Scenario Designs??

[GonzoAttacker]

What Do you Guys Want to see?

I always start my designs with map designs using a story board. Then I go to type of units to deploy. In the past I started with simple maps one player vs AI. Then there was a demand for player vs player (tournament action)PBEM, and hot seat action. I always tried to balance forces on map or load up with AI forces for single player.

I am excited to see how new engine will work.

There could be endless oppurtunites.

The Question of the Day is What do You Want?

[Hukka]

I want my Combat Mission: Shock Force!

(Sorry...)

[GonzoAttacker]

What type of CMSF scenario? Units? Map sizes? Objective ideas? etc?

[MikeyD]

I had had an idea of a mammoth 'Mall of America" type shopping complex with acres of asphalt parking lot and sprawling interconnected buildings. Maybe next to a highway. The sorta ugly urban thing you simply wouldn't be able to create in CMx1. Whether or not I could get a decent scenario out of it I don't know, but it would be mighty satifying to blow it up with airstrikes!

[Sgt.Rock of Easy Company]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

I had had an idea of a mammoth 'Mall of America" type shopping complex with acres of asphalt parking lot and sprawling interconnected buildings. Maybe next to a highway. The sorta ugly urban thing you simply wouldn't be able to create in CMx1. Whether or not I could get a decent scenario out of it I don't know, but it would be mighty satifying to blow it up with airstrikes!

Hah, if interiors were modelled more detailed, or you could adjust them, that would make for some amazing urban combat.

....mmm six stories of indoor madness.

[rune]

Gonzo, asking what people want before you have even seen the editor is wasteing your time. Follow the scenario design thread and you will get a feel for the many changes to the editor. get a feel for what objectives can be selected, and what terms for the objective. Map sizes I have discussed to death, you are going to have to test on your system before even trying to create a massive one on your computer.

Forget what you know about the editor, it is completely different. Part three, the units will be posted tomorrow.

Rune

[Michael Dorosh]

Excellent thread, Gonzo. As someone who has had a lot of fun using the editor, I know you as a fellow designer will be delighted with the new tools and abilities. We'll look forward to seeing your work.

[ July 11, 2007, 12:50 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[dan/california]

One of my areas of greatest interest is in looking at the size force required to do a particular mission. So you take the basic idea for a scenario and then set up multiple versions with progressively larger or smaller forces on one side until you reach the point where victory is almost assured for one side or the other.

Lets say the basic idea for the scenario is that a Stryker platoon is the very furtherest unit out on a flank and is dug in a hasty defensive emplacement. What size Syrian force is required to overrun it. Can one mechanized company do it? Can three? Is a Syrian Mechanized company more or less effective than an infantry company, than 2? how much difference do a few irregular units make? and so on. Obviously terrain will play a huge roll as well.

This kind of thing gives vast replay possibilities even without making more maps, and making maps is about to become a hobby in and of itself.

They need to get the game out before my head explodes.

[Michael Dorosh]

As for what I want, I am dying to see some good mountainous terrain scenarios. I haven't been able to design a good mountain map myself - you can get 1000 levels or more of relief. I started a Minas Tirith map but it sucked up too much of my time when I was supposed to be testing, so I abandoned it.

1000 levels on a map that at best should be less than 4km by 4km is not realistic (I'm not suggesting anyone use all 1000 levels), but I'd dying to see a really well done alpine scenario - there was a good mountain based one in CMBO from one of the tourneys. I think I played it against Kettler. Even with only 20 terrain elevations, it was really cool. The current editor could do it so much better. Can't wait to see someone try.

[dan/california]

Several other heads around here appear to be in danger of sympathetic detonation.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by dan/california:

Several other heads around here appear to be in danger of sympathetic detonation.

The CM community has always impressed me with the ability to think outside the box and exceed the original parameters of the release. I'm excited not just to see the reaction of the forum to the game itself, but to seeing what the talent out there will do with it.

[MikeyD]

I suspect the key to doing great scenarios is to forget the game - at least initially. Come up with a crazy real-world concept then once the game falls into your hands see if you can reconcile one to the other. How about a night skirmish with a narrow winding road that skirts the edge of a huge cliff, Afghanistan-style? In 2 weeks we get to see if the idea can be successfully implimented!

[Edited - i see everybody's thinking about the same thoughts on the topic and typing all at the same time! ]

[ July 11, 2007, 01:09 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[panzermartin]

I was a fan of the meeting engagements in CM, didnt really like the Attack/Defense fixed and slow repeative action. I d'like to see an adaptation of these in CMSF with some fluid action and mobile elements from both sides. Mobile defense from Syrians with some counterattack chances, not just waiting to blow up the IEDs and hiding in a skyscraper with your RPGs. Numbers should be in favor of the Red side probably for this kind of scenario.

The most loved scenarios were the ones tha both sides had their chance to attack and defend at the same time. If this can be achieved in CMSF I'll be a happy gamer.

[ChrisND]

I did some scenario design for CMx1 and it was a lot of fun. Maybe more fun than playing the game. I have a few scenario ideas I have been batting around:

- A Special Forces team(s) with Javelins and unarmored humvees takes on enemy armor and troops, loosely inspired by an event in Iraq.

- A race to recover a crashed airplane/helo (Havent made my mind yet). The US and Syrians will have a parallel race (Separated by a terrain feature or two) to the crash site. So it's a decision of how many forces you want to allocate to the rush forward, and how many you want to send sideways to disrupt the opponents advance.

- 82nd Abn combat jump, airfield seizure.

- A totally wildly fictional one, a re-make of my CMAK scenario "Crossover Madness". Both sides have equal forces, and plenty of terrain features in between. They start on opposite ends of the map, but have to cross past each other and exit on the other side (The enemy starting point) for points. There will be a blue vs. blue and red vs. red version.

- An afghanistan one on the Pakistani border, based VERY LOOSELY on a FOB I was on (Terrain and base will be very different, not recognizable). We were always getting warnings of possible mass attacks by Chechen mercenaries coming over the border, it never materialized. So it'll be a US "hold the fort".

[panzermartin]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

I had had an idea of a mammoth 'Mall of America" type shopping complex with acres of asphalt parking lot and sprawling interconnected buildings. Maybe next to a highway. The sorta ugly urban thing you simply wouldn't be able to create in CMx1. Whether or not I could get a decent scenario out of it I don't know, but it would be mighty satifying to blow it up with airstrikes!

Well the ideal scenario for such a map, would be a meeting engagement where the goal is to reach the X floor with the 50% discounts on all clothing. Since civilians arent modeled, you'll have to put some guys with kalasnikovs. It will still be close to the real thing though

[MikeyD]

In CMx1 meeting engagements were a bit on the phoney side - after all, how often did full battalions blunder into eachother in the countryside? With CMSF we've got an excuse - A rapid reaction Stryker force doing deep penetration, acting as a screen to the main body further to their west. Robust Syrian off-map AA perhaps a limiting factor in airborne intelligence. Perfect setup for blundering into an unsuspecting column of T62s as they deploy west to blunt the main thrust.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

In CMx1 meeting engagements were a bit on the phoney side - after all, how often did full battalions blunder into eachother in the countryside? With CMSF we've got an excuse - A rapid reaction Stryker force doing deep penetration, acting as a screen to the main body further to their west. Robust Syrian off-map AA perhaps a limiting factor in airborne intelligence. Perfect setup for blundering into an unsuspecting column of T62s as they deploy west to blunt the main thrust.

Who needs a reason, though, really? Meeting Engagements were my favs, too, despite being the most inherently unrealistic of the bunch.

[GonzoAttacker]

Rune thanks for the tip. I will definitely lok at the thread. Looking forward to the game. I like pushing the editor to the limits.

I just wanted to see what the boys were loooking for in a scenario. I am exicited to create some challenging ones like i have in the past.

[Steiner14]

Is the battle type (attk/dfnd/ME) displayed on the interface again? I hope not, since this gave away too much information to the players.

[Kwazydog]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

The CM community has always impressed me with the ability to think outside the box and exceed the original parameters of the release.

Indeed, so have we been Michael, and in fact that innovation in many ways molded CMx1 as it developed. This is actually one reason why I think its a big shame that some WW2 only fans arent willing to even give CMSF a go, as they wont be able to provide any input or feedback for future releases which ironically includes their favourite theatres.

[Salkin]

I want a fun simple campaign with a few branching battles. What do I mean with fun and simple ?

Well first of all I want fun scenarios over realistic ones. For instance scenarios where there's a small unsuported american infantry force vs a larger syrian mechanised enemy. This is very unlikely in the real world, but it would turn the table a bit and force the americans to employ ambush tactics.

Another fun but not very realistic thing could be an armour vs armour battle on short range in a rural environment with lots of cover. Hills, trees and some houses maybe.

What do I mean by simple? Well background story and stuff doesn't have to be super detailed , just interesting and detailed enough to be entertaining and easy to read.

//Salkin

[MarkEzra]

Gonzo: John F. Antal wrote a fun book called -Infantry Combat the Rifle Platoon- It describes a lone US Infantry platoon's stand against a Mechanized onslaught.

KwayzDog: I a WW2 guy who has pre-ordered. Are there any CMBB/AK/BO threads with players actually saying they'll sit this game out?

[Kwazydog]

Originally posted by MarkEzra:

KwayzDog: I a WW2 guy who has pre-ordered. Are there any CMBB/AK/BO threads with players actually saying they'll sit this game out?

Ive seen a few posts, but far less I must admit Im looking forward to seeing Panthers and Tigers in the new engine myself, hehe, but CMSF will certainly hold me over until then and beyond even though Ive been working on it for years now.

[Salkin]

Originally posted by MarkEzra:

Gonzo: John F. Antal wrote a fun book called -Infantry Combat the Rifle Platoon- It describes a lone US Infantry platoon's stand against a Mechanized onslaught.

KwayzDog: I a WW2 guy who has pre-ordered. Are there any CMBB/AK/BO threads with players actually saying they'll sit this game out?

In the early days when CMSF had just been announced alot of WW2 grogs/players said that they would pass on this one, but like Steve wrote in an answer to one of these threads some of them have had a change of heart and I bet many of them will at least try the demo.

//Salkin

[MarkEzra]

Salkin: I expect you are right. I had little interest in Eastern theatre but bought CMBB just the same. The new features at that time made it an excellent purchase. What lay in store with CMSF makes me salivate with anticipatory joy not felt since CMBO days.