Red Devils Posted August 8, 2000 Share Posted August 8, 2000 I read some earlier complaints about this map. I was more concerned w/ the lack of British firepower. From the account I read in Stephen E. Ambrose's "Citizen Soldiers", pgs 125-127, the British assaulted the westend of the bridge w/ 40 vehicles w/ a further 10 shermans and an artillery battery on the bank prviding coverfire for the paratroops crossing. I would guess that the smaller numbers game reflect the lack of space on the map. If anyone has created their own Market-Garden scenarios or maps I would love to take them for a spin! ------------------ I'm sorry, we haven't the facilities to take all of you prisoner. Was there anything else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Wilder Posted August 8, 2000 Share Posted August 8, 2000 Where is this Eindhoven scenario? I have not seen it...WB ================ ------------------ Wild Bill Lead Tester Scenario Design Team Combat Mission-Beyond Overlord billw@matrixgames.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Wilder Posted August 8, 2000 Share Posted August 8, 2000 Did you try Nijmegen? How did you do with it? How was the crossing of the Waal? ------------------ Wild Bill Lead Tester Scenario Design Team Combat Mission-Beyond Overlord billw@matrixgames.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juardis Posted August 8, 2000 Share Posted August 8, 2000 Bill, I'm in the midst of Nijmegen and I have a few comments (I don't think you designed that one and I'm too lazy to go check). * * * * * possible * * * spoilers * * * below * * * * Based on what I've read, I was lead to believe that there was no problem for the allied tanks to drop smoke on the far bank to provide cover for the river crossing. In CM you don't even have time to load up a shell before they get knocked out. Plus, there's only 3 tanks. Was this done for play balance issues or was the account I read unrealistic? Also, when I get reinforcements theres a sherman stuck in a heavy building (3rd house from the river to the right of and adjacent to the RR tracks). That kinda sucks. But other than that it's a tough little scenario. The Jerries are well placed with lots of firepower. ------------------ Jeff Abbott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted August 8, 2000 Share Posted August 8, 2000 I think Red Devils is talking about Nijmegan, he probably got the cities mixed up. Re: Nijmegan, I too have the same problem that Jeff had. As soon as the bell goes off the Shermans on the river bank turn 90 degrees to the right to engage units in Nijmegan proper, leaving the river assault to the tender mercies of multiple dug-in gun batteries. Might i suggest a line of trees or houses along the left edge of the town that would block LOS from the Shermans to units inside Nijmegan. At least the Paras would get the extra firepower/smoke the tanks were to provide. Just a thought ------------------ The dead know only one thing - it is better to be alive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Wilder Posted August 8, 2000 Share Posted August 8, 2000 That is a good idea about the tanks. I hate that I can't program the tanks to stay in place. The limits of the game often dictate the limits of what you can include. I am sure there were more tanks than what I have, infantry too. This often happens when you try to represent an engagement larger than what a game is supposed to allow. And just showing a piece of the action was not what I wanted to do. In reality a couple of para battalions, plus the Brits, plus all the Germans makes for a LOT of units, more than what I can include. Here again, the limits of the game itself limit what can be portrayed. Perhaps I went beyond the reach of what was intended. But I wanted to fight that battle with this game. Such is life. No excuses, just stating facts And yes, this one is mine....WB ------------------ Wild Bill Lead Tester Scenario Design Team Combat Mission-Beyond Overlord billw@matrixgames.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Devils Posted August 8, 2000 Author Share Posted August 8, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wild Bill Wilder: Where is this Eindhoven scenario? I have not seen it...WB ================ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry, got my bridges cofused! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Posted August 9, 2000 Share Posted August 9, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Red Devils: Sorry, got my bridges cofused!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> "Captain sir, Sergeant Wilkes reporting fer da Nijmegen Bridge attack, sir!" "Errr, Sergeant, this is the Eindhoven bridge..." "Doh!... Da Krauts musta rotated the road signs...Sir, can you point us towards da Nijmegen Bridge please?...Or was it da Son Bridge?...Geez, too many bridges in this war!..." Henri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juardis Posted August 9, 2000 Share Posted August 9, 2000 I like the line of trees idea myself. Wild Bill, I'm not criticizing, I'm just curious as to the inner workings of a master scenario designer. I understand tradeoffs sometimes have to be made. To make up for the lack of tanks and the inability to provide cover fire, I think you... * * * * more * * * spoilers * * * * added reinforcements on the German side of the river. Since I'm not aware of a second wave of assault boats, I can only assume that they show up as if there were enough smoke/cover fire for more troops to make it across alive. At least that's the rationale I've come up with. Without those reinforcements, I'm not really sure I could've taken that side of the river since my initial assault got mauled (I have 4 squads left, at reduced strength of course). And I still haven't taken it after 12 turns, but it is inevitable now unless they get more reinforcements. So, IMO, you have to do one of 2 things. Leave the scenario alone (maybe add a tree line and fix the Sherman in the heavy building), or add more tanks for the allies but forgo the reinforcements on the German side. That would make keeping your initial assault companies alive a top priority. What do you think? ------------------ Jeff Abbott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Devils Posted August 9, 2000 Author Share Posted August 9, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Juardis: I like the line of trees idea myself. Wild Bill, I'm not criticizing, I'm just curious as to the inner workings of a master scenario designer. I understand tradeoffs sometimes have to be made. To make up for the lack of tanks and the inability to provide cover fire, I think you... * * * * more * * * spoilers * * * * added reinforcements on the German side of the river. Since I'm not aware of a second wave of assault boats, I can only assume that they show up as if there were enough smoke/cover fire for more troops to make it across alive. At least that's the rationale I've come up with. Without those reinforcements, I'm not really sure I could've taken that side of the river since my initial assault got mauled (I have 4 squads left, at reduced strength of course). And I still haven't taken it after 12 turns, but it is inevitable now unless they get more reinforcements. So, IMO, you have to do one of 2 things. Leave the scenario alone (maybe add a tree line and fix the Sherman in the heavy building), or add more tanks for the allies but forgo the reinforcements on the German side. That would make keeping your initial assault companies alive a top priority. What do you think? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'd say about 6 more shermans and an artillery observer. ------------------ I'm sorry, we haven't the facilities to take all of you prisoner. Was there anything else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted August 9, 2000 Share Posted August 9, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wild Bill Wilder: ...The limits of the game often dictate the limits of what you can include. I am sure there were more tanks than what I have, infantry too. This often happens when you try to represent an engagement larger than what a game is supposed to allow. And just showing a piece of the action was not what I wanted to do. In reality a couple of para battalions, plus the Brits, plus all the Germans makes for a LOT of units, more than what I can include. Here again, the limits of the game itself limit what can be portrayed. Perhaps I went beyond the reach of what was intended. But I wanted to fight that battle with this game. Such is life. No excuses, just stating facts <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I am beginning to form the idea from what I've been reading on the BBS, and from the slight familiarity I have with the user-designed scenarios (mostly I have been playing QBs), that the scale of the game is not a good one for trying to reproduce historic engagements. You need companies, or better yet battalions or even larger units for that. Even if the computer were able to handle all the squad-sized units in this particular battle, I'm not sure the players could. There's a bloody good reason why armies have a chain of command with local commanders on the scene. There are only so many units a human brain can intelligently interact with and give orders to. If AI continues to improve to the point to where it can reasonably depict the funtioning of an efficient chain of command, then you might have something. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts