would be set by Win or Loss on script.

Repeat for as many battles make up the campaign, using the follow on battle set by Win and Loss as your guide to what the heck is happening! It would be twice as complex with the force decision, but maybe twice as much fun.

Would this hit a critical mass of mind-bending? Certainly, if overly ambitious (see above). It's really best for something more contained - say one segment of the fighting around St. Lo in Normandy, or the fighting just in the Deg to Simontorntya area seen here (a segment of the map would be used). Keep it to 4 or so main events, and it would be manageable hard work.

Edited September 30, 2021 by benpark

[Hapless]

I was messing around with a similar idea back in February and thought I was onto something no one else had considered- of course, the oustide world didn't know about CMCW at that point...

Broad concept here, with mutliple friendly units that are immobilised when not under control and wrecks to show destroyed enemy units:

I also did a short CMFI campaign messing around with Commando raids in Norway which had a similar choice system- this altered the order you played the two subsequent missions in changing the time, conditions, weather, off-map support and enemy preparedness. I'd link it, but there is literally no attachment space here .

So, entirely doable concept!

Edited September 30, 2021 by Hapless

[chuckdyke]

A great idea just an icon like a cathedral for a city. The sky would be the limit and would leave room for maneuver. 

[Glubokii Boy]

This is a cool idea and i'm sure some rather neat things can be made with a set-up like this...

It is a bit of a shame though that one of 'the completally unneccesary' limitations with the current editor will limit the player options/game result (from previous battle)  to only two different choises....I feel that this limitation of TWO...will limit the flexibility and potential fun of a 'free' campaign like this...

If only the campaign script would allow for a wider branching than TWO options...That would have  been great to allow the designer to represent various combat results and a wider variety of player options...To be limited to only two options might be somewhat...limited 

 

 

[landser]

22 hours ago, benpark said:

In practical terms - The choice to the player would be "take the road to Deg, or take the road to Enying"

I like this concept and it' seems a 'poor man's' version of what I would like to see come to the series. An operational level campaign map. I often use Close Combat games, specifically CC5 (Normandy) as the reference. An operational map with battlegroups deployed, with the map divided up in to sectors. If anyone has played CC5 they'll know just what I mean.

And exactly like that game, the Combat Mission version would allow the player to move those battlegroups from sector to sector during an operational turn phase. If the BG was moved in to a sector already occupied by the enemy, an attack or assault mission would play out, depending on factors such as how long the enemy had occupied the sector and perhaps other factors like ability to dig in or build fortifications (attached engineer/Pioneer, etc). If both sides move a unit in to the same sector during the operational turn phase, a meeting engagement would result. And if the enemy moves in to your occupied sector a defend battle results, again with considerations for how dug in the defenders are.

Combat Mission is ideally suited for this type of operational level campaign. Persistent core battlegroups, logistics, the ability to outflank on an operational level, to cut lines of communication. A support pool of naval, air and artillery to be dispensed across the campaign map as available and needed. decisions made on where reinforcements go, where reserves are deployed. Attacks and withdrawals, salients and shortening of lines.

Combat Mission is wonderful on the field of battle. An operational-level campaign system, even as simple as mirroring Close Combat 5 would bring the series to a new level. It's wishful thinking, and I know Battlefront have no plans to do anything like it. But for years this has been my vision of what Combat Mission could be. To take the wonderful tactical battles and tie them together in an engrossing campaign. All of the tools needed to pull this off do not exist obviously, it would need to be built from the ground up, and I have no illusions about the complexity of such an endeavor.  For me though this is the sort of vision needed to move Combat Mission forward, and give campaign players something amazing, where the battle is no longer the sole focus of the commander, and one where each result has an effect on the campaign as a whole.

Perhaps I am not seeing Benpark's vision in the same way as he does, but this does seem to point in this direction. His idea is one of practical considerations that can be done now, with the tools at hand. But with a little ambition and new thinking, Combat Mission could be transformed from a series of semi- or disconnected single battles in to one where the player commands an entire front, with all of the decisions and weight of responsibility it carries. One can dream, anyway

[Erwin]

5 hours ago, Hapless said:

altered the order you played the two subsequent missions in changing the time, conditions, weather, off-map support and enemy preparedness.

That sounds very good.  Another thought...  If one's units have performed well, the designer could give the player the option to select better quality troops for the next scenario - that would attempt to simulate the units gaining experience/promotions. 

However, if they did poorly, maybe the next option would be to get more troops but they would be inexperienced new replacements.

Edited September 30, 2021 by Erwin

[MOS:96B2P]

6 hours ago, Hapless said:

Broad concept here, with mutliple friendly units that are immobilised when not under control and wrecks to show destroyed enemy units

+1.  If I understand, objectives that were secured by friendly forces are marked with an immobilized friendly vehicle and a burning OpFor vehicle.  Cool idea. 

I wonder if setup zone colors might be used in the same way.  When you open the operational map the Forward Edge of Battle Area (FEBA) is marked with a 3 or 4 action spot wide line of a blue setup zone color.  Then a red colored setup zone line for the OpFor front line, which in most cases will run adjacent to the blue line.  Guess there might be a no-man's land in-between.  Painting just lines instead of the entire areas, under control of the two sides, would allow a player to see the map better.  Of course when you hit the red button the setup zones will vanish but the immobilized and burning vehicles will be present.  Interesting stuff. 

PS - Hapless makes some great Combat Mission U-Tube videos.  Highly recommended.  I attempted to post a link below.  

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9egpHJiRis89uHkeyJiEug/featured

Edited September 30, 2021 by MOS:96B2P

[Sgt.Squarehead]

@benpark  Is there a tool that you use to make campaign flowcharts?  Preferably one I can get for free. 

[benpark]

3 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Is there a tool that you use to make campaign flowcharts?  Preferably one I can get for free.

Pen and paper, first, along with dozens of bookmarks. I use Photoshop for after that, with each battle a separate Layer with an "IN" and "OUT" flowchart - I keep everything movable, on one document. It is open to add or remove things, and is pretty simple. Like a script-writers room wall, in miniature.

Anything like Powerpoint (or the Open Office version) would also let you do this graphically.

[chuckdyke]

40 minutes ago, benpark said:

I use Photoshop for after that,

Thank you for this tip. I will use Affinity Photo which is very similar to Photoshop. 

[Artkin]

I like the idea @benpark. Having a second game running with troops on very tiny circle arcs could solve admin issues I have with my Radzy game. It would make it simpler to player.

 

I'm thinking toss a small team for every company on the battlefield, a halftrack for mechanized company, a tank, etc. They would be named appropriately. I could even extend the map and make a deployment/destroyed units area to the sides of the map. I wouldn't have any scripts on this map since I am actually in the middle of a custom multiplayer campaign.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

That's a very logical extension of the idea.

BTW - What is the huge map above?  Is it available anywhere for slicing?

[Artkin]

7 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

That's a very logical extension of the idea.

BTW - What is the huge map above?  Is it available anywhere for slicing?

Rad Full 2 by Pete of course!

https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-red-thunder/cm-red-thunder-add-ons/razymin-master-map-care/

I dont see a download link anywhere... if you dont find it ill send it

Edited October 13, 2021 by Artkin