A Thousand Ways To Die - Random CMAK Battle

[Znarf]

I've posted a new scenario at the Scenario Depot - "A Thousand Ways to Die." This is a HUGE, but manageable, battle. I've playtested it a number of times, and each battle ends up being a bit different from the previous. This is due to a totally random reinforcement OOB. If you are into lengthy and huge battles, this may be one for you. Post some reviews if you want to opine of the battle, and if the feedback is positive, I'll possibly design another battle like this one. (I say "possibly" because playtesting a totally random reinforcement scenario takes a LONG time).

- POSSIBLE SPOILERS FOLLOW -

Both sides starts out with just four scout vehicles; the remaining forces arrive at highly variable times,i.e., 3-4% chance per turn for U.S. forces, and a 5% chance per turn for Axis AI forces. The total points are 11,500 for Allied, and 15,163 for Axis AI. Accordingly, the German AI usually has a stronger force on the board initially, and receives reinforcements in a more timely manner.

I haven't seen a scenario that is this large and so dependent on random reinforcments (but see Small Battles, Encounter Norway 1940, by "Hans" at the Scenario Depot for an excellent example of what random reinforcments can do for small OOBs) and I enjoyed playtesting this one immensely. Here are some examples of the unexpected carnage:

[Brent Pollock]

Looks good, I'll try to give some feedback at the SD by the end of the weekend. I tried this on a much more limited scale with my CMBB offering "WBRP - Company Town", which can be found at The Proving Grounds (cf. the CMBB and Scenario Talk forums).

[ July 08, 2004, 12:00 AM: Message edited by: Brent Pollock ]

[Michael Dorosh]

I posted a small scenario with lots of random reinforcements for CMAK - I believe it was called CAT AND MOUSE. It is indeed a neat concept; I hope CMX2 gives us even more flexibility as far as that is concerned. Ie - you get a 5% chance of group A arriving and 5% of group B. That is at present. I would love to see us able to customize further

ie

If group A arrives, group B never arrives

If group A arrives, chances of group B arriving drops to 1% per turn for 5 turns, then to 0%

etc.

[Seanachai]

Eh, Dorosh, ye cheap hoor, I can't imagine you won't be at the Winnipeg Folk Fest this weekend. Leave me a note as to where we're to meet, you ass. I mean, I could just pop by the beer tent at any given moment in time with expectations of finding you, but I'd prefer not to miss too much music trying to track you down. There's usually a bulletin board just before you hit the food tents...

[_Axe_]

Originally posted by Seanachai:

Eh, Dorosh, ye cheap hoor, I can't imagine you won't be at the Winnipeg Folk Fest this weekend. Leave me a note as to where we're to meet, you ass. I mean, I could just pop by the beer tent at any given moment in time with expectations of finding you, but I'd prefer not to miss too much music trying to track you down. There's usually a bulletin board just before you hit the food tents...

Your knowledge of Canadian geography ranks right up there with your CM turn-sending abilities I see.

And, for what it's worth, good show with that whole drunken COPS-esque episode.

[Brent Pollock]

Oh come now, Michael, it's not all THAT far from Calgary to The 'Peg...and the WFF is worth the trip.

Yes, exclusionary reinforcement protocols would be good...one of the reasons I've yet to sell off my ASL kit.

e.g

"SSR2: On turn 3, the Russians make a dr and receive the resulting reinforcement group (see OB)."

We also can't do a guaranteed arrival but in in mixed order over a few turns, like we could with Morgan's Stand.

[Znarf]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

....I hope CMX2 gives us even more flexibility as far as that is concerned. Ie - you get a 5% chance of group A arriving and 5% of group B. That is at present. I would love to see us able to customize further

ie

If group A arrives, group B never arrives

If group A arrives, chances of group B arriving drops to 1% per turn for 5 turns, then to 0%

etc.

I also had a similar post a while back about this. I believe it was directed to shifiting OOB's, depending on whether the palyer was human or AI - for example, the AI might receive an extra tank platoon, while the human player would not. This would eliminate multiple versions of the same scenario - e.g., Battle X, AI version."

What comes to mind is an Event Engine, much like you had in the Operational Art of War Series. Seems like the talented programmers at Battlefront could incorporate something like this if they want to really expand the capability of the scenario design engine. Given that the longevity of the CMxx series is due in large part to the avid fans who design scenarios for free, it seems like it would make economic sense to empower the fan base even further. The more dynamic the scenarios, the more popular the game.

[mike_the_wino]

What's a fair play balance for PBEM with this scenario? Is +25% to Allies fair enough.

[Watson & Crick]

Either that or -25% for the Axis.

[Watson & Crick]

Maggot :mad:

[Znarf]

Originally posted by mike_the_wino:

What's a fair play balance for PBEM with this scenario? Is +25% to Allies fair enough.

Good question... I didn't playtest for two player, but I did include a German briefing if two players wanted to give it a shot (see briefing intro). Educated guess follows after

POSSIBLE SPOILER WARNING

I'd start with +25% for Allies.

Allies have 11,500 pts and the Axis have 15,163. Axis also recieve their replacements in a more timely manner (5% chance of appearing) and more quickly (all axis reinforcements are available by turn 50 (except for a ceasfire prevention sniper at turn 95), while the Allies' last reinforcement is available at turn 56). Axis also has advantange in that they are closer to the objectives and can quickly set up a defensive position. IF the allied is the more experience player, then 11500 * 1.25 = 14375. I'd start there, but I'd expect it would be a tough battle for the Allied player. Let me know how it goes if you do.

[mike_the_wino]

Originally posted by Watson & Crick:

Either that or -25% for the Axis.

It's ok to be as dumb as the day is long, no need to go into overtime, slappy.

BTW, there is no -25% Axis.

[Brent Pollock]

Possible spilers...although I don't know if that's possible given the low reinforcement probabilities....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

I'm up to turn 28 or so.

My 4 x ACs managed to ping a couple PSWs...and fannywhacked a StuG IV, but only managed what looks to be a crew casualty...later the StuG got its revenge.

Things were getting way to hairy, so I pulled the three survivours back to wait for help...

Turn 17 gave me:

5 x M4A3(75)w

1 x M16 MGMC

3 x M8 Greyhound

On turn 28, I managed to lose two of them to a PSK team. A few turns later, the StuG shows up while all three Shermans are on Area Target: scratch one Sherman. Luckily , the HQ tank puts one through the side at the 59" mark.

Meanwhile, the German ACs are getting hammerred by a combination of Shermans, quad 50 cal and, most impressively, the right flank Greyhound, which is a killing machine, spewing AP, HE and canister.

It's being backed up by my first infantry force: an armoured mech platoon, that showed up on Turn 24 and includes the halftracks, 2 x MMG, 1 x BAZ & 1 x 60 MTR.

That's where I'm at for the moment. Try for more today, but I take over as Orchestra Treasurer today, so there's oodles of new duties to learn and eat into CM time.

[Znarf]

Originally posted by Brent Pollock:

**SNIP**

That's where I'm at for the moment. Try for more today, but I take over as Orchestra Treasurer today, so there's oodles of new duties to learn and eat into CM time.

Thanks for the update. I'm interested in how the battle turns out. Those darn 'schreck teams can be the death of you - here are the results from my last playtest:

Good Luck!

[GreenAsJade]

I'd love to see a version of this for PBEM.

I took a look and concluded that with the flags so close to the German side, the Allies would be in big trouble unless they were really boosted. But giving +50% is too unpredictable ... who knows what the effect would be!

Can we have one with the flags in the middle, please please?

(or with forces composed for attack/defense balance).

[MikeyD]

I recall seeing a good deal more 'randomness' designed into CMBO scenarios than is currently the case with CMBB and CMAK. That may be a false observation though, since those old CMBO scenarios got played and replayed until we memorized every dip in the ground! How many people have played a CMAK scenario fifteen times over like they did with CMBO so they can discern the 'random' elements designed into it? Not to say CMAK's less fun than CMBO, it's just that we've got more new stuff turning up a Scenario Depot and don't need to rehash the CD scenarios quite so much.

[Carl Puppchen]

I think this is great and am trying to make a more even version for pbem. I think I will move the axis reinforcement to 3% and the allied reinforcement to 5%. I expanded the allied setup area, too. How do you move the flags so that they are in the middle?

[cg84]

I've been playing this one over the last few days against the AI and once in futility against a human opponent. We were discussing way to improve it for PBEM play and one thing we thought would real work would be to extend the map on the axis side 500-900 more meters. Also either eliminate the side reinforcements or give one to the allies. I think the Allies would need a few more M10s(or infantry..never enough infantry) to really level the playing field.

I really like the premise behind the scenario, recce the objective, picket it and maneuver your follow on forces to the best possible spots to either serve as reinforcements, ambushes or simply to capture a unmanned town.

Even if you don't make it into a PBEM type scenario, well done on the Vs the AI version.

[Carl Puppchen]

I apologize for sounding like such a nubee but even though I have played this game forever I haven't done much scenario design. I am changing the reinforcement sequence for pbem and will throw more stuff in for the allies at the reinforcement points so that the point totals match better. Am also making the allied reinforcement area bigger - can't put on side reinforcements for allies without moving them, will try to figure that out, too. But I still can't figure out how to move the flag to a better spot in the middle Can one of the experts help me? I even read the manual

[Znarf]

Originally posted by Carl Puppchen:

*SNIP*

...I am changing the reinforcement sequence for pbem and will throw more stuff in for the allies at the reinforcement points so that the point totals match better. Am also making the allied reinforcement area bigger...*SNIP*. But I still can't figure out how to move the flag to a better spot in the middle Can one of the experts help me? I even read the manual

As the author of the original scenario, I ask that you kindly change the title of your final product and note the original scenario in credit.... After all the playtesting and map design, I'm kind of partial to it - but I've no problem in others revising a scenario I designed and re-releasing. Other than that small request, good luck.

Okay, on to your question of flag placement and other design considerations - there really is no way to find the best place to put a flag (or set of flags) aside from playtesting. Sure, you can start out with logical placements, e.g., if you want the AI to march forward, lay out the flags like bread crumbs.

But you really need to playtest and playtest and playtest. The placement of a flag can tip the balance of a game - but unfortunately there is no sure-fire way of determining adequate placement except by playtesting. And as I stated in an earlier post, it takes a lot of time for a scenario of this length and randomeness.

More specifics after a

:confused:

:eek:

SPOILER WARNING!

:eek:

:confused:

As for PBEM, I have not designed scenarios specifically for PBEM/2 player. Nevertheless, I think this map and reinforcement entry would require a lot of revisions for a PBEM/2player version. Here's why:

First, the map needs to be lengthened to distance the German player from the towns. Sounds simple, but now look closely at the allied approach and you notice some lethal fields of fire and alternating cover that would need to be repeated on the newly designed north approach to the towns for the Germans. It wouldn't be a fair fight for the Allied player if the Germans could simply approach the towns under the cover of forests and trees. Conversely, it wouldn't be a fair fight for the Germans if they have to march 500 yards across a shooting gallery.

(BTW, the map was derived from a "random map" that I modified for the scenario - i.e., added hills, opening fields of fire, etc.).

Second, you may want to widen the map if you want to maintain the side entry reinforcements - remember that I designed this with the AI in mind - the plopping down of a platoon of AI controlled tanks near a town held by Human controlled infantry may not necessarily spell disaster for the human player. However, if a human player controlled the tanks, the tank platoon could easily level every building from a standoff position and rake down the fleeing infantry. To be fair, then, the map should be wider so the human can palce a picket/LP outside of the town in order to have fair warning of approaching armor.

Finally, this is a HUGE scenario - 26,000 points, and if you up the Allied side, you will be pushing 31,000 points. I've never played a two-player/pbem this large. Playing against the AI in the final playtest took a weekend, and I imagine that this scenario as PBEM would take a lot longer. But if players have the patience and time, then that shouldn't be a problem.

One last thing- I would think you should redistribute the large and small flags so the the villages are of equal value, or the two northern villages total 4000 pts and the two southern villages total 4000 pts.

[Brent Pollock]

The point total isn't a problem the way I play....reinforcements are more like coal for the furnace than cherished jewels to be coddled at all cost

[Carl Puppchen]

I read a bunch of posts and spent a bunch of time figuring it out and will work up a totally different scenario for PBEM that I will post later after I playtest it with friends (and fix the problems). I am indebted to the scenario designer for bringing back the idea of random reinforcements. Great idea!

[tooz]

SPOILER******************************************

This

scenario

is

"as

advertised",

a

real

involved

"in-

your-

face"

fight!

Now for the feedback...

I am up to Turn 72, Allied Player. What makes this a nail biter is all of those big cats (more Tigers and Panthers in this battle than in most Kursk battles--and ops!). Fortunately for me (unfortunately for the game itself) the AI is doing its usual "scattering cockroaches when the light turns on" (tanks going everywhere without apparant purpose) armored advance, allowing for a few flank shots. My initial M4s succeeded in whacking those five MkIVs that attack along the upper right side allowing me to take that village early--I am still in control now, Turn 72. When the Tigers and Panthers appear my Shermans disappear in a sheet of flame very quickly. What became frustrating was losing all but one of my M4s in the early reinforcement groups, then not getting additional tank reinforcements until Turn 61! That small town of the lower left (I'll write down all of the names before I post again--I cannot do screen shots, try as I may, I can NEVER "bring up the console" during play. :confused: :confused: )was quickly seized by my troops, who kicked the Kraut infantry butt,were subsequently forced out by the big cats. The survivors vacated to the woods to the lower left, hid, then retook the town when the big cats moved on. One Panther was K/Oed by an Engineer demo charge, one Tiger K/Oed by three bazookas firing on it from different angles--rear lower hull shot did the trick, and another Tiger was burnt by a FT team. Cool. For almost 30 turns this was "men against tanks". I still held on to my villages on the right flank. After finally receiving my 76 mm Sherman reinforcement groups I "baited" the AI tanks to move after some M4s, and expose their sides and rears to the other bushwacking Shermans. I lost some armor of my own (natch) in this process, but my strength in numbers (which is historically accurate)are starting to win the day. Now, the right side of the map is completely mine, and now begins the Cat hunt and infantry mop up.

The US infantry whacked the German infantry and this is how and why I know I will prevail. The battlefield resembles the screenshots posted above. As mentioned, I cannot send screen shots but have have saved games after different turns if someone wants to follow my progress.

Yep, a lot of fun--just as adverised. Once a PBEM version becomes available, I am more than willing to give it a playtest. So, if any of you want to try this as a PBEM, send me an email (found in my profile). This PBEM will probably not end until Christmas! Ok by me.

Once this game ends I will repost with the final tallies and provide additional commentary. Then, MAYBE review this battle at the Depot. Maybe.

Exciting, frustrating, difficult, and thoroughly entertaining! Good job! Now for the PBEM version!

[Mattias]

After 99 turns it was over, and yes, a whole lot of fun it was!

Spoiler

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

I managed to secure VP area "small left" and "small right" fairly quickly and held them with infantry and light armour. In retrospect I had a bit of luck with my infantry reinforcements and a bit of bad luck with my armour. I held against the early infantry attacks and my greyhounds and .50 touting vehicles held his SPG's and Pz IV's at bay. When the big cats arrived though I was forcefully evicted from VP area "small right" and all forays towards the big VP areas stopped. An engineer platoon claimed three Panthers on the wooded hill top in the centre but was subsequently ran over by inf. At the height of the German dominance, around turn 65, I was clinging on with my nails to "small left", the Sherman 105mm + 1 76mm group just saving the day against a Tiger platoon. To make a long story short, the eventual arrival of the M4/76mm platoons (first one on turn 65 something) spelled doom for the Germans as the AI's skill simply isn't enough to stop a human player, with the tools to get the job done. The Panthers were quickly cut down, the Tigers where tougher but succumbed in the end, one of them still functional at the final whistle. I held all VP areas, "big right" only with armour though.

As advertised it stayed manageable throughout the game as incoming units to a certain extent was balanced out by units that were lost.

Good fun, and I would love to play more scenarios based on the same concept. They will not be historical but they have a nice dynamic that gives the AI something of a chance to offer a fight.

M.

[Joachim]

First, I like the idea of random reinforcements. I even had one try myself.

I tried to balance the scenario. Thinking about it I came to the conclusion that random reinforcements (below 30% probability) need sound statistics to be somewhat balanced.

The trouble is that to achieve balancing, the scenario needs an equal amount of forces on both sides. Tipping the odds in player one's favor will increase losses for the player 2 during a small amount of time. If from then on all is equal, player 1 will have the advantage until the end (considering both players to be equally skilled). To counter this, player 2 would need much more luck.

A small example:

20 plts of Mark IVs vs 20 plt of Shermans (considering them to be equal tanks). Reinforcements due every 4th turn with prob 10%. Starting with 1 plt on board.

No losses till turn 6. A 2nd plt of MarkIVs appears in turn 6. No other reinforcements till turn 14.

In turn 12 the forces meet.

The German player has numbers on his side and will quickly dispatch the 3 of the 5 Shermans, losing just 1.

No German reinforcements till turn 20, but 5 Shermans appear in turn 17. 9-6. Still odds for the Germans which might result in 2:1 or even more lopsided losses. Even if the US gets one reinforcement much earlier, the loss ratio still favors the Germans. The US needs t reinfocements more than the Germans to counter this a bit. But the later in the scen this happens, the less likely it is that 2 M4 plts more will increase the odds as much as they were initially for the Germans.

A balanced scenario would need:

a) balanced forces over the entire game length

balance in AT, AP to destroy (armor, inf and arty)

c) balance in armor and infantry to hold/recce ground

Playtesting the balance:

IMHO this is impossible. You'd need an insane amount of tests. Too much luck involved.

It is fun vs the AI, and fun to play the PBEM. But the result is not important.

Gruß

Joachim