A day in the life...

[Mishga]

Hiya

If your interested I am posting a micro-campaign following one single unit through the first day of the ground war from dawn to dusk.

It's three linked battles, one diversion. Simple to play. There are more than one unit in the scenario's of course but it revolves around one in particular.

www.cmmods.com if you wish to check it out, download Operation Campsite.

[ May 07, 2008, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: Mishga ]

[Topo]

Downloading now. I like little campaign with few units. Thanks

[Mishga]

Hope you like it. Give me some feedback for improvement?

[Phoenix]

**spoilers**

Well...I gave it a brief try but it's not my thing. I like small scenerios, but I just don't understand this one. You start out with a humvee and a few squads of elite guys...but no support at all. Are these guys supposed to walk all over thh country side???

There's no cover at all...advance out in the open in the light of day into a known entrenched enemy...uh...ok. Why? So I approach and crawl to the edge of the hill and instantly the entire trench opens up as soon as my crawling elite guys crest the hill. Even thogh I am flanking the hell out of them... 5 guys get waxed, and that's enough for me so I do a cease fire.

Next mission, another plain desert with a lone building in the distance. Ugh. Now my guys are mostly "-2" ratings. The humvee is gone and a Stryker shows up. Now I've got a spotter and arty...And again, advancing over open terrain with a couple guys...no thanks.

Anyway... my .02

[Mishga]

I agree, it's not for everyone. It's to represent that not everything goes according to plan.

It's a short recon mission gone wrong. The intel on the first one is supposed to be a small force of Syrian troops holed up. Nothing major.

The first mission is designed to be tough. It's a bit of a blunder on intelligence front. You got duff info.

I don't see the point in making scenario's that are US walkovers with no difficulties or surprises. I imagine people would get bored of that in short order, I know I would.

Thank you for the feedback. It is appreciated.

[MarkEzra]

Originally posted by Mishga:

I agree, it's not for everyone. It's to represent that not everything goes according to plan.

I love it when a player is forced to confront a broken plan...It becomes a thought provoking scen. Congrats!

[Webwing]

Mishga,

Contratulations!

You are doing a lot of nice stuff with the editor.

I love small campaigns like this. I think people should do more of those.

I guess people are intimidated by the thought of designing a campaign. It seems like something huge. But there are loads of interesting scenarios to be created with 2 or 3 linked missions.

---

[ May 09, 2008, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: Webwing ]

[Mishga]

Thanks guys!

I should have put more in the briefings but how do you tell the player "oh by the way, ignore the briefing cos Captain Fubar typed it up" without doing away with the surprises?

If you like the micro-campaign concept then I will be glad to make a few more.

[Paper Tiger]

Hi Mishga

well, I was suffering a bit from red on red fatigue earlier this afternoon so I thought I'd download this campaign and try it out. I am going to provide you with some honest feedback which will contain LOADS of spoilers so other forum memebers beware... here goes..

SPOILERS! SPOILERS! SPOILERS!

Yes, I'm serious folks...... SPOILERS!

okay, I loaded up the first mission and quickly figured out what I had to do. All Elite troops with +2 modifiers but no support except for a humvee. The scouts also can't lay down smoke. A shame as I figured I was going to need it. It was obvious where the enemy was but there was no covering terrain to approach their position so I figured I'd send one platoon to one flank and the second to the other and hit the crest line simultaneously. Since the humvee would be easy meat for an enemy RPG team, I thought I'd hold it back until I'd gathered some intel on the enemy.

Well, it was a nice plan but when I hunted to the crest line my elite troops came under some very heavy fire immediately and they started cowering. This was on both flanks and apart from the humvee, there was nothing left. So with the enemy engaging both my platoons on both flanks, I committed the humvee to the centre. It retreated very quickly so I sent it in again and it got killed. Pooh! With everybody cowering and nothing else possible I hit the cease fire button and got a shock when I saw what I was up against.

Okay, onto mission 2. Some of my troops were now -2. I'm not sure why? (Perhaps because I lost? If that's true then you made the cam[aign dynamic?) Anyway, I had a Stryker this time, albeit an FST vehicle, and some artillery as well. Woo hoo. I figured this would be a bit more fun. But as soon as I hit the start button I saw that there were two HMG bunkers on either side of the lone building. No problem, I called in some artilery on one while I tried to get my troops into firing positions. To cut a long story short, the artillery ran out of ammo very quickly while my stryker cowered in the corner from the INCREDIBLE amount of MG fire that was coming in. No troops could get a LOS to any units as the enemy defensive fire was appalling. So eventually I hit cease fire again and when I saw what I'd been up against I started laughing my ass off. My wife wanted to know what was so funny but I knew she wouldn't understand...

O...M...G! I can't believe you playtested these missions as I think they're utterly impossible to win. They're fun, but completely unwinnable. If I'm wrong and you did playtest them until you could get a win, PLEASE tell me how as I must suck at this game.

The mini campaign idea is a really good one and I am planning to do some mini campaigns when the Marines module comes out. But in your campaign you really need to give the Blue side a bit more in the way of support. And also reduce the quality of those Syrian machine gun platoons. So... many... machineguns!!!

I really wanted to enjoy this and in a way I did but not for the reasons that you really want. I was actually still laughing my ass off when I was in the shower this evening thinking about all those MGs in mission 2.

My honest advice to you is to spend a LOT more time playtesting your own missions, especially if you're going to compile them into a campaign. If you do that, the entire community will be much richer for it as the basic idea of your campaign is both sound and fun.

[Mishga]

This micro-campaign is not easy. I understand that. It's a worst case situation gone bad. The first battle I toyed with giving US support then discarded the idea. I hoped that the player once he realised that he was up against it would ceasefire rather than suicide charge up the hill. This would conserve forces for the next battle.

It is a dynamic campaign following the hardships of a single unit in the main. You don't have much in the way of guidance from superiors in this one so it's up to the player as the man on the ground to decide when enough is enough and ceasefire or try WW1 tactics uphill against a determined enemy.

I do appreciate your feedback and thank you for your attention to the detail

[Paper Tiger]

Oh don't worry, I didn't perform any suicide charges and I took almost zero casualties except for one man and the humvee. (I also killed nobody on the Red side...) However, I have no idea how I am supposed to win the second mission. Since I know now that I'm supposed to quit the first mission, I'll just skip it and move straight onto the second and try again but I can't see how a win is possible unless you are extraordinarily lucky.

[Mishga]

The left flank on the second mision is the key. The bunkers have no LOS and the MG posts are on the opposite flank. Get your movement up that way and use the other platoon to provide long range fire with the M240's.

I just played through the campaign and the Bunkers are pretty resistant to mortar fire. Hit the right flank with the mortars to take out the MG posts. Move up the left then turn into the enemy line. Roll along it. Watch out tho, it's not easy.

[Pandur]

ok, this campain is somewhat strange. however i pushed the american up to their limit.

SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

iam in mission 3 now, i needed a break after i noticed that i have 3 ATGM strykers in that map and they are not able to attack infantry or at elast they wont do it here. also they dont want to listen to my area fire orders, they just "spott".

anyways, in mission one i figured thats a WW1 mission so i pressed the man hard, i took out 3 syrians and cease fired with 1(one) man left as the gained intel cannot be lost.

ok, a typical open ground charge into a MG stuffed trench 25m away. the US looked quiet helpless -> total defeat

mission2;

after i saw the map i fugured that be easier. however the "flank" here is in reallity a pretty gamey map edge crawl. i pushed my man down there in the low ground. one squad made it thorugh, the other ones took 1 casualtie and i stoped them to move em with the stryker up to the front.

the stryker lost its gunner in turn one or two, i came to launch some smokes but the launcher was broken in turn 3 than. was funny picture, the stryker constanty backed up, next turn i let em drive up fron again to draw fire so the bunkers run dry and my man can spott. that worked pretty good.

stryker is invincible in that map after all, the fancy systems wich get shot off the vehicle arent needed here

the mortar i directed onto the house, now i know i should have spared it for mission 3.

after a good portion of my guys where ready to rush up the platou and engage in close quaters i ordered the stryker, wich was still catching ammo out in the open, to come to this guys and make a vehicle wall between the house/left bunker and my guys. so it did to great success, it even got imobilized at a "perfect" spot, so it didnt drove away in fear constantly. in the house was just 1 guy left due to mortar fire and i took out the bunkers with hand granades.

after the high ground with the house was clear i ordered my man into the house to engage the guys in low area, but time was up at that point.

secured me a "draw" 55 vs. 50 points, in favour for my side.

now in mission 3 i wanted to area fire the map corners imedeatly as there are many foxholes to spott. the ATGM strykers wont do it, no clue why... .

in the end i have to say this campain is pretty "dramatic", in the first mission you see a movie of US guys beeing humiliated and in the 2nd mission you need to resort to rather gamey and exploiting tactics.

im not deep into mission 3 but it looks its the same style.

however, even if there meight be some negative things, i guess its the most challenging campain/mission out there currently

(tumb so not to spoil, klick for original size)

the vehicle wall, in that position the stryker got immobilized too.

[ May 10, 2008, 10:44 AM: Message edited by: Pandur ]

[Mishga]

A flank attack is not that gamey. The ATGM vehicles in the third mission are for SPOILERS

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

There are enemy troops in the buildings which the TOW strykers are happy to obliterate. The rest of the troops are back in the far corners and the TOW's won't engage "empty" ground.

If you husbanded your forces earlier on the infantry can keep the enemy pinned from the forest in the middle of the map. Word of warning. If you don't use the ammo for the mortars in Mission two Captain Fubar will allocate it to another recon patrol other than yours. So use it or lose it.

Sorry if you thought this was a gamey campaign. I took your feedback onboard about a lack of "tactical choices" from one of your previous posts and tried to implement a map that made the player look at what he had, where he wanted to go and how he should get there, to my mind this is tactical choices. I hope you give it another go but this time don't try to press the first mission too hard as you need that elite patrol for the second and third missions.

Thank you again for your feedback, it all helps

[Pandur]

ovcourse a flank attack isnt gamey itself but i consider it slightly gamey if you have to hug the mapege, move along it "the whole" map up to the enemy side to than swing around in the verry corner to take out the bunkers wich are 10 meters from the mapend away.

i dont "blame" you! its just my personal view on things, plus the current limitation of CM:SF wich runs with bad frames on big maps. wich tends to limit maps.

in theory i "like" flank attacks wich result out of a stalled main effort and the need to go around that position, but there is no main effort so to say. you are caged with the tiny bit of man in a narrow map the need to commit all of them to one "go". and that "has" to be in the low ground to the left.

to flank something in open ground you need room to do it, or at least i like it if there is some.

also what i miss is a bit more info in the briefing. if you would be their "real" commander you would be well aware how things are looking for you. you as the player have not any clue...

if you read the brifing the situation looks all dandy and "walk in the park" like.

you need to make the player clear in what situation his man are in. if every thing is F*up or if its going good.

if he will likely face certain death or not...in short you need to give the player the situational awareness they guy on the ground has already.

i dont mean you have to tell the player the secret and important stuff but you cant send one RSV stryker + recon quad into the most fearsome valley of death stuffed with 2 hmg bunkers and plenty more HMG´s and some MMg´s in the open, with the order to "maximize enemy casualties" and the info "moderate enemy presence" in some short sentences.

There are enemy troops in the buildings which the TOW strykers are happy to obliterate. The rest of the troops are back in the far corners and the TOW's won't engage "empty" ground.

yes, i found that out

however i spotted one guy up there, that was the reason i looked up the corners, and manally targeted the unit. also nothing, not even M240 fire.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Paper Tiger]

Okay, I gave mission two another spin this morning and got a Tactical Victory with only 3KIA and 4 Wounded. It wasn't difficult to get either...

SPOILERS

Since I KNEW that there were loads of MGs on the right flank I hit it with the mortars with a pre-registered barrage at the start and moved everybody onto the left flank. I made very slow but definite progress and got up onto the 'plateau' with my entire force without too much trouble. Once I captured the plateau I found that most of those MG teams were still there and firing on my troops so I hit cease fire with 3 mins to go and got a tactical victory. Okay, so it was doable. I was wrong. But the only way I was able to do this was because I already had the intel from playing it the first time. Call it Deja vu. Or call it cheating

Never mind, onto the third mission. "Stiffer resistance"! OMG! I was already uncomfortable. Nice map though and I was happy to see that I had a whole platoon of Stryker ATGM vehicles. But on closer inspection I saw that they were conscripts! And with -2 modifiers to boot. Looking at the map, it was fairly obvious what was going to happen and I wasn't surprised by anything at all.

The conscript vehicles were utterly useless except for popping smoke which got me into the woods in the centre of the map overlooking the houses. The vehicles wouldn't perform any area fire commands and when an enemy unit did pop up in their LoS, they usually ducked down again before the conscripts could do anything. I have to confess that I gave up and quit because I was thoroughly demoralised by the way my conscripts were performing. I had no artillery suppport and only two javelins.

Okay, some more, hopefully, constructive feedback. The Syrian opposition is just too strong for this to be much fun (for me anyway) Elite MG teams with +2 modifiers are fine but please, not so many of them.

The US conscripts are farcical. Certainly, they conscripted for the Vietnam war but, to the best of my knowledge, they haven't done it since. Especially putting them in command of their high tech vehicles in the lead element on the first day of a major invasion. Come on!

You also need to give the US WAY more artillery. And I don't mean more batteries, just some more ammo. I spent all my ammo in mission 2 and so there was none left for mission 3. No resupply is fine but it's impossible to believe that a front line US unit would receive so little support from it's own mortars on the very first day of operations. Full resupply between missions 2 and 3 would definitely make mission 3 more fun.

So, in summary, to make this mini campaign a really good one, rework it so that:

a) the Syrian MG teams are veteran AT BEST with 0 or even negative modifiers. That would make the game more challenging AND fun.

Make the US conscripts Green at least, or better yet, Regular but reduce the number of ATGM vehicles from 4 to 2 to balance things out. This would make the final mission more interesting and fun too.

c) give the US side a full resupply in the campaign script between missions 2 and 3. And maybe more ammo too. You're stretching the Captain FUBAR thing way too far with this.

d) please give us more info on what we're supposed to do in the mission, even if it's wrong or misleading. Your current instructions are too vague. I know that's the designer's intention but at least mark the victory point objectives on the maps.

e) The 'unwinnable' first mission is a clever idea but it's very easy to circumvent it simply by hitting cease fire at the start and skipping the mission. You need to find some way to encourage the player to stay in the fight.

It's almost a classic. With maybe some air support thrown in you could have a first class mini campaign here.

[Mishga]

Noted.

One point on the conscript ATGM vehicles is that it's to represent the vehicles being out of there usual tactical role. Instead of MGS which the unit should have had in support they were not battle ready in time so ATGM were told to stand in.

It's an attempt to represent fish out of water syndrome. The tankers are looking for tanks to destroy. I tried to simulate this somehow.

The mortars don't carry over to mission three anyway. The third mission you have to use the ATGM's to destroy the buildings if enemy troops occupy them. The infantry are to pin the enemy on the flanks.

There are no victory conditions on the map. It's up to the player to decide when and where to fight or withdraw. It's a casualty based campaign.

Yes I agree, with hindsight the enemy MG teams are too good for the situation. Should have toned them down. Will remember this for future.

Thank you again for your time and suggestions. As this is my first ever attempt I welcome the feedback.

[Paper Tiger]

No problem. Even if I disagree with them, I appreciate the design decisions that you made when creating this campaign. The ATGM vehicles are very effective infantry killers. I know 'cos I used a couple of them in my first ever offering. So it was frustrating to see them nerfed so badly in your campaign.

I just hope that my 'feedback' doesn't sound too critical. I realise that you're not designing these missions for ME and other people are happy enough with them. And, at the end of the day, I obviously enjoyed it enough to post about it. Good luck with your next project....

[Mishga]

yeah, it's not a problem. I would like to think we had an open and frank discussion about it without resorting to going in a strop.

The way adults should talk about things. I am grateful for you taking the time to chat about it all

I have learned a lot for the next micro-campaign.

Which of course I hope you will continue to cast your eye over