COMBAT MISSION : The RPG

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

I have always played role playing games. None of that fantasy wierd crap though. Started with Star Frontiers, moved onto Mechwarrior, and the ultimate game Paranoia.

I was thinking today...why cant CM be played a 1 player role playing game? I am going to test this with a friend, where I design the maps, battles, etc as a Gamemaster, design the role-player's force. But the cool part is that I will play as the opposing force, as the Gamemaster. By taking the AI out of the loop, I can try to simulate instinctive enemy actions, and in the long run, build a "campaign" for the player.

In a sense, this is a miniature meta-campaign, but with more control available. I dont know if its worth the trouble, or if it will play out as just dumb, but I am going to try.

Anyone else have ideas on this? Have any of you tried it yet?

[Lorak]

Captain,

So your going to play a series of PBEM games with one person? Then decide their fate on how well or how poorly they do in the battles you set up? Sounds kind of interesting.

Lorak

------------------

"someone you trust is one of us"..........the illuminati

*

http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub

Lorak's FTX for CM <--Proud member of the Combat Mission Webring

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

Interesting you should put it that way, but I as gamemaster would have little to gain in victory, and as an all seeing party I would have to maintain a mental separation between what I know, and what my troops would know.

Its just a way to have greater control over the troops. Go ahead and scoff, you swine!! You will be jealous when you hear how much fun it is....

[Lorak]

lol, I'm not scoffing.

I'm just undecided on just how diffrent that would be than regular PBEM.

Most of us that have been here a while seem to have a core group that we always have PBEM games going with.

So what I'm guessing is that you'll give this person a core company or so, and then depending on how he does, or the situation adjust what he has avalible. Then if he does well... gets better equipment,men, promotions ect...

That close?

Lorak

------------------

"someone you trust is one of us"..........the illuminati

*

http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub

Lorak's FTX for CM <--Proud member of the Combat Mission Webring

[Lorak]

**disclaimer**

I'm an idiot.

**************

But how about this for an idea.

Have two major players run a game(duel GM's).

Then have 2 or three players under them.(setup has to be done by GM's)

Each player will control a certain amout of assets in the game.given to them by the GM.

The players then send in writting there moves for thier troops for that turn.

The GM's enter the moves for thier side and send the turn.

The players only get to see thier sides movies. And then send in orders for their men again.

Would be interesting, and maybe some cool what if's. "I see that squad taking some fire, should I use my tank to give them some support? or continue on?"

stuff like that.

Sort of like a mini-CMMC but played on one battle map.

After that battle is done, GM's decide figures, loses, ect, for the nest battle.

Stupid? crazy? might just work?

Lorak

------------------

"someone you trust is one of us"..........the illuminati

*

http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub

Lorak's FTX for CM <--Proud member of the Combat Mission Webring

[argie]

Captain, I have some ideas about it, mostly based in the actual CM Meta Campaign in development. If you like to see if my ideas worth something, mail me to arielglb@fibertel.com.ar

Thanks.

Ariel

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>So what I'm guessing is that you'll give this person a core company or so, and then depending on how he does, or the situation adjust what he has avalible. Then if he does well... gets better equipment,men, promotions ect...

That close?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah, thats the kind of thing I am talking about. I figure with some role-playing, and a whole lot of background detailing it could be cool. My brother is the indended target on this first one. He doesnt have a lot of detailed information on eto ww2 history, so it will be educational for him as well.

So I am going to make a fake gamey unit that goes from Normandy to the heart of Germany. And all you genius historians can stuff it, it will be cool....

[Lorak]

Cool Foobar. Should be fun.

What did you think of my idea? passible? or just another crazy idea from my idiot mind?

Just been giving it some more thought. Basically you would be the CO. You would do the setup and send a picture of the map to your guys. and Say " your in command of platoon B. you'll be assaluting along the left flank, your goal is the small victory location on that farm house"

then cut them loose. later on you could give them new orders like "plans changed! we need you as reenforcement on the center objective. get your men over there now."

Just crazy stuff like that..

I think it might be fun to try.

Lorak

------------------

"someone you trust is one of us"..........the illuminati

*

http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub

Lorak's FTX for CM <--Proud member of the Combat Mission Webring

[Mace]

Foo,

Let us know how it turns out!

Mace

As for Paranoia....nope, sorry, Traveller's the best!

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

I like concept, but if I understand you, the players would not be directly playing CM. They would be playing through the gamemaster?

Lets see if argie has come up with any ideas for the rules and guidelines.

What will probably happen is as soon as CMMC starts, I will become so focused on it that I lose interest in this whole thing....

[Seahawk-vfa201]

What if players share a Large scenario/Operations.

The way I see it is: the GMs set up the forces. Then all COs of one side share the PBEM password. Each CO commands some troops and units. In turn they will receive a saved game with the orders set by previous CO to their respective men. The first CO, group "A" receives the setup with his orders. He plots his orders, and instead of doing a PBEM he SAVES the game. Send the saved game to the 2nd CO. This one opens the game: CM asks if he wants to play solo or as PBEM. Select PBEM and issue his orders. Now instead of closing the gmae (GO) he saves again and sends to the 3rd CO which applies his orders and so on until the last CO who saves and send to the GM. This one review the order phase and issue the GO. The Go will produce the PBEM to be sent to the other GM.

I tried with myself. It seems to be working.

It is tricky but it would work.

[thomasj]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lorak:

**disclaimer**

I'm an idiot.

**************

But how about this for an idea.

Have two major players run a game(duel GM's).

Then have 2 or three players under them.(setup has to be done by GM's)

Each player will control a certain amout of assets in the game.given to them by the GM.

The players then send in writting there moves for thier troops for that turn.

The GM's enter the moves for thier side and send the turn.

The players only get to see thier sides movies. And then send in orders for their men again.

Would be interesting, and maybe some cool what if's. "I see that squad taking some fire, should I use my tank to give them some support? or continue on?"

stuff like that.

Sort of like a mini-CMMC but played on one battle map.

After that battle is done, GM's decide figures, loses, ect, for the nest battle.

Stupid? crazy? might just work?

Lorak

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That would be a great idea! I mean imagine a TCP/IP lan option where many people could play and control small parts of the assets on the board of one side or another. So instead of only two people playing a LAN youy could have multiple people playing as platoon or company commanders.

[Guest grunto]

if you could take his remaining force from a given battle, then build a new force in the game editor around the survivors, it would be interesting.

you could look at the surviving units' states (broken, ready, etc.) and kill stats then raise or lower them in rank in the editor for the next battle.

so record the surviving units from one battle along with their promotions or demotions, then enter them into the editor for the next battle, raising and lowering their individual rankings. then buy replacement units around them and fight the next battle.

that way a player could have a 'personal leader' unit and work their way up through the ranks.

a good trick in squad leader was to start out as an FO and get a lot of kills, then go into frontline combat =laughter=

we used to deck our personal armored leaders out in heavy tanks with artillery radios. =more laughter=

my favorite was the 'schlepper' in cross of iron. it was much rarer in asl. that thing sure didn't need a radio... it was its own artillery support =g=

andy

[Guest grunto]

you could do this also as a pbem campaign without gamemasters. both players could decide the general areas for the maps and then they could haggle over each map design, passing it back and forth between them, then transplant their survivors from one battle or map to the next with promotions and demotions and reinforcements.

interesting idea there capt'

andy

[PawBroon]

I like the idea Lorak.

Wanted to do something like that for my french whatnots who hadn't received their CM.

A grided overview printout and some arrows and briefs over it.

They play like in a CPX, not interfacing with CM.

------------------

Either he's dead or my watch has stopped

[Fred]

Anyone know "Behind Enemy Lines", AFAIK the only commercial WW2 rpg.

Well, I'm gamemaster in an ongoing BEL campaign with a friend who plays a german Wehrmacht Lieutenant and commands a Panzergrenadier company.

For fights on a personal level I first used "Soldiers at War", but it does not work (rediculous LOS problems, etc.).

For company level engagements I used Steel Panthers, but now I will try CM as the battle system for the rpg campaign.

The problem is, we are in France 1940...and no Pz III or Pz II or Char1b..

Fred

[Guest Pillar]

That sounds awesome! Does BEL have a website?

[Fred]

No, it is an old "pen, paper and dice" rpg from the 80s. It's focus is the US Army, so we somewhat changed the character generation rules in order to generate german characters. It works very well. We started the campaign game in 1938 (game time ) and the first battle was a night assault on a polish bridge at the german/polish border (platoon vs. platoon).

At this level of engagement we used the BEL combat rules with miniatures on a tabletop.

Now, with the player as company commander, we use Steel Panthers...maybe I find a way to use CM in the current 1940 setting...as long as it is infantry only (and with the Lynx) it could work.

Fred

------------------

"I got signals, I got readings, in front and behind of us!" - PFC Hudson on LV-426 mission

[Mace]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar:

That sounds awesome! Does BEL have a website?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pillar,

Behind enemy Lines was published by Fasa well over 10 years ago!

I don't think it's still available.

Mace

[Huron]

Seahawk, that's a great idea. With the "Show movement path" toggle off, at least you wouldn't know what your fellow commanders are planning for the next turn.

There could be some people controlling, say, a company each, and another player in charge of the armour, somebody else handling all the artillery and maybe a third person taking care of other support units if it's a large scenario/operation.

It would be fun if the company commanders then had to request tank support, artillery, etc via e-mail, and got no definite answer in respons. They just had to wait and see if the tanks or shells actually appeared as promised by the artillery or tank CO.

I can just picture the poor soul in charge of artillery, when every company commander and what not request a fire mission and some sort of priority has to be made. Or a good hearted tank commander chasing all over the battlefield trying to give a helping hand to everyone...

Would the GM issue the orders about objectives for each group, or maybe there are some discussions betweeen commanders before the battle? Also, there's the question of how much each commander should know of the general picture once the fighting has started. Maybe it's possible to play the battle from the eye perspective of the troops under your command.

Anyway, you'd have to get a group of dedicated players together, because I can see just a single scenario taking a very long time, just as it would be quite some times between your own turns. Ah, but what a de-briefing it would be.

"Ahrg, I told you I'd spotted some Tigers!" A captain "disussing" things with the tank commander, after having spent the major part of the battle trying to rally his troops.

"You tell me, how am I supposed to know you'd already started the assult? We agreed on T+15 minutes..." Exhasperated artillery officer, after a mishap with some friendly fire.

"What are you doing on my hill?" One suprised company commander to another.

Oh, well, now, if only CM would arrive in the mail. Once it does, count me in on this idea.

Huron

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

Wow, seems we have a wealth of good ideas, and with each idea 100 details to work out.... Now I know how the CMMC admins must feel.

[Darwin]

Cover and I have been doing something along the lines of what your doing Foobar. My idea was to start real small just a shot out platoon half green or so but as he does the maps I've started as an elite company of american para's with different support units attaching for the various battles he creates for me. We've played 3 of the battles so far and he has the 4th ready for me now.

We haven't been keeping track of all the details and instead he sits nearby and watches me play against the ai(smirking mostly as I deal with his traps etc) and then makes the next map based from a good feel for the conditions of my troops.

The good thing about playing these against the ai is you can play a game through quickly.

The downside is that the ai cant compete with better players and so has to be stacked or the player must be given unreasonable orders to make it challenging.

I might do a series for him when we're done though but on a very small scale. Keep it small but with greater detail and maybe play them pbem not to destroy him but to have more GM control over what goes on.

[Lorak]

Just a little update,

Seahawk and myself maybe giving this a try in the near future.

I'm really bad with the written word but I'll give you guys the basic overlay (details still need some work)

2 GM's will control the allies and axis side. With 2 or 3 players per side controlling a company and its support units.

I'll give a fake OOB and players for an example.

German Side:

GM: Lorak

players: Tom, Dick and Harry

OOB: 3 rifle-45 companies, 6 halftracks, 2 stugs and an 105 FO

Each player is assigned 1 company and 2 half tracks.

2 stugs and FO controlled by Lorak (since they can't break apart even and are independent assets)

Lorak starts game, Sends e-mail giving each player their objectives, then sends to Tom.

Tom plots his moves, adds request to e-mail, saves game sends to Dick.

Dick plots, adds request, saves game sends to Harry

Harry plots moves, adds request, saves game sends to Lorak.

Lorak looks at request for artillery, tank support, ect.. plots those, creates file and sends to the Other GM.

Turn is sent back, starts all over...

Sounds like a lot, But for the individual player, it wouldn't be anymore than taking on another PBEM game. I think it would be a lot of fun due to the teamwork, ect...

I figure with good turn around time, your looking at 3-4 days a turn. maybe less.

First Battle would be a meeting engagment.

second battle depends on first. Losers become defenders next game, ect...

Thats the idea.

Any futher comments?

Lorak

------------------

"someone you trust is one of us"..........the illuminati

*

http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub

Lorak's FTX for CM <--Proud member of the Combat Mission Webring

[This message has been edited by Lorak (edited 07-28-2000).]

[thomasj]

Maybe I'm being over optimistic, but would there be a way to do this with multiple people on the TCP/IP LAN/WAN game? Iamgine it that way with maybe a VON(Voice Over Network) program open to talk to the other players to carry out roles.

Just a thought, use a VON when playing many other network games on my LAN/WAN. Not to mention people would use email to set the date and time for the game.

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

That would be the ultimate thrill....playing coop via tcp/ip! It may be a pipe dream right this moment, but I remember not too long ago, when CM itself seemd unimaginable.