BrucErik CSD Studio

[bru888]

Bruce, please feel free to edit any scenario briefing/info to your heart's content.

...

Lastly, I usually do not add many secondary objectives. I thought I'd wait until I had at least one scenario play-test under my belt.
If you have any interesting ones up your sleeve, put them in.

I feel like the Genie emerging from Aladdin's lamp. "I'm free, free, FREE! HA, HA, HA, HA!"

The_Genie_Aladdin.png (77.57 KiB) Viewed 3369 times

(Don't get nervous. It will be fine. )

[calmhatchery]

EXCELLENT dear HERREN

[Erik2]

Re unit density.

Operation Epsom's massive OOB convinced me to go from company to battalion level for the Allies and battalion/company for the Germans.
I think the larger maps will still work well with this.
I may keep the company level for the small scenarios as otherwise there will hardly be any units left on the battlefield.

So I'm taking one step back and will redo the earlier scenarios.

[bru888]

Re unit density.

Operation Epsom's massive OOB convinced me to go from company to battalion level for the Allies and battalion/company for the Germans.
I think the larger maps will still work well with this.
I may keep the company level for the small scenarios as otherwise there will hardly be any units left on the battlefield.

So I'm taking one step back and will redo the earlier scenarios.

I don't think this affects anything that I have done so far. I will do a CSI sweep before release, looking for "orphans" and such, but this does not sound like you are altering objectives, descriptions, etc. The first thing that it might affect is what I am thinking of doing with Michael Wittman's Tiger tank in Villers Bocage.

[bru888]

. . . what I am thinking of doing with Michael Wittman's Tiger tank in Villers Bocage.

Speaking of which, if you don't like what I did in this regard, remove the "- Wittmann" tag from this unit:

Screenshot 1.jpg (123.86 KiB) Viewed 3315 times

. . . return the scenario name to "Villers Bocage - Wittmann's Ride" or something else:

Screenshot 2.jpg (264.48 KiB) Viewed 3315 times

. . . delete this trigger folder:

Screenshot 3.jpg (159.96 KiB) Viewed 3315 times

. . . and delete this objective:

Screenshot 4.jpg (187.04 KiB) Viewed 3315 times

Note that Wittmann doesn't get killed if the objective is completed, in case we want to use him again later. This is how it starts:

Screenshot 5.jpg (335.05 KiB) Viewed 3307 times

and this is how it ends:

Screenshot 6.jpg (384.44 KiB) Viewed 3307 times

[bru888]

Villers-Bocage

Edit: Two humans again. I fixed.

Edit: Turns per day = 18 = Turn limit.

Edit: The objective is "Hold all 5 objectives at scenario end" but there are six primary VP's on the map. The sixth is Tracy-Bocage, southwest of Villers-Bocage. I felt that this was a more important hex than the one on the road to Vily-Bocage because Tracy-Bocage represents the point at which the salient could be cut off. It was important to hold Tracy-Bocage to avoid encirclement of British forces in and around Villers-Bocage. Therefore, I made Tracy-Bocage an objective to be held:

Screenshot 1.jpg (657.18 KiB) Viewed 3303 times

Then I saw there was a substantial gap between Tracy-Bocage and Villers-Bocage, so I made Chienbourg a primary VP as well. Now the objective is ""Hold all 6 objectives at scenario end" and it represents not only holding Villers-Bocage but the lifeline to it.

Edit: Here are your outcome images:

outcome_2_1.png (251.99 KiB) Viewed 3303 times

outcome_2_0.png (232.39 KiB) Viewed 3303 times

I'm finished with Villers-Bocage and the updated version is in the "Back to Erik" folder. Remember, only "Edits" are changes that I have actually done to the scenario. They are for you to review and approve. "Comments," "Questions," and "Suggestions" are things for you to consider and act upon as necessary.

[Erik2]

Nice additions to Villers-Bocage.

[bru888]

Nice additions to Villers-Bocage.

Thanks. I try to make them plausible, based on a reasonable amount of research. Don't be shy if I err or overreach.

Question: Before I get into 13Caumont which is named "Caumont-l'Eventé - An Opportunity Lost (Large)," what is the relationship of this scenario to the Villers-Bocage that I just finished? It looks to be the same situation here as in the previous scenario, only on a much bigger map (this one does show Caumont-l'Eventé). Even the preliminary scenario description is the same as it was in Villers-Bocage.

Question: If you intend to include both Caumont-l'Eventé and Villers-Bocage in the campaign, even though that would seem repetitive, do you mind the same arrangements? It's going to be hard going back to the creative well to come up with different materials to deal with the same situation. I'd rather set it up the same way and have you choose which one to include because, frankly, I don't think you should have both in the campaign.

[Erik2]

Nice additions to Villers-Bocage.

Thanks. I try to make them plausible, based on a reasonable amount of research. Don't be shy if I err or overreach.

Question: Before I get into 13Caumont which is named "Caumont-l'Eventé - An Opportunity Lost (Large)," what is the relationship of this scenario to the Villers-Bocage that I just finished? It looks to be the same situation here as in the previous scenario, only on a much bigger map (this one does show Caumont-l'Eventé). Even the preliminary scenario description is the same as it was in Villers-Bocage.

Question: If you intend to include both Caumont-l'Eventé and Villers-Bocage in the campaign, even though that would seem repetitive, do you mind the same arrangements? It's going to be hard going back to the creative well to come up with different materials to deal with the same situation. I'd rather set it up the same way and have you choose which one to include because, frankly, I don't think you should have both in the campaign.

These scenarios are basically large and small variants of the same battle. The smaller one concentrate on the fighting around Villers-Bocage while the larger one includes the whole shebang. Just giving a battle-weary player a choice here. If we decide to leave one scenario out, we'll keep the larger one.
And yes, you can use the same Wittman setup.

[bru888]

Caumont-l'Eventé

Comment: This OOB map bothers me. The British are too strung out - the "Caumont-l'Eventé Gap" seems to refer to them rather than the Germans - and the map omits the fact that the Panzer Lehr Division faced pressure to their front; i.e., from north of Tilly-sur-Seulles. Hence they were not entirely free to just wheel the entire division to ambush the British 7th Amoured Division at Villers-Bocage as apparently they can in this scenario. Moreover, the British advance was called a "salient" whereas this here is like a pencil-thin headlong dash which can easily be surrounded and cut off. From reading about the battle and looking at the maps below, I don't think the OOB map is an entirely accurate depiction of what happened. I was wondering if you would consider revising it? It's too bad that the Tilly-sur-Seulles is just off the northern edge of the map or you could show some of the British 49th/50th Infantry Divisions and other units that immobilized much of Panzer Lehr in static defense.

Operation_Perch.png (560.01 KiB) Viewed 3216 times

Caumont_Gap.png (363.53 KiB) Viewed 3216 times

[Erik2]

I'll take another look at Caumont.
Note that I've moved the Epsom scenarios out of your folder for some tune-ups.

[bru888]

I'll take another look at Caumont.

I'm not suggesting a major revision of the map. I am thinking of a slightly broader and a continuous front in terms of British hex ownership (it was wider in Villers-Bocage) with British units in a more regularly spaced arc that would look like a salient. I do see that you have some of the Panzer Lehr Division on local defense; that would be commensurate in the north with having to hold the line south of Tilly-sur-Seulles but I'm not sure if you have it arranged that way. Perhaps, depending on how well the player does, there could be a couple of secondary objectives to decimate the Panzer Lehr (and the remnants of the 352nd in Caumont) so it would not necessarily mean that these defensive German units would be out of action completely.

[bru888]

Am I waiting for a revised map of Caumont or should I proceed with the existing one? No rush if the former; no problem if the latter.

[Erik2]

Am I waiting for a revised map of Caumont or should I proceed with the existing one? No rush if the former; no problem if the latter.

If I remembered to copy Caumont back into your folder you can continue (not at my PC right now).

[bru888]

Caumont-l'Eventé

Edit: Two humans again. I fixed.

Edit: I moved the sixth primary VP from Hotto-les-Bagues to Chienbourg. Hotto-les-Bagues is too far north to be a realistic objective, given the premise of the scenario and the history of the battle (the British have been ordered to halt and hold; they will eventually be ordered to withdraw). I also moved the primary VP in the nameless hex adjacent to Montbrocq to Montbrocq itself.

Edit: I also moved the secondary VP in the nameless town south of Villy-Bocage to Orval. My thinking is this: Temporarily, the British are halted and ordered to hold the six VP's in the Villers-Bocage) but there is a gap in their own lines between Bricquessard and Tracy-Bocage. A prudent commander would seek to ensure that a supply connection was established so that the salient remained viable. Taking Orval would be essential for this and Anctoville and Caumont-l'Eventé would mean securing the flanks of the salient.

Edit: To that effect, I added a primary objective to "Open and maintain supply lines" with the description "A continuous supply line must reach from Planquery through Tracy-Bocage and on to Point 213, the spearhead of the British advance." The triggers in the "Supply Lines" folder facilitate this objective.

Edit: Considering these changes, it seemed advisable to make both primary objectives to be evaluated at "Scenario turn limit."

Edit: Tweaked and enhanced the briefings and outcomes from the Villers-Bocage scenario to correspond with these changes.

Edit: Added "Change Income" and "Event Popup" effects to the UK-1500 trigger.

Edit: Added the Michael Wittmann module from the Villers-Bocage scenario. Moved the 1/2/101 SS Pz and 2/2/101 SS Pz - Wittmann units back a hex or two to give the British some breathing room at start (which is how they were positioned in the Villers-Bocage scenario).

Comment: By far, this Caumont-l'Eventé is the scenario that I would include in the campaign over the Villers-Bocage scenario. Much better portrayal of the situation, in my opinion.

Edit: Here are your outcome images. They are the same as Villers-Bocage because it is my anticipation that you will use only one scenario or the other:

outcome_2_1.png (251.99 KiB) Viewed 2936 times

outcome_2_0.png (232.39 KiB) Viewed 2936 times

I'm finished with Caumont-l'Eventé and the updated version is in the "Back to Erik" folder. Remember, only "Edits" are changes that I have actually done to the scenario. They are for you to review and approve. "Comments," "Questions," and "Suggestions" are things for you to consider and act upon as necessary.

[bru888]

Operation Martlet

Edit: There was the same "Air Supply Limit Exceeded" issue with this scenario, which I fixed by turning on "Off-map Air Supply Source."

Edit: There were actually 15 primary VP's on the map. I thought, why not add the final two? They are to the south and east which is the direction that the offensive was going; they seem to be the logical destinations. So I included Rauray and the town to its southeast, which I identified as Le Haut De Grainville. To compensate, I removed the two primary VP's in the middle that have a "supply dump" appearance. I made those secondary VP's and I created a secondary objective concerning them - see what you think, including the reward. Here are the photos that I used:

photo_german_supply_dump_1.png (251.63 KiB) Viewed 2942 times

photo_german_supply_dump_2.png (255.36 KiB) Viewed 2942 times

Edit: Only because I did not mention "waves" of deployment in the briefing did I include an Event Popup message about "Additional Troops" at 0730. I always appreciate knowing when command points are increased as it is easy to overlook this during gameplay.

Edit: In "Ger/1000," I assume you meant "Change Income +4" instead of "=4."

Edit: Here are your outcome images:

outcome_2_1.png (224.83 KiB) Viewed 2942 times

outcome_2_0.png (184.35 KiB) Viewed 2942 times

I'm finished with Operation Martlet and the updated version is in the "Back to Erik" folder. Remember, only "Edits" are changes that I have actually done to the scenario. They are for you to review and approve. "Comments," "Questions," and "Suggestions" are things for you to consider and act upon as necessary.

[bru888]

Operation Epsom - Day One

Question: What is the significance, in game or historical terms, of these Railroad Cuts?

Screenshot 1.jpg (246.01 KiB) Viewed 2898 times

I am wondering whether they are worthy of objectives, primary or secondary.

[Erik2]

The railroad cuts are only decorations.
There are precious few 'rail stations' on the map so I guess neither the Germans or Allies will use the rails much anyway.

The map templates I use include previous battle results, note that a lot of villages are using the rubble/scorched earth terrain in later scenarios.
You may want to add some smoke/fire decoration if you like.

[Erik2]

Bocage question

I'm currently replacing the 'rough desert' in the US 44-45 campaign with 'rice field'. It works much better as roads actually function on the rice field.
I would like to do this for our Normandy campaign as well. These scenarios now use normal fields for bocage.

Thoughts?

[bru888]

An upgrade aesthetically over rough desert. I forgot what you said previously so please excuse the repetition: Did you give thought to using escarpment to stand in as bocage?

EDIT: Nah, never mind. Escarpment would bar ALL units, not just armored, and that would not be realistic.