New Scenario - Morgan's Stand

[Frenchy]

I adapted an old CMBO scenario I did for CMSF - it's pretty rough for a first attempt so I am looking for feedback. It was my first time tackling the editor.

In this battle, a weak US company must defend the village of Bar-el-Saddam against a determined Syrian attack.

It has been uploaded to CMMODS.

Thanks.

[MarkEzra]

Hi Frenchy: Glad to see you diving into the editor...I'll DL and play for sure.

[Frenchy]

Mark -

Thanks! Hope it plays well for you.

Steve

[bodkin]

**spoiler ahead**

Thanks for the scenario Frenchy. Just one point in terms of balance is that the Syrians are given nothing that can hurt the Abrams. When the reinforcements come and there are four Abrams on the battlefield the game becomes a one sided slaughter. Please give the Syrians some more modern ATGMs at least Saxhorn.

Thanks.

[Stingray]

Just finished playing the scenario. Loved it !!

Very exciting. Congratulations on your first scenario.

[Frenchy]

Bodkin -

Thanks for the input - I have noted your suggestion. The Syrians do get some ATGMs as reinformcements but unfortunately I cannot tell the editor what type to supply.

I'll see what others have to say and when I have enough input to start tweaking I will put out a revised version.

Stingray -

Thanks! Which side did you play and how did it turn out?

[Roter Stern]

The Syrians do get some ATGMs as reinforcements but unfortunately I cannot tell the editor what type to supply.

While not explicitly, you actually can – it’s a combination of the formation type and their “equipment” value. Also note that changing the equipment value after the unit has been added to the active list does not seem to do anything, so make sure you set the proper value beforehand.

It does take quite some time to figure out which units get which launchers at which equipment levels, and frankly it would’ve been very helpful if the editor would actually specify which launcher each ATGM Team is using, without having to load up the 3D map.

As far as the Abrams goes, from my own play-testing only the AT-14 has a reasonable chance to take one out with an angled shot – everything else is hopeless. It is a rather rare piece of kit to come across however, since IIRC only the Special Forces guys and a few Combatants get the AT-14, while even an excellent-equipment Republican Guard unit doesn’t have them. So if you don’t plan on giving the Red side a few AT-14s, I would seriously rethink their indented strategy vs those M1s.

Also a special note with Fighters and Combatants in the editor – their equipment tables seem to be reversed, something I reported a long time ago but no one important seemed to take note, since it is still the case in v1.06. What that means is that the units set to “poor” equipment will actually get better stuff than those with “excellent”. This is rather important, because the equipment setting for the Uncons also controls the number of men and small arms in the unit.

Basically the moral is that you need to play around with the equipment value setting – it does effect the units quite a bit.

As a side note, there's a Scenario forum where this thread would've been better at home - as an added bonus of posting stuff over there your posts will stay on the first page for a lot longer than they would in the General section.

[ February 12, 2008, 07:29 AM: Message edited by: The Louch ]

[Frenchy]

Louch -

Thanks for the notes. I will keep that in mind the next time I tackle a scenario. I also posted in the CMSF Scenario folder.

[thewood]

I hope someone notes this discussion about getting the needed equipment easily. I have canned a large number of scenarios I have started to build because of the frustration in screwing around with trying to get the right units. I also had to do a lot of testing to see exactly what the night vision capabilites were for certain units. SOmething that could have been made a little more obvious or accessible.

[Roter Stern]

Well I’m sure it’s a classical case of the game devs having to pick their priorities with-in the finite development time. Hopefully one day the unit editor will look a little less like a 1987 Norton Commander ...although that's a bit of an insult to NC

[ February 12, 2008, 08:33 AM: Message edited by: The Louch ]

[Stingray]

Originally posted by Frenchy:

Stingray -

Thanks! Which side did you play and how did it turn out? [/QB]

******* Spoiler Alert ***** Spoiler Alert ****

I played (WEGO)with the blue side and won with the surrender of the Syrans. But it was a close one.

Just before the re-enforcement arrived (turn 15) all my Bradleys have been destroyed, the sole M1 tank was out of ammo and subseqently destroyed by 4 T-62s coming from the farm side. A T-55 and a couple of BDRMS were attacking the main fort... all I had left to destroy armor were rifle granades. :eek:

The cavalry arrived just at the nick of time and the battle dramatically turned.

I think the scenario is well balanced. During the first 15 turns I could barely hold back the "injuns" with the 2 Bradleys and M1 (until the ammo ran out).

Fotunately, help arrived just in time. To win you have to hold back the attacking hords for 15 turns.

Loved it !!!

[bodkin]

Oh I forgot to mention I didn't see any Syrian FO's which meant I couldn't use the mortars.

Louch, I've got a kill on an M1 with a AT-13, also RPG-29 IIRC.

[MikeyD]

"but unfortunately I cannot tell the editor what type to supply."

I recall it took me fifteen+ minutes of farting around (a technical term) with the editor before I finally got early T55s to show up in my last scenario. Its all explained right there in the manual - but that didn't stop me from having fits looking for 'em!

[Roter Stern]

Louch, I've got a kill on an M1 with a AT-13, also RPG-29 IIRC.

Never checked the '29 actually, but the AT-13 must've just been lucky... or tweaked from when I first tested the ATGMs.

I had something like 20 of each ATGM type take frontal shots at a few M1s, and only the AT-14 was having any luck - others would expand all of their 90-100 missiles without as much as a ruined gun or optics for the M1 (something else I tried addressing a while ago, but to no apparent effect).

[bodkin]

My AT-13 kill was with a side shot in the Hammertime scenario, which BTW is now unbalanced and easy to win as Blue because RPG-7s are now not able to kill anything other than a Humvee.

[Frenchy]

Bodkin -

I'll fix the FO omission and a few other items in the Morgan's Stand scenario. Will work on it this weekend.

Stingray -

Glad you liked it!

Thanks for the feedback!

[kevinkins]

With all the retro scenarios do we long for the days gone by?

Kevin

[Frenchy]

To All -

I have uploaded version 2 of Morgan's Stand to CMMODS. Also posted in CMSF Scenario/Campaign forum. Been getting more reads here than there.

I added the missing Syrian FO so the mortars can be used and slightly reduced the number of US reinforcements.

As always feedback is appreciated.

[Frenchy]

Guys - Decided not to wait for 1.07 to tweak scenario! Notice also posted in Scenario and Campaign forum. All further notices will be posted there.

Just uploaded version 3 of Morgan's stand. I have extended the map - placing the village nearly in the center. I also added a few more buildings. 3 plans are included for red and 2 for blue.

Uploaded to CMMODS.

**********************************************

SPOILER - Us reinforcements must travel a bit to help save the day. They no longer pop in outside the village. This may give the Syrian player a chance to hold the village.

I played it as US against Red AI and it was a nail biter with blue holding on.

Reinforcements come in low on ammo also.