Scenarios for tactics only?

[medlinke]

I have some ideas for scenarios that present, not historical simulation of actual battles, or hypothetical conflicts, but rather tactical puzzles to solve through Combat Mission.

I want to know what things you think would be important to include in these scenarios if they were outside the realm of "real" historical battles.

Things like:

Keeping the force composition realistic (Obviously I want to do this)

etc.

So, sound off and let me know what you think! I'd also like 3-5 playtesters for this, so e-mail me if you're interested, I'll notify the 5 selected people tonight by 6pm!

Keith

[Terence]

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

I have some ideas for scenarios that present, not historical simulation of actual battles, or hypothetical conflicts, but rather tactical puzzles to solve through Combat Mission.

I want to know what things you think would be important to include in these scenarios if they were outside the realm of "real" historical battles.

Things like:

Keeping the force composition realistic (Obviously I want to do this)

etc.

So, sound off and let me know what you think! I'd also like 3-5 playtesters for this, so e-mail me if you're interested, I'll notify the 5 selected people tonight by 6pm!

Keith<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I designed a scenario like this, just for fun, and even described it as a tactical puzzle in the briefing.

Its a hypothetical battle in which a fairly strong American force (tanks, artillery, infantry) has to take on a layered German defense (at guns, a couple AFVs, pillboxes) inside a canyon with a narrow mouth.

It's on Manx' s site in the Scenarios section and is called "Canyon of Doom"

Its designed to get the player to think hard about how to tackle a layered defense. Brute force up the middle is not the way to do it. A plan is necessary.

The Germans have an excellent defensive position and so I think the US would probably have decided to starve them out, all other things being equal.

So, A) I'd be happy if you wanted to include my scenario in your package for fun.

and having some curiosity about this topic in general, I'd be happy to playtest.

finally, C) if anyone wants it, ill email it to them or get it off Manx's excellent site:

www.combat-missions.net.

[BloodyBucket]

Isn't there a German Vs. Brits scenario that takes place at a German infantry school included in the CD?

[JasonC]

It is a good idea. Other things to be aware of for such "puzzle-lesson" scenarios are -

1. Keep them small. Brigade command through combat mission is not a tactical puzzle. Stay under 1500 points for the attacking side. One company and attachments or less.

2. Keep them short. People will be very interested in challenges they can play through in an hour or three, less so in major time commitments. 30 turns is an absolute ceiling, and 15 turns to 25 turns will generally work better. It is more time than you think. A side effect is choosing the wrong way to solve a puzzle will have consequences in that period.

3. Keep them simple. The VCs should turn on accomplishing one or two things. Get to here, exit those, stop the enemy from either, destroy whats in front of you, etc.

4. Despite all the above, flavor them, and not vanilla. There should be some one thing about the situation that is unusual. An enemy force type, a tactical terrain feature, what one has to work with, the nature of the mission. Not "blah".

5. Don't write a script. Let the players command their forces and find their own way of accomplishing the mission. Meaning, avoid a situation in which there is only -one- right answer, or where the outcome turns on a "door number two" 3-card monty choice (of direction, point of attack, etc).

I hope this helps, and I encourage the effort. More such scenarios would be great.

[CombinedArms]

I guess we generally think of tactical problems as being for the attacker, but I wouldn't want you to rule out posing some for the defender.

Possible problems for the attacker:

1) Pillboxes with AT guns are a tough nut to crack for Allies. Attacking a pair of mutually supporting AT pillboxes with interlocking fire--supported by dug in infantry-- would pose interesting problems for a combined arms attacking force. (JasonC--along with good advice above-- had some good things to say about these tactics on a recent thread.)

2) Attacking AT guns/infantry hidden in forest with a combined infantry / tank force--little or no artillery.

3) Attacking MG pillboxes + infantry with a pure infantry force (maybe limited arty).

Defending:

1) Defending a city with just infantry and zooks/shrecks and maybe mines against a tank/infantry force.

2) Defending with AT guns (no tanks) + infantry against a strong tank/infantry force.

3) Defending with a mobile infantry force (lots of HTs + zooks/shrecks but no tanks/ATs) against a larger attacking foot soldier force (no HTs) with a couple of tanks. Can your greater mobility compensate for attacker's greater strength and armored firepower.

Just some thoughts. I might be willing to fool around with what you come up with.