ahistorical dilemma

[simovitch]

I need to share a pet peeve.

Let's say you are a long time student of the history of the "schmegg offensive". You know the terrain quite well, you have photos and period-mapping information. You know the OOB of the battle and have a good idea about the TO&E's of various units at various times during the campaign.

Not uncommon I would say for this group.

Then you find a long awaited scenario covering one of your favorite battles during schmegg: the "battle of gnep". It's listed as "historical" and the breifing is right on.

Then you open the map and it's at best a 2004 mapquest rendition. The topography and tree coverage is pure fantasy...

Then to your added dismay the OOB gives you a couple of "wombats" to lead the charge, when you know quite well that even though the hollywood version showed Macauley Caulkin leading a troop of wombats into battle at Gnep, you know without a doubt there were no wombats at Gnep, or anywhere in the schmegg offensive.

Like myself, do you find it difficult, if not painful, to play that scenario? This happens to me so many times (not always) in CM that I am starting to feel a little dismayed. The main reason I bought this game was to get play (and develop) some faithful reconstructions of the schmegg offensive battles.

[rune]

As someone who has a faulty historical scenario, you got to cut the designers some slack. I always post the sources I use in my briefings, and have found that some of them have been wrong. I will stand by my work, as it was the best I could do with what I had at the time. When asked nicely, I give my references and why I went that way. For example, no Matildas at Beda Fomm, the article in the WWII magazine showed a photo of the Matilda with the caption it was in the unit. Well, it wasn't. Who would have thought a magazine on WWII would get it wrong?

A big problem is getting a low scale enough map of areas sometime. For a scenario I just did in San Pietro, modern maps have the town slightly different from where it was in 1944. The town was flattened so was most likely moved. I went off of photos of the area I found. A lot of maps do NOT go into the detail needed, and are at a higher level. Forests are gone on modern maps that were there in 1940, roads change, etc.

yet another thing the designer runs into is conflicting reports. How many times does one side say we ran into panthers, when the German Records show there weren't any? Do a search on the King Tiger in Italy, you will see some sources saying they were there, and others saying never made it.

I would just send the author a nice email asking why something is that way. You may be surprised by his source, or whatever. I know I have been surprised by a few things in scenarios. The bottom line is that the scenarios are being made for free, and not everyone has the time or money to buy a dozen books on one battle. Remember, if you don't like the scenario, you can always make one yourself.

Also remember, the editor is restricted on what it can do. San Pietro was on a hillside and I did the best I coudl do with the editor. The editor flattens out the terrain a house is on, so I did the best I could do within the editor.

Bottom line, ask the designer nicely. He will share his/her information with you, and you or they may learn something. There isn't a designer out there that thinks "Gee, I wonder if I can screw up this battle completely".

Rune

[Boo Radley]

Originally posted by rune:

There isn't a designer out there that thinks "Gee, I wonder if I can screw up this battle completely".

Rune

You've never played a Ker Dessel* scenario, have you?

*Ker Dessel -- When it's called a set up for a reason.

[junk2drive]

I googled for schmegg and gnep and couldn't find any historical references. Maybe that is why the designer fudged it.

Seriously, you had me reading your post as if it was a real scenario. The wombats and the rest got me wondering.

Sometimes CM doesn't do what you want but the designer should state the adjustment or liberties they took in making the scenario.

[simovitch]

J2D lol! sorry for sending you on a hypothetical reference goose chase.

If you spell gnep backwards you would get "Hi Mom".

Anyway, point well taken rune. And If there is a disclaimer with the scenario, I do appreciate it. Beside my desire to vent, my main question though is if anyone shares my historical OCD with any certain scenario that they have played in CM.

cheers

[Philippe]

I have loaded up 'historical' scenarios in CMBO that were made with approximations of OOB's that might have been used in the real battle, but that used fantasy maps that couldn't possibly represent real terrain that existed anywhere, let alone on the continent of Europe. The result is that I shut down the computer immediately and spend a few minutes shaking with rage. Taking a walk helps.

It's nice that there are a couple of thousand scenarios out there to choose from. But there's a lot of dreck to wade through as well.

Still, some people like playing with wombats on paintball maps, so why should we deprive them of their fun? And the designer can always claim that his unrealistic foray into map-editing was an intentional exercise in producing a training scenario.

Having said that, we should probably cut the designers some slack. One of the reasons I don't design scenarios is that I don't have adequate research tools. I suspect if most designers felt as I do, very, very few scenarios would ever get done. So let's welcome every approach to scenario design as long as it inspires careful and talented designers to get it right from time to time. You can't always tell that something is good unless you have something mediocre with which to compare it.

[junk2drive]

"And the designer can always claim that his unrealistic foray into map-editing was an intentional exercise in producing a training scenario."

Then they can check the box that says "fictional"

[rune]

Another thing to remember, is that CM goes off the book to&e. So a Panzerabtwhatchamacallit is listed as tigers, you give them a platoon of tigers, but in reality it was a mix of tigers and Pzdufflebags III mit Spatzel. Also a lot of the reports don't tell you field strenghts. I do have some books that give day to day toals of some of the tanks, and have shared information with other designers, but the books are expensive. I am consulting with JonS to make a New Zealand scenario in Italy, but the river crossing I was going to do mentions several "brisk firefights". When information was dug up, the "brisk firefight" lasted 5 minutes and the Germans withdrew. So, we are still working on it, but on hold temporary as I have been busy with other things here.

Jon, Orsonga [sp?] sounds good, I'll follow up with you when things slow a little.

Anyway, hope you get the idea. Nothing can be truely historical, since the minute you press go, it no longer is. I have posted what we call what before, Historical, Semi-historical and fictional. I have also talked at lenght with BFC on editor changes for CMX2 that will eliminate some of these things. I think when the time comes, you will be pleased.

Rune

[ February 04, 2005, 12:13 PM: Message edited by: rune ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by rune:

Who would have thought a magazine on WWII would get it wrong?

Any researcher worth his salt who has progressed past the comic-book phase.

[Hans]

Perhaps we need a fourth designation besides fictional, semi-historical and historical? I think we also need a catagory(s) for a historical scenario that has EVERYTHING, OOB, briefing and map in 100% accuracy. I'd say the map is usually the weak point because most sources will only show a sketch map and from that you must guess or interpret from modern maps. (only a small percentage of those that I label historical would make it into the new catagory). I suggest we call it:

Historical

Historical Grog level 1

Historical Grog level 2

Historical Grog level 3

Grog level one has a historic OOB, reasonable briefing while a Historical Grog level 3 scenario has a map of no more than 1:25,000 made by members of the opposing sides (while at a cafe in Paris in the 1960s). A by name list of participants = their status and wounds - and what they did after the war. Plus a listing (by serial number of all vehicles and crew served weapons) plus their fate.

A minimum of 40 to 50 B/W stills taken within a hour of the battle plus one film clip from newstone or Signal. PLUS modern photos of the same area (which has remain pristine and devoted to the battles fought there) and is run by a guy named Maurice.

Also it should include the names of all miniature clubs that have wargamed the action and how many times its been mentioned in the militaria press.

That might get it to Grog level 3....

[Brent Pollock]

Score one for "ignorance is bliss" vs "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing"

[Brent Pollock]

yyyyuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmmmm...spatzel...but I don't know what kind of wine to have with Pzdufflebags III...

Originally posted by rune:

Pzdufflebags III mit Spatzel. Rune

Having tried my hand desiging a few CM/ASL scenarioes now, I'm of the opinion that "Semi-Historical" is as accurate as you're going to get.

[Nidan1]

I recently played a scenario that was listed as "semi-hostorical, set in Normandy in 1944.

Now I had done some extensive research on the timeframe, terrain units etc., because I was in the process of creating some scenarios of my own of that campaign.

My opponent in the game lives in Europe and has traveled to this area and knows it first hand. His first comment when the scenario loaded on his end was, and I paraphrase, "aw another lousey un realistic map of Normandy" or some such.

Chatting with him, and in the course of our on line play, I vowed that if I was making a semi historical or historical battle, I would try my best to get it right. I think all designers follow that premise. Within the limitations of the game editor a designer does the best he can.

If you look at overhead photos of the Normandy area from 1944, for example, you will see that almost every inch of ground has been cultivated in some way, aside from orchards and tree groves in villages and along roads, its farm land. If a designer gives you a Normandy map that isnt at least 80% farm land, than that is wrong. IMO the map is the center point of any scenario, especially historical, semi historical battles. An interesting, fairly accurate map, makes playing a lot more fun, even if there are units or two that really don't belong.

Creating a good scenario, that is well received, is a tough proposition that takes time, effort and dedication and a lot of research. I salute all those who have given it a try, if you look on the Scenario Depot, you will see a lot of us in this community have done so.

[rune]

LOL. Hans, I bet the grogs would even argue about the grog levels. No, I decided on the three levels, knowing that 90% of everything would fall under the semi-historical, and hence it became the default.

Michael, A magazine that prides itself as THE magazine of WWII. I chalked it up to a learning experience. Kinda like last night watching a show called Pearl Harbour in Color. Gee, I didn't realize Helldivers were present at Pearl Harbour. One of these days you and I have to go back and do that one scenario in CMAK, and make the changes we talked about. Wonder how that island would play out in CMAK.

I prefer a nice Mosel wine with my PzDufflebag mit Spatzel. I like Rhine wines too.

Rune

[ February 04, 2005, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: rune ]

[Nidan1]

Why would you quote your own post?

Oh, I forgot its you.....

[rune]

OK Mister slow tanks don't raise dust. Oh wait, I guess the photos of matildas doing just that while moving slow must have been fake. Back to the Peng thread with thee.*

Rune

*Photos courtesy of:

Tank Combat in North Africa: The Opening Rounds : Operations Sonnenblume, Brevity, Skorpion and Battleaxe February 1941-June 1941 (Schiffer Military History)

[Nidan1]

Originally posted by rune:

OK Mister slow tanks don't raise dust. Oh wait, I guess the photos of matildas doing just that while moving slow must have been fake. Back to the Peng thread with thee.*

Rune

*Photos courtesy of:

Tank Combat in North Africa: The Opening Rounds : Operations Sonnenblume, Brevity, Skorpion and Battleaxe February 1941-June 1941 (Schiffer Military History)

I was thinking more on the line of smaller dust clouds, not something so large as to be a dead giveaway of a large formation or large vehicles such as tanks.

I'm sure that any vehicular movement in the desert would give off dust, and in a small battle where contact is immediate it would not matter. I was thinking of a movement command for road movement, where you might not want your opponent to know that something is coming up that road to the east, that would eliminate the dust altogether, but cause you a penalty in movement speed.

BTW;I'm getting shredded as the Americans in San Pietro. Night fighting is a bitch.

[rune]

Simovich and junk2drive,

For being reasonable, and showing a remarkable sense of understanding, may I offer San Pietro to you for testing? As nidan1 says, and I quote "Night fighting is a bitch"

Rune

[simovitch]

rune,

Send it over to me at my email adress, I would be honored to have a look. With ROW V about to start, It may take a while if it's a PBEM. if I can play it VS the AI (default setup?) I should be able to hammer it out in less than a week and get you an AAR.

thanks,

[junk2drive]

Night battles I don't mind. Big battles don't do well on my PC.

I'd be happy to try. I wouldn't know if it's historical though. Maybe that'sa good thing.

[imported_mike_the_wino2]

Originally posted by rune:

As someone who has a faulty historical scenario...

But did you get the EVIL right? Well, didya, tough guy?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by rune:

LOL. Hans, I bet the grogs would even argue about the grog levels. No, I decided on the three levels, knowing that 90% of everything would fall under the semi-historical, and hence it became the default.

Michael, A magazine that prides itself as THE magazine of WWII. I chalked it up to a learning experience. Kinda like last night watching a show called Pearl Harbour in Color. Gee, I didn't realize Helldivers were present at Pearl Harbour. One of these days you and I have to go back and do that one scenario in CMAK, and make the changes we talked about. Wonder how that island would play out in CMAK.

I prefer a nice Mosel wine with my PzDufflebag mit Spatzel. I like Rhine wines too.

Rune

Kapelsche Veer?

Let's wait for CMX2 - since the attack was from both ends of the island at once, though if Operations are out and Campaigns are in, I don't know if that means we can play more than one battle on the same map? If so, I hope that front lines can be drawn more realistically (and involve multiple directions!!

[dalem]

I enjoy making maps in BO and BB. Not a lot of folks like fighting on them, which I take as a compliment.

I am eager to try out the map functions for CMx2, whatever they may be. Steve has already said "no tiles" which has me salivating a bit. A lot. I truly think that more granular mapping will really really really help out CM-sized battles.

-dale

[simovitch]

rune, if your still following this thread...

From the "topographic maps of italy" thread in the scenario talk forum, I was able to get a great view of San Pietro Infine at 1:25000, probably wartime-period with (contemporary) aerial overlay. Its right up on my screen - beautiful... but I can't for the life of me get a hardcopy, so no screenshot. :mad:

If you can manage to get into the map site, its on the "Lazio" portion of Italy, at coordinates:

Top left: x-412961, y-4589507

bottom right: x-414904, y-4587968

hope this helps.

[Philippe]

Have you tried taking screenshots and pasting them together in Paint? Crude, but effective.