Linked Scenarios and Opeations: CAMPAIGNS

[Rarg]

I think CM(CM2) engine could accept a branch tree linked scenarios/operations design to create a truly CAMPAIGN mode.

[Hamstersss]

A campaign mode for CM would have to be more engrossing than that and the scale would have to be accurate. Perhaps you could be placed in charge of a division or regiment and then are faced with the task of assigning arty and advancing toward strategic objectives while CM determines the type of resistance you run into where you decide which battle(s) you want to directly control. For PBEM, players alternate between picking the battle for the PBEM battle.

This way you can be presented with an operational map, showing where your forces have come into conflict, with a rough idea of the forces at play, and you can assign reinforcements to any battles (If you held any in reserve) and then enter into the battle. The actual conflict marker would tell you the CM details of the battle (Length, terrain type, etc.) and any reinforcements you assign could show up later.

Once we get this together, we could link them for the gold release of CMMC... Or maybe I'm going too far.

[argie]

Elijah, exactly what you said is in which I was thinking as a learning tool (and a lot of fun) for CMMC. Not embedded in the game, but as a kind of mini CMMC, in which the new people learns procedures and rules for CMMC, and plays quick and fun games with a more limited scope...

Ariel

[Henri]

It might not be as difficult as it first looks, if the maps were generated randomly. The SITUATIONS would vary and would depend on what happened in one's previous battle, but the terrain could only roughly correspond to the historical one -so what? On each day a number of battles would take place and the player would choose where he wants to fight and the otehr battles would be fought automatically.

Here's another idea for multiple player games: an operation would be planned with a game on a larger scale, say West Front; then each player would be given command of a bunch of units (say a couple of infantry companies and/or one or two tank squads and so on), then all the players would fight their local battles in CM on randomly-generated maps roughly corresponding to the West Front terrain, and the head honcho would play the units for which they are no players and arbitrate the results. This could allow for Division-size battles, the only unrealistic part being the inability of players to communicate with each other.

Since the randomly-generated maps have no rivers, someone would have to create them when they are required (or copy them from an existing scenario).

Henri

[Rattus]

Henri,

Why are are you always one post ahead (stupid question!)

What do you mean viz players unable to communicate - that the players in command of adjact companies/bttns can't communicate with each other during the same time frame of operations ('cos the players are in different TZ but are nominally playing in a related action)? If the players forces are essentially indept then this is no prob. THer would hace to be some catch up betwen the battles but I think this could be built in. I am sure then e-mail would do instead of that crappy old valve set.

This sort of campaign op is what would really put the icing on the cake for me. 99% (well 100% actually but don't tell BTS!) I can live with & thoroughly enjoy but the lack of a really good variable campaign sytm is a sad omission.