I'm thinking of creating a war.

[Sigrun]

Good evening gentlemen (and any ladies who might be into this stuff);

I've been on these forums for only a couple of days (unless my taken name indicates I registered previously but forgot), but I've been playing the CM series on and off for a good few years. And at least a couple of the members here (who's names I recognize from other forums) know me of old. They will also remember the online war I ran for just over a year for IL2 (mentioned only to clarify that I'm not a complete noob to this online warfare jazz ).

So, that's the intro out of the way...now down to the business.

I've been taking a good long look at the scenario editor (with a view to using it for an organized online war), and it looks pretty damn good. But I have a question (and maybe more later):

Is it possible to open a saved mission file outside of the game? Even better, has anyone coded a parser (and is prepared to share it)?

If anyone is interested in considering yet another organized war, and would like details, ask away...it'll at least give me an indication of general enthusiasm.

[76mm]

Dear Sigrun:

Is it possible to open a saved mission file outside of the game? Even better, has anyone coded a parser (and is prepared to share it)?

I'm pretty sure that the answers are "No" and "No". Nonetheless there are a couple of other on-going CMBB wars, including Onion Wars and CMMC (search forum).

I also created an application called CAMPAIGN TRACKER which allows you to track all unit info, etc., but you've got to enter it manually, which is a huge drag. I can't figure out how to post a thread-specific link for my post describing CAMPAIGN TRACKER, but you'll find it with a forum search.

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by 76mm:

Dear Sigrun:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Is it possible to open a saved mission file outside of the game? Even better, has anyone coded a parser (and is prepared to share it)?

I'm pretty sure that the answers are "No" and "No". Nonetheless there are a couple of other on-going CMBB wars, including Onion Wars and CMMC (search forum).

I also created an application called CAMPAIGN TRACKER which allows you to track all unit info, etc., but you've got to enter it manually, which is a huge drag. I can't figure out how to post a thread-specific link for my post describing CAMPAIGN TRACKER, but you'll find it with a forum search. </font>

[76mm]

The parser would be required to establish exact losses at the end of battle, to determine what men & materiel would be carried over, and if the percentage of losses per unit allowed or prevented increased experience.

CMC does all of that, and more, once it comes out.

CAMPAIGN TRACKER also does the tasks you describe, with the, er, slight drawback that before and after each battle you've got to enter unit data to/from CMBB. It also allows for two sides, although it would be tough to have lots of different players enter data into the same master database.

Anyway, if you proceed I've got several dozen 3 km x 3 km maps you're welcome to make use of.

In any event, as you're coming to realize, what you're proposing is rather a chore.

[V]

Originally posted by Sigrun:

So maybe it'll be sensible to wait for CMC,

And wait, and wait, and wait, ad infinitum.

[Corvidae]

ok,

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by 76mm:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> The parser would be required to establish exact losses at the end of battle, to determine what men & materiel would be carried over, and if the percentage of losses per unit allowed or prevented increased experience.

CMC does all of that, and more, once it comes out.

CAMPAIGN TRACKER also does the tasks you describe, with the, er, slight drawback that before and after each battle you've got to enter unit data to/from CMBB. It also allows for two sides, although it would be tough to have lots of different players enter data into the same master database.

Anyway, if you proceed I've got several dozen 3 km x 3 km maps you're welcome to make use of.

In any event, as you're coming to realize, what you're proposing is rather a chore. </font>

[76mm]

You might want to look at Onion Wars and CMMC before spending too much more time on this--their approaches are generally similar (although from what I can tell CMMC seems more formalized). It's possible that most of the players that would be interested in this kind of thing are already involved in them.

And I wouldn't plan on using randomized maps unless to play on something that looks like it came out of a blender--using hand-made maps adds a lot to the battles (ie, no swamps on hilltops, etc.), although they can be pretty time-consuming to create.

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by 76mm:

You might want to look at Onion Wars and CMMC before spending too much more time on this--their approaches are generally similar (although from what I can tell CMMC seems more formalized). It's possible that most of the players that would be interested in this kind of thing are already involved in them.

And I wouldn't plan on using randomized maps unless to play on something that looks like it came out of a blender--using hand-made maps adds a lot to the battles (ie, no swamps on hilltops, etc.), although they can be pretty time-consuming to create.

Thanks 76, I'll check out both those wars.

Me and my sparring partner (brother) have used countless random maps, and never had a problem with them. Hand-making maps is simply not possible for a project like this, especially since I did pretty much the same for my IL2 war (new maps every day, though many were simple alterations of existing ones...still a one-year trauma I have yet to forget ).

[Sigrun]

Well, I've had a look at the two wars you mentioned...Onion Wars, looks like a light-hearted fun-fest, not really in the same ballpark as a serious affair.

CMMC...aye carumba! Now that is one seriously complex gig, although it models a very small ToOps.

It looks like there is a massive hole waiting to be filled in between the two, as they appear to occupy the opposite extremes of what is possible (unless one imagines CMMC handling the entire eastern front :eek: ).

I guess I'll employ the old tried & trusted method of 'Build it and see who comes'.

Thanks for your input 76.

[JT Fox]

May I suggest you select a real German division and plot it’s movements and actions thought the war.

Each major/large historical engagement could then be broken down into a series Battalion/Company CMBB games.

Avalon Hill used a similar process for their Patton’s Best game. After the first few battles it soon became clear that the aim was not to win the war but survive it.

Cheers JT Fox

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by JT Fox:

May I suggest you select a real German division and plot it’s movements and actions thought the war.

Each major/large historical engagement could then be broken down into a series Battalion/Company CMBB games.

Avalon Hill used a similar process for their Patton’s Best game. After the first few battles it soon became clear that the aim was not to win the war but survive it.

Cheers JT Fox

I've considered the various 'scales' of format, and covering the entire front with a KISS system offers the best bang-for-buck in terms of role-playing and individual player achievement imo. Not only can players be given bigger/smaller commands, based upon their performance, they can also be transferred to/out of elite divisions (something not possible with a single-div format).

Cheers JT.

[para]

I like the sound of this, but don't i will be able to do the calculations bit

[Bonxa]

That's the first one calling CMMC's operational area small!

I would not compare the projects tough. In CMMC the historical roleplaying and the operational battle is a least as important as the CMBB battles.

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by Bonxa:

That's the first one calling CMMC's operational area small!

I would not compare the projects tough. In CMMC the historical roleplaying and the operational battle is a least as important as the CMBB battles.

There will be little to compare. CMMC looks like a full-on simulation of the entire staffing from top to toe of divisional combat. I can see the appeal if you like an extreme extra dimension beyond the actual in-game combat.

I'm used to a faster pace and a broader scope, usually frustrated by the limitations of whatever game I'm trying to use. I've had to change mental gears to get my head around using this type opf game for an online war, but it's actually proving to be more suited than anything I've used (or tried to use) before.

Right now I'm wading through drudgery (made a couple of maps, now compiling sector data, both taking liberally from HoI2 :cool: ).

[Hensworth]

Originally posted by Sigrun:

Well, I've had a look at the two wars you mentioned...Onion Wars, looks like a light-hearted fun-fest, not really in the same ballpark as a serious affair.

CMMC...aye carumba! Now that is one seriously complex gig, although it models a very small ToOps.

It looks like there is a massive hole waiting to be filled in between the two, as they appear to occupy the opposite extremes of what is possible (unless one imagines CMMC handling the entire eastern front :eek: ).

I guess I'll employ the old tried & trusted method of 'Build it and see who comes'.

Thanks for your input 76.

The banter you find in the public part of the Onion Wars forum is not representative of the way the game is played. That's just where the two teams go for smack talk and general ribaldry.

There is a pretty serious game underneath, they're into their 17th turn with every turn representing one month of war.

The learning curve for new players who want to get into operational command is pretty steep, but the fun thing is you tend to learn from your teammates rather than having to study a hefty rulebook.

Although the nations in Onion Wars are fictional, they have taken on a real identity over the years. Players tend to identify strongly with their team and there is a fierce rivalry that gives a nice edge to the battles.

I've been involved with it for a couple of years both as a player and a GM and I'd say it's the most fun thing I've ever done with CM.

[ August 09, 2006, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: Sgt_Kelly ]

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by Sgt_Kelly:

I've been involved with it for a couple of years both as a player and a GM and I'd say it's the most fun thing I've ever done with CM.

I'm sure it's a load of fun Kelly, it's just that I wouldn't be able to bring myself to scoot around in an Onion Tiger.

[Sigrun]

Update:

I have a new domain-name and hosting deal on order, and I've been sweating my nuts off over this bloody map (argh! ). This is a half-size image, it looks a lot clearer full-scale.

The format is shaping up nicely too.

[tankibanki]

That looks great. I'm looking forward to it.

[bitchen frizzy]

Ooh, that's a cool map.

I'm interested.

[painfbat]

When do we start??

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by painfbat:

When do we start??

As soon as everything is up on the site and we have enough players for critical mass.

[JT Fox]

Add my 16 stone towards the critical mass.

[para]

Will this be only for those clever enough to do the math?:-(

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by para:

Will this be only for those clever enough to do the math?:-(

I know people don't like out-of-game chores, but usually there's no avoiding at least some.

Without access to the files (which means no way to parse them) there is no alternative to players having to manually maintain certain data. In this case that means totting-up losses after a battle and submitting a report to the superior officer, who will forward them to me (cross-referenced & collated data keeps everyone on their toes. And honest. ).

However, what I originally thought was going to be a royal pain in the arse has become a breeze, namely dealing with infantry losses. I envisaged each player having to track each soldier by type, association, weapon etc etc etc. "That'll go down a treat" I thought. There followed a "Duh!" moment, at which point I realised it would be simplicity itself to simply levy a point penalty for each loss, regardless of type etc.

So, the "math" will be nothing harder than writing a list of number of troops and specific vehicles and other hardware lost after a battle and sending it to your boss. And this data is readily available on the screen at the end of each battle.

So:

Soldiers lost: 132

Panther A lost: 6

37mm PAK lost: 2

Trucks lost: 11

All of those have a specific point value, but to keep things simple the soldiers' will be abstracted...that means you won't have to scour through the list, specifically ID'ing each soldier by type etc and writing that down.

How that ties-in? A brief briefing then...( ):

I have used the data concerning each side's resources directly from the game HoI2, as it's as good a base to extrapolate from as any. Those values are represented directly on the map as two figures, an IR number (Industrial Resource) and a CV number (City Value).

The IR numbers generate an income of points per month. The CV generate a 'prize' point value upon capture.

The leader/s of each side will take their total points each month and allocate them to their combat officers as they see fit, maybe with detailed or general instructions on how to 'spend' them. The combat officers will then purchase their units from in the game and submit that roster back to the boss, for his records.

Then they fight and stuff gets mashed up. A list of the mashed-up stuff is submitted to the boss and the point's value (loss of) is duly recorded.

So, the next battle comes around and Officer-A wants to replace the stuff he lost in the last battle, which he may or may not be able to do depending on how many, if any, points he's been allocated back by the boss from the boss' pool.

The points pool each leader will have will be determined by the total number of IR sectors owned (own side ones and those captured by advancing on the map, plus any captured city bonuses).

Obviously there's some fine-tuning to be done, followed possibly by more after battle commences, though I'll do my best to try and get the numbers spot-on from the outset.

Don't fear the math.