Free France Campaign

[bru888]

[...] On the other hand, there should be some reward for playing better. Indeed.

So what should that adjustment amount be for each scenario? -100, -250, -500, -1000? A tough question. Yes...

This is what needs to be defined. But I think that's probably going to change over the course of the campaign... I mean, from one scenario to another. Maybe from the second to the (let's say for the example!) tenth scenario it will be that much less, then for the next ten scenarios another amount, etc. But this is yet to be defined.

I tremble to ask this, but did you not volunteer to do a complete playthrough, once the last scenario is finished, with this very goal in mind?

[ColonelY]

Yes, I did.


But, I'm indeed waiting before I start that. I think it will be better to set some rules first...

Why? Well, if I remember correctly, I believe that a part of the RPs invested in auxiliary units are offered, or recouped, again later on (maybe up to 50% or something like that - and then it could go up and up, if for example you used 100 RPs for this purpose and you get a bonus of 50 RPs for each future scenario - IF it really works like that)...

1. So, should I replenish units that I don't really need anymore to win the scenario (as a kind of long term investment) or not?

2. Should I focus only on normal replenishments or allow some elite replenishments? This would be a game changer (or a long-term RP changer)... If some elite "allowed", what kind of units favored for this here, I mean for the sake of this test?

3. Other rules?


So, I'm waiting because to be most effective, I think we're going to have to set some rules for that.

[ColonelY]

Or perhaps I shall then just play it "naturally", as I would normally do, I mean, while keeping track of the starting/remaining RPs per scenario?

We'll see.

[bru888]

Or perhaps I shall then just play it "naturally", as I would normally do, I mean, while keeping track of the starting/remaining RPs per scenario?

We'll see.

Don't overthink it, Colonel. You have done plenty already, and I appreciate your willingness to perform this final task in the project. This "natural" approach would suffice, I think. Play it as natural as you can (i.e., don't try to over- or underachieve; don't stint or waste RPs), track the outcomes, and we will come up with a table of RP adjustments. Thanks.

[ColonelY]

Okay, it works.

[bru888]

Thanks again. Black Forest will be out soon, complete with Vichy castle and officer school diversions.

[GabeKnight]

2) A mechanism that will correct the build-up of Free French resources as one proceeds in the campaign.

As to that second item, I know how to do it: At scenario start, a negative adjustment of resource points. I know it cannot go negative; zero is the lowest, but is zero appropriate? On the one hand, I would say yes because each of these scenarios could be played individually. On the other hand, there should be some reward for playing better.

So what should that adjustment amount be for each scenario? -100, -250, -500, -1000? A tough question.

On my playthrough of this campaign (I got to the "Jedburgh Mission" (or similar, sorry)) I've accumulated literally thousands of RPs, to the point that I could and would repair everything Free-French with elite-replacements. It just didn't matter with that much money. And it always was going to be more next mission, because of the 50%-payback rule.

If you really want to do something about that, my advice: Trigger an absurdly high negative RP value for the player at turn start to make sure he always has zero RP and then add the amount you want them to have. As you seem to be very fond of campaign variables and sec. objective rewards, you can couple the starting allowance for the player with that.

[bru888]

Yes, that is the idea.

[ColonelY]

Well, yes and no. I think these are two different approaches... reduce RPs at the beginning of the scenario OR impose a certain amount, a precise amount, of RPs at the beginning of the scenario.

One thing to keep in mind is that the player should still be able to benefit from their prowess in the previous scenario(s).
Besides, I'm not sure we really want to add a whole collection of variable campaigns.

Since we are not going to make any massive changes to the first twenty scenarios of the campaign, I have already replayed the first two, paying attention to timing and, especially, to RPs.

For example, Erik has written that he has finished the first one with 377 (Free French) RPs. For me, it was 502 - but that, in itself, doesn't really matter. The point here is: if we force the player to start the next scenario with a certain amount of RPs, how many, then? 300? 400? 500? Let's be honest: we've to make choices, and it can't be perfect. But there are definitely ways to improve it.

I'm working on it.

[ColonelY]

The number that I'll give in this context depend of course on the way you play, but should already balance things out, because currently there are way too many RPs in this campaign.

(By the way, a player who saves directly less RPs should get more later on with the mechanism of recovering points invested in auxiliary units, so one in the other... )

I’ll try to check the timing too… I’ll see when I could have had a Major Victory, then continue playing (even, for example, with the last town to capture being empty, being no longer defended by enemy troops), just to see at the extreme end how many RPs are left (without having to calculate, like remaining RPs when Major Victory achievable + RPs/turn * the remaining amount of turns)…

[ColonelY]

@Bru: I suggest you read this entire post and the next one before making any changes... OR, at least, take a look at the end of the next post soon enough. I found something very encouraging.
*************
01Dakar:

Major Victory at t 45/50 (‘could even have been at t 44/50 if I’ve been lucky with the locations of the converts… the last one was of course in the last town to capture when I’ve played ) => timing perfect, nothing to change here!

RPs at start: 0 (of course, that’s normal)
RPs at the very end (having used mostly non-elite replenishments): 502 for FF & 1’111 RPs for Brits… => that’s too much!

Let’s change the FF income from start by -3 and the British income from start by -7.
So, respectively -150 RPs and -350 RPs, so about 350 RPs in the reserve for the next scenario and a British amount more reasonable too.
*************
02Gabon:

Major Victory at t 41/48 => so, here the timing may be a little generous… especially if this scenario is played within the campaign, with some RPs available from start. Otherwise, the player may encounter a slowest start… So, I would say, nothing to change here, turnwise.

RPs at start: 616… from 502, that’s 114 RPs that have been added => Immediately, from start, -120 FF RPs! (To compensate that – again, if the player has spared less RPs, he’ll receive a little more, which will somehow balance things…)

What was the most costly (at first) was the southern group to be replenished while being heavily bombed (especially our artillery unit)…

At the very end, the FF had 1’797 RPs… from 616 when I’ve started, that’s more than 1’180 RPs gained during this scenario. Again, that’s too much!

Now, the thing here is that we DON’T want to reduce the FF income FROM START. I’ve actually had to use a part of my reserves, down to a minima of 456 RPs (so 160 RPs LESS than from what is available to start with)… it was around the 15th turn – when the FF were about to start the landing!
It took me about 5 turns to balance back the reserve of RPs to the starting value (and a little higher)… from there, it did only go up and up…

Towards the end, the income is definitely much too high… when only two or three interior towns are left to be taken, with only relatively speaking very few casualties taken compared to what we’ve seen during this scenario, then we’ve still a +50 RPs/turn…

It shouldn’t be changed during the initial phasis (until troops are ready to land, that is). => 28 RPs/turn
It shouldn’t be changed during several of turns just after the landing has started – then, these RPs are needed… => 50 RPs/turn (so +22 RPs/turn then)
Then, it should definitely be reduced. When? Either using a timer starting when the player can start the landings… OR, probably easier, simply choose some turn. (Why easier? Well, this timer may work or not, so…)

I’ve stabilized the RP reserve back near its initial value near the 20th turn… Few more turns for safety, taking into account that perhaps this scenario is played as standalone… hummm…

Let’s say at turn 28 start: let’s reduce this income to 30 RPs/turn, so -20 RPs/turn during the 20 last turns (so that’s -400 RPs in total).
Plausible? Yes, after all, this battlefield stands far away from main bases, we may encounter some difficulties related to this…
I’ve gained almost 1’200 RPs during this scenario, so cutting down 400 shouldn’t be a problem.

=> So, I suggest cutting down the income at start of turn 28 to the 30 RPs/turn… Perhaps together with a small event talking about the issues due to a far away battlefield. => This would make more important, more meaningful, by the way, the fact of going to take the Mine. Thus, increasing the immersion, and thus worth the effort.

Two other elements spotted:
1. Very nice briefing starting about “Freetown” and “Libreville/Townfree”… But where stands Freetown? The player isn’t supposed to know this, I think. So, perhaps consider adding a small bracket at the end of brief 1/5 containing some info about this.
2. When the mine is taken (probably towards the end of the scenario) => let’s change the flag of Oil Pump & Construction Group from (Vichy) French to neutral ones! (As in the Dakar scenario for the phosphate mine.)

[ColonelY]

03Kufra:
RPs at start: 2291… from the remaining 1797, that’s almost 500 that have been added => Directly remove 500 RPs at scenario start!

Various:
1. Add from start some RPs for the British, perhaps from 20 to 30 I would say an extra 20 RPs would be nice here. Reason? 3 recon vehicles, ‘supposed to be in front of our troops, thus to take casualties against the Sahariana… and they are “difficult” to replenish with the income. 3 vehicles, so 3 RPs/turn, that’s coherent… but it costs 7 RPs to replenish 2 health pts (without elite rep.)… so, once they are fighting…

2. I’ve checked in the triggers… no, I haven’t lost any commander ( ) but I remember that the British recon vehicle has been changed (to allow for replenishment, precisely). Therefore, I wanted to check something related to this… And actually, there is a catch: Folder “Secondary Objectives”… there has been a little clone to adapt -> trigger “Lose Colonel Bagnold”, under Conditions, the “Unit Killed/Removed”, it’s Leclerc (again) that is selected. Obviously, this has to be modified.

3. The two Italian AA units in the fort have no XP at all => 1/2 star each or 1/2 star for one and 1 star for the other? (They don’t deal too much damages to our planes anyway.) This had been changed as well, it was at first a mobile unit…
*******
When I’ve played, I was close to settle the deal for the Italian aerodromo, but I had already several infantry units and one artillery unit near the fort and the first attacks there began. Which means I already had my two British bombers available… (which means too that Al-Jawf was already captured, by the way). Then came the time when the Italian Aerodromo was taken/destroyed… this triggers the exit of all remaining Italian planes (there was already no more left anyway, as the remaining depleted ones have been destroyed on the ground, in the westernmost airstrip – again, doesn’t matter here). The point is that actually ALL planes were exited, including my two British bombers! At least I could just deploy them back, so of course I did it and thus managed to finish this scenario with them.

So, I’ve looked in the triggers… under “pri obj” folder, “Destroy Buma Aerodromo”… “Remove Unit”: actually, you’ve made it right! It should work. You’ve selected as “Alliance” the (Italian) AI one, that’s perfectly correct. But not working as expected. => I’ve even reloaded a save file just to check again this aspect… our British planes are indeed exited as well!
Perhaps, rather than “Alliance” and the color for Italian (AI), it would be better to select “Nation” and then the “Italian flag”?
*******
And, under the “Italian Activations”, for the “Release Guardia Aerodromo”, perhaps spawn the two infantry units at 8 strength points only (so a little depleted)…

Then, I’ve seen a visual “glitch” when removing the Italian MG-foxholes & bunkers of the area… sometimes they are still visible on the map even if the sector IS empty, even if one unit can just move to this very same hex where they stand.
Once, it has concerned 1 MG-fox (the one in the SW) and 1 bunker (the one in the S). Another time, only this bunker and a still another time, all were blown up as they should…
Well, we know that MAY happen, but I don’t think there is anything we can do about it. It this happens, it happens!
*******
By the way, the “Remove (our) bombers” set of triggers in “Allied Activations” isn’t working now… Because under each “Remove Unit”, you’ve no hex selected and no distance neither.
I managed to use one bomber to help dealing with heavies around the Mosque.

The “Remove bombers – fort” may be deleted anyway, I think, as we’re very likely to take the fort at the very end of the scenario anyway… But, it’s not a problem in itself, so we may as well keep it as it is.

Now, to make a better use of the “Remove bombers – distance a”, I would suggest selecting the very same hex for the condition and the same distance (10). Then, it may be a nice idea to add an event (in each and every of these triggers) to remind the player that these planes have been put under his command ONLY to help taking the fort… and that he may deploy again these planes now, while not bringing them any longer further away from the Italian fort.

(Speaking about this, I’ve made another little test: now, the British bombers are exited as well even if they’ve stayed really near the fort so, anyway, we know for sure that these “distance” triggers don’t play a role in what I’ve written before about our undeployed bombers. – Perhaps it has been alterated by the Allies Defiant DLC, as we know that there are a few changes here and there? Perhaps, I don’t know. And doesn’t really matter here.)
*******
Major Victory could have been taken at turn 33 out of 48 (the last concrete bunker in the fort down to 1 or 2 strength points, several French units there, ready to rush for the finish; all other obj achieved)… there, we’re definitely too generous timewise! I think we’ve already talked about this for this scenario… still, what about 44 turns?

At the very end (only non-elite replenishment – but we don’t need more anyway, our troops start at low XP anyway), with all units at full-strength, I had 3008 RPs… Having started at 2291, that’s a gain of more than 700 RPs. Again, that’s too much.

We don’t need that much RPs as we’ve no costly tanks nor planes to replenish… Here, I would suggest two things:
1. Remove these 4 last turns (thus “lose” as well 4*24 RPs/turn, so almost 100 RPs)
2. Reduce the income from 24 RPs/turn to 20 RPs/turn… so 44*4, that’s a little less than 180 RPs

=> Like this, we’ll reduce this gain by almost 280 RPs… The player still has the possibility to “gain” about 400 RPs during this scenario. Or a little less, depending on how he’s playing… anyway, he’ll have enough RPs.
*******
04Keren:

RPs at start: 3275… from the remaining 3008, that’s almost 275 that have been added => Directly remove 275 RPs at scenario start!
=> By the way, I think that THIS IS VERY PROMISING!

‘Got it?

Look: In the Gabon scenario, we’ve several tank units. And tanks cost more to be replenished than simple regular infantry. Basically, I’ve used more RPs to replenish units in 02Gabon than in 03Kufra… So I receive more RPs (from this aux mechanism) after the 02Gabon than after the 03Kufra (respectively ~500 vs ~275).

Why is this good, or promising? Well, then it may not be as worse as we may have thought, there seems to be nothing really “exponential” here.

So, when playing the 20th scenario, for example, it’s not that a part of ALL RPs used during ALL previous scenarios will be taken back. No, not at all. It will then be a part of ALL (Free French) RPs used during THE previous scenario (only) that will be taken into account.

And that’s very good, because then we CAN make some rather fine tuning. And that, that’s promising, isn’t it?

[bru888]

Colonel, here is a title and position should you decide to accept it: Conditional upon your acceptance, I hereby appoint you as Resource Manager for Free France 1940-1945!

This means, based on your campaign playthrough, I will adopt any and all recommendations that you have concerning various adjustments to be made to resource income and starting balances.

Three provisos:

1) Bear in mind the rule of thumb that the AI has been getting approximately 25% of the income of the Allies. This seems to be a consensus in that most people don't mind the AI doing some repairs, but get exasperated when the AI is constantly repairing its units.

2) There are one or two scenarios, if I recall correctly, where the human player is given additional resources at the start for a particular purpose. This is not on you to discern, but I will be looking for these instances before making adjustments.

3) This is where the scenarios will part ways, so to speak; one version for the campaign and one version for the standalone set that I have in mind. I believe that, in general, the RP income is sufficient for each standalone scenario so I will leave that set unchanged, most likely.

[bru888]

As to your other recommendations, they will all be considered of course, in due time. I want to finish Black Forest first, and I am close to doing that.

[ColonelY]

Colonel, here is a title and position should you decide to accept it: Conditional upon your acceptance, I hereby appoint you as Resource Manager for Free France 1940-1945! [...]

Great, that's okay.


And, by the way, I agree with all the points mentioned in your two posts.

[ColonelY]

This way, at the start of the campaign, the player builds up his (RP) reserves.

With these first changes, he can start the 4th scenario with up to 1500 or 1600 RPs (which is already more reasonable than almost 3300 RPs). After that, there will be some scenarios that are more resource-intensive than others. So you don't want to have it go up in every scenario. We'll have to find something reasonable: not to be too strict/hard, but not to be too generous either. I'll work on that.

[bru888]

Screenshot 1.jpg (183.4 KiB) Viewed 1127 times

[bru888]

As to your other recommendations, they will all be considered of course, in due time. I want to finish Black Forest first, and I am close to doing that.

Finis. 24 scenarios in a year and a half. That's about my speed. ( )

[bru888]

Colonel, here is a title and position should you decide to accept it: Conditional upon your acceptance, I hereby appoint you as Resource Manager for Free France 1940-1945! [...]

Great, that's okay.


And, by the way, I agree with all the points mentioned in your two posts.

There is one more proviso: Once I split the scenarios into two groups, standalone and campaign, I am not going to want to do much more editing except for the most expedient reasons. So let's proceed with your playthrough, if you will, and I will consider your suggested improvements as well as RP adjustments. After that, I am looking to lock this down, then begin the work of splitting/copying the scenarios into two groups.

[bru888]

This way, at the start of the campaign, the player builds up his (RP) reserves.

With these first changes, he can start the 4th scenario with up to 1500 or 1600 RPs (which is already more reasonable than almost 3300 RPs). After that, there will be some scenarios that are more resource-intensive than others. So you don't want to have it go up in every scenario. We'll have to find something reasonable: not to be too strict/hard, but not to be too generous either. I'll work on that.

Thanks, Colonel.