Operations

[Blow2]

In CMBO and CMBB I have noticed that Ops are a foreign concept to most of the scenario designers and this is now confirmed with the collection released with CM:AK. The battles are fine; the Ops are, almost without exception, criminally bad. The Leros Op falls into the most common problem of Op designing with airborne troops - they scatter them all over, as in the air-drop gone awry. Of course, on Turn 2, the AI levels out the frontline and screws the whole deal. It also wastes Turn One, spent gathering together your scattered forces. Why bother, when you can start the game coherently on Turn 2?

Likewise there are two monster maps in the desert, one unrelievedly flat (the desert isn't flat, it just looks it. Like the Russian steppe, it undulates and it cut with gullies). The other has the protagonists so far apart that the three-battle deal is meaningless - unless you leave the sacrificial troops stuck way out on their own, you don't get to contact for most of the first Battle.

I am also a little disappointed that you have to fudge the Greek campaign and that there is no Grass tile for 1940, nor the ability to use German troops for that year. With that included you could concievably have stretched this game to include France 1940. It wouldn’t have screwed up the game that much - but hopefully the modders will be at work.

I didn't expect wild innovation in this - the dust is a splendid addition and the new tiles are ace, too - so I am not downhearted.

But I am a little shocked at how most of the CM fans out there only seem to know Battles.

[jwxspoon]

So which Operation have you made that gets it right?

jw

[Blow2]

Since I have only just got the game - none. But watch this space. And if I decide on a historical one, it will be - unlike the fantasy that is Beda Fomm Battle, the only one I have played so far. Australians? Matildas? Give me a break! Don't get huffy – I see you are the designer/playtester and I know a lot of work went into this, but I have to ask ... what happened? CMBO and CMBB Ops - and Battles - were much better than this, working, I presume with a lot less easily available info than for the Western Desert and associated campaigns. Overall, the concept and the mechanics of CM:AK are top-rate ... its just a pity that whoever came up with the Ops isn't half as good as most of the modders and scenario designers who were not involved in creating the scenarios for the final game but who will now gleefully start fixing that shortfall.

Maybe, in the future, you should throw it open to the CM fans to come up with the goods for the next one, if there is a next one. At least then we'll have no-one to blame but ourselves.

[Moon]

You have no one to blame but yourself! With the editor that ships with the game you have the exact same tools as the designers who made the battles and ops that shipped with the game to come up with awesome historical engagements.

Endless variations are possible, even of the same historical battle (e.g. I believe that there were at least half a dozen variations of Villers Bocage, if not more, for CMBO), and the fact that there are different tastes is precisely why we provide the editor (that and our belief in shipping product with great replay value).

Martin

[Los]

SOME MINOR LEROS SPOILERS!

Sorry you didn't like the op. In both airborne operations the effect of the scatter is done on purpose. Not every airborne operation starts with fighting right out of the airplane, but in both Leros and Maleme this was a the critical phase of the battle. Had these battles started with the airborne forces already concentrated you would miss out on what was the biggest problem for the commander and one of the most critical phase of the fight. This is in contrast to say an Op centered around Market Garden where most of the drops were not seriously contested. If dealing with the first critical minutes of the invasion and the hassle of scatter is not your cup of tea, stop playing the op imediately and move on. Or better yet edit it.

As far as how the AI calculates OP front lines, well it is what it is. Getting into subsequent turns on both ops would kind of be a spoiler. But in the Leros case you end up with the same problem your counterparts ended up with. Most of them will get no resupply until you start taking ground and connecting the dots. Again pretty much similar to what happended in the real battle. If you had everyone blow their wad in the first battle you are screwed. In both Ops each play through ended up in a white knucle affair, regardless of whether every minute of the battle unfolded historically correct.

As far as Operations design in the combat mission series in general, it's been one of the strong features of the game and generally the ops delivered have been very highly received. It's very difficult to make an operation go the exact way it's historical real battle did. WHat you can do accurately is present the player with a very similar opening situation to what his counterpart faced and then from there off he goes into his own experience.

On the other had Operations are exponentially more hard to design than battles. A critical part of battle design is playing it through a few times, making tweaks and what not for cause and effect to get the AI to perform some reasonable facsimile of your intent in order that the fight flows how you want.

In an Op is very time intensive to test since you have to fight multiple battles and getting the first one right is easy, but to get the second and third right means making changes and then fighting your way through the first one all over again. It can take weeks to get one operation right unless you are a full time op designer without a real job and not working to any type of time schedule. In particular sometimes you want to try an op as either an assault or an attack or whatever and you might run two concurrent tests to try and establish which op type is the most effective for what you want to accomplish.

And always you have to deal with that dreaded front line draw between battles. I remember the first time I played through Leros and then saw the front line trace drawn by the porgram on Battle two. At first I was distraught and looked at changing parameters and whatnot and then started another run through. But I continued to play the original and eventually realized that there was nothing wrong with flow of the fight.

Most of the units land close enough together that they can be consolidated with a turn or two. Some are in deep **** right off the bat. Depending on what youa ccomplish in the first turn you are in good stead for future turns. It's important to consolidate in the first battle. If you do not consider your objectives, your situation at the start of the op or if you expend all your ammo in the first battle you will be screwed later on, a real consideration. Providing you make the right choices in consolidation and what terrain to grab you will have a chance in the second battle. Most units will get no resupply in the second battle due to how the AI draws the front line. This is completely realistic, the Paras had to hold on to Racchi Ridge with no support other than CAS while they fended off fierce attacks by the defenders. That is exactly what happens in the second battle. But the Kustenjager also have to consoldate their hold on the city of Leros, and push the front line trace NW in an attempt to reach the paras, those of which who are not holding Racchi should be pushing SE. Eventually by battle three you should have linked your front line. If you want to get resupplied and sustain yoru force you will figure out a way to make that happen or whither on the vine. Hopefully the FJ bn cdr has husbanded platoons in reserve the whole time to keep a core of units ready for fierce fighting in each battle. Then in the final turns it's the job of the Germans to push south. What starts out looking like a confusing shambles of an op ends up being a coherent fight that more or less follows the general outlines of the battle.

Los

[ December 18, 2003, 07:38 PM: Message edited by: Los ]

[Franko]

I have one coming out pretty soon on Anzio. I hope it changes your mind about OPs.

[SgtMuhammed]

Franko, if it is half as good as "Tank Warning" it will be a classic. Keep me in mind if you need any playtesters.

One thing about these forums is that it makes personal opinion seem somehow official. Seeing something in print has that effect even to totally pointless things. What may be a crap Operation to someone may be a classic to another. Having designed several ops for the previous two I have learned to design them for myself and not worry about what others think. If you like it fine, if not, fine. All I can promise is that I will do my best to make what I consider a good fight, which is all any designer can promise. While there are some that do show little effort other than the desire to see their name on something, for the most part the designers do their best.

We all are constrained by the limitations of the system. There are a lot of changes I would make to the editor but such is life. Not liking a particular op is one thing, declaring that all of them are garbage and implying that there was no real effort to make anything better is insulting and rude.

[rune]

well said sgt goody, well said.

Rune

[Los]

I agree, everything I've designed has been to my tastes and what I want out of an op in CM. With a bunch of people doing that you get a good variety to choose from. I've designed four Ops on the CDs, Villers-Bocage, Carentan, Maleme and Leros. They have one thing in common: they are all very large ops in terms of area size. For me personally I like the freedom to explore true operational maneuver (as it's defined in CM). Some people don't like having to cover so much area, or have hardware issues, in that case there are a number of very nice smaller ops others have done. But if it's not a labor of love first and foremost then it's already set up for failure.

Los

[jwxspoon]

Amen to that! My last operation to be released publicly was B&T's The Beginning of the End. It reflected a trio of battles that I enjoyed playing IMMENSELY. I relesaed it because I hope others enjoy playing it, but if not, c'est la guerre.

jw

[Blow2]

I am not against Ops - just the opposite, Iove 'em and am constantly trying to get others interested in doing them as opposed to Battles, which, to me, have little reason to them (with one or two linked exceptions). I am only disappointed in the Ops provided with CM:AK. I realise they can be tinkered with and I already have. I am in the middle of making one of my own, too. It just annoys me that we have, for a start, some 60 Battles offered and a handful of Ops only and, in my opinion, the Ops are flawed. I realise there is more to CM:AK than the Battles and Ops provided and, even without any it would still be worth the money - but why didn't you issue a limited beta that would have let fans create Ops and Battles for it? I am sure they'd be delighted and we WOULD have no-one to blame but ourselves. Moon, I have had no input on what went into the finished build apart from buying it, so your comments are fatuous. Yes, you have provided an editor for us to create some excellent work on. Pity you couldn’t use it as well as everyone else.

[Kingfish]

Your attitude gurantees one thing - your work will not be appreciated, no matter how much time and effort you put into it. No one likes a whiner, even less one who thinks his work will be far superior in quality.

Tell me, given the fact that you are using the exact same editor that everyone else has, how will your work be better?

[Moon]

Blow2, a limited beta WAS released, and the scenarios and operations on the CD have been made by hand-picked beta testers and scenario designers, many of whom were chosen for their excellent scenario designs for the previous two titles. I wonder why you were not part of that beta team if you're so good at it?

Martin

[Hans]

spoilers for the Sidi Nsir operation

For the Sidi Nsir operation I was challenged by it being a historical battle with (unfortunately for playability) a fairly accurate map and locations of where the units ACTUALLY where.

The bare ass terrain, the defenders weapons mix and the habit of players not liking to start under fire requires you to start far out.

Enjoy

[Blow2]

Interesting - my work won't be appreciated because I am a whiner. There was a hand-picked team who designed the scenarios but I wasn't part of it and you wonder why. That tells me I am not part of the inner circle of Battlefront/CDV/

Combat Mission's design and playtesting clique. What makes my work better than anyone else’s? Probably nothing - it is all relevant, as someone pointed out. One man's Op is another man's poison.

But what is WRONG with you people? These Ops were part of a product you have to pay money for. What other product would you buy and discover that the pleasure was curtailed until you went into the workshop and fixed it? It's fine designing Ops and Battles for amusement, sticking them on a forum and taking whatever flak comes along. That's life and modding. Sticking them on a disk that people have to fork over money for is another thing entirely and, in my opinion, part of this product was badly done. I have every right to criticise – if your favourite group produced an album you thought had some crap tracks on it you wouldn't be slow in voicing your opinions - why is that whining? Maybe if you'd widened the beta circle and stopped slapping each other on the back, I wouldn't have grounds for complaint.

[rune]

Maybe it was widened, and you don't know what you are talking about? In your opinion they suck, and you are a total of one person. You have had cmbo and cmbb for a while, point me at an operation you have done.

Everyone else, look at the credits and see the new names. People are selected by their past work and ability to follow instructions, and be a team player. We work hard, and everyone tests each other's work. Matter of fact, you can find the thread where I even posted what was required to become one of the scenario design team.

The odds of us sending out a beta scenario with all the units, terrains, ability to make scenarios and battles to everyone for free would be zero and none. Why not just give away all out hard work? Sending the full game out would be leaked out in no time, not to mention the technical difficulties.

The guys making scenarios and operations are all known authors. I get 20-25 emails a day, some with small gripes, but mainly with wonderful reviews of the guys work. As I tell the designers ALL THE TIME, there is no one correct way to make a scenario/operation. As many different players there are, there are that many opinions of what is "a perfect scenario/operation". Make stuff you will love to play, and it will come together.

OK, we have seen a whine about the operations. Now, who has played an operation from the CD, and loved it? Let's see the flip side of this.

Oh yeah, one last thing, buying a product does not give you the right to be rude, or make an ass out of yourself. The beta testers/scenario designers only get a copy of the game when they are done. I thank each and everyone of them for what they have to put up with, and the guys know I appreciate their work.

So, who played an operation they loved in CMAK?

Rune

[WWB]

Except you are not providing criticism, you are just whining, much like a child who got an etch-a-sketch instead of a playstation for christmas.

Criticism would go like this:

Played op X. Loved the map. Force balance was an issue because reinforcement Y showed on battle Z, where the other side got theirs 2 battles later. And you dont quite have the right tanks in there. My sources show unit K had PzIV Gs, not Hs.

The folks who made the "circle" criticise, because it makes it better. In fact, we spend more time breaking down each other's work than slapping each other on the back. I am sorry you find the operations flawed. I tested several of them and found them to be largely enjoyable, depending on taste. And, if you dont like what you see, take a weekend or three, get some playtesters and make your own.

WWB

[Znarf]

Designing a battle takes time; designing an op takes much more time. I've designed 13 battles for CMBB (Chernova Station, Red Christmas...) and 1 from CMBO (Les Soers Jumelles), and it has taken A LOT of time.

With fewer choices, you will likely have fewer exceptional pieces of work. I can't opine on the quality of ops - I've only played two - one that came with CMBO, and one I designed. The amount of time it took me to playtest and design the op was not worth the reward (for me, anyway). Like battles, I'm sure there are good ops, average ops, and poor ops.

Looking at the Scenario Depot, it appears that most fans of the game enjoy battles more than ops. Given a limited amount of time to release the product, I imagine that it makes economic sense to design more battles for release than ops.

[rune]

This was the thread where I answered what it takes to get on the design team. Several new faces were added. When time comes again, I may need more, time will tell.

Rune

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=007519#000005

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Blow2:

Moon, I have had no input on what went into the finished build apart from buying it, so your comments are fatuous. Yes, you have provided an editor for us to create some excellent work on. Pity you couldn’t use it as well as everyone else.

Jeez, man. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt until you made that totally uncalled-for statement. All I have to say now is you really picked the right handle.

Go away.

Michael

[86smopuim]

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

Franko, if it is half as good as "Tank Warning" it will be a classic.

0Hahah, I agree. Tank Warning was Awesome.

[Emar]

I agree with many of the sentiments put forth here as well. Operations are very difficult to design and playtest and it takes a lot more effort than a regular battle. Try playtesting through a 6 battle op and then find out that you need to tweak the map, balance or some other aspect in the 4th or 5th battle. When you go back and adjust it you have to playtest through the whole op again to test it and hope you got it right. Whether a particular operation suits your tastes or not its a long process and designers who go through this deserve a good bit of credit.

That is why there are so few ops compared to battles and I agree that most people who put out ops do so through a labor of love.

I designed my own Gebirgsjager pack ops because I had a fascination with the subject matter, the battles portrayed, the challenge of making maps of the difficult terrain, a good library of historical resources on the subject available and because I felt the series could be different from any of the others made for CM. They have received mixed reviews at the depot but if some of the folks who have downloaded them have enjoyed the fruit of my efforts then that is satisfaction enough for me.

Unlike many designers I prefer the challenge and quirks of designing ops and I am currently in the process of designing 5 more Gebirgsjager ops for CMAK. As before they may not be everyones cup of tea but they fill my cup just fine

Eric

[John Osborne]

I'm quoting Rune "The biggest problem with scenario design is no matter what you do, someone will like and someone will hate a scenario".

I would like to give it a shot on making an Op scenario. The question I have is where can I go to ask questions without getting my head twisted off? Is there anybody I can get in contact with? Is there a web page that can answer my questions.

Also I find playing Op scenarios to be fun. I'm playing "Descent on Maleme" because I found this site and got me interest on the battles in Crete http://www.crete-1941.org.uk/

---John

[Kingfish]

Originally posted by John Osborne:

I would like to give it a shot on making an Op scenario. The question I have is where can I go to ask questions without getting my head twisted off? Is there anybody I can get in contact with? Is there a web page that can answer my questions.

Feel free to ask here, or start your own thread. You can also e-mail me directly, I will try to help as best I can. Either way you will not have your head twisted off. Anyone who is willing to contribute to the game in a positive way should get all the support and encouragement he needs.

[Salkin]

Originally posted by Blow2:

In CMBO and CMBB I have noticed that Ops are a foreign concept to most of the scenario designers and this is now confirmed with the collection released with CM:AK. The battles are fine; the Ops are, almost without exception, criminally bad. The Leros Op falls into the most common problem of Op designing with airborne troops - they scatter them all over, as in the air-drop gone awry. Of course, on Turn 2, the AI levels out the frontline and screws the whole deal. It also wastes Turn One, spent gathering together your scattered forces. Why bother, when you can start the game coherently on Turn 2?

Likewise there are two monster maps in the desert, one unrelievedly flat (the desert isn't flat, it just looks it. Like the Russian steppe, it undulates and it cut with gullies). The other has the protagonists so far apart that the three-battle deal is meaningless - unless you leave the sacrificial troops stuck way out on their own, you don't get to contact for most of the first Battle.

I am also a little disappointed that you have to fudge the Greek campaign and that there is no Grass tile for 1940, nor the ability to use German troops for that year. With that included you could concievably have stretched this game to include France 1940. It wouldn’t have screwed up the game that much - but hopefully the modders will be at work.

I didn't expect wild innovation in this - the dust is a splendid addition and the new tiles are ace, too - so I am not downhearted.

But I am a little shocked at how most of the CM fans out there only seem to know Battles.

You are either out to pick a fight or you are just full of yourself .

Saying that all Ops suck is a statement that don't hold water.

Even if you have to pay for CMAK there is no guarantee that every operation will be to your liking. No man in the world has a super formula that makes everyone like his scenario/op.

These guys sacrifice family time and weekends so you can come here and tell them their work suck....this is not proper critisism (see post above).

They put heart and soul in their work.

Beeing on the receiving end of your allmighty posts must be awfull.

In spite of this most people in this board (except me maybe) answer in a respectfull maner, you could learn a few things from these guys.

I have yet to play any of the operations so I can not reply to runes question.

//Salkin