Command Ops 2 - Epsom v1.0

Operation Epsom, Normandy 1944

  1. Pieter

    Pieter Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2015
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    3
    Pieter submitted a new resource:

    Epsom - Operation Epsom, Normandy 1944

    Read more about this resource...
     
  2. Takoda

    Takoda Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    5
    Thanks for sharing guys, it's great to see some new scenarios posted here lately.
     
  3. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    1,943
    Likes Received:
    103
    Thanks, Tukker. Who was the author? It wasn't you, was it? I have always played a modded version of the first Epsom scenario, modded to dig in or entrench the majority of the Axis units (as was the case in reality, but as was left out by the author in the original version, though I recall he did say he was to correct this, but I don't think he ever did). I was also thinking of modding the map to make sure nearly all areas were passable (at a crawl) by all wheeled and tracked units, which is the only way you can get over the lack of mounted ops at the moment and simulate the true mobility of mounted units. Might not be so important in this scenario where there aren't too many forests, no major rivers etc. But I wouldn't want to publish an amended version if you had already dealt with the digging in thing? Did you dig in the Axis for this version?

    Peter
     
  4. Pieter

    Pieter Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2015
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    3
    You're welcome, Peter. And yes, I am the designer of the Epsom scenarios. To be honest, it's been such a long time that I don't remember whether on not the Germans are dug in or entrenched or whether or not I would or did correct it. They should be entrenched. If they aren't, by all means amend the scenario. Some goes for the map, it would be interesting to see what happens if the woods are passable for motorized units.

    Pieter 'tukker' Schouten
     
  5. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    1,943
    Likes Received:
    103
    Cheers, Pieter. I must have forgotten it was yours. Sorry. It's a great scenario (the first, I mean - I'm sure the second is good too, but haven't played that much). I recall a conversation ages ago when you said you would dig them in if you got the chance. It's easy enough for anyone to do in scenmaker, of course, for those who have already downloaded it. I'll put one up though. Thanks.

    What do you think about some bunkers, or fixed map fortifications of some sort - up on hill 112?

    Peter
     
  6. Kensal

    Kensal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2018
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have been playing the Epsom scenario. Thank you for making it - it’s a pleasure to play it.

    A comment on the map - my understanding is the both the railway line (which ran in a steep cutting) and the Odon river were practically impassable for both tracked and wheeled vehicles, save at the specified crossing points, which made life a lot harder for VIII corps. I am not sure if it is possible within the confines of the game system to make the railway line impassable to vehicles though.

    Another query is the presence of 101 SS heavy tank battalion on the Odon. I can understand why you may have included it to balance the forces better.

    One final point about the scenario is that it might have been better to provide some fixed Lehr units on the western edge of the map to prevent 49 Division advancing south unopposed west of Fontenay.

    The scenario also throughs up an interesting question about the balance of attack and defence in the game system. During the battle, VIII Corps struggled to punch through 12 SS Divisions defences in Manvieu and Cheux, despite overwhelming superiority in numbers, and similarly II SS Panzer Korps failed to make any impression when it counterattacked late on in the battle. In the game system, attacking units seem to have more ability to defeat defending units than may have been the case in real life. The same points might also be said about the Bulge scenarios. However I have only ever played against the AI which might partly explain it.

    Overall a really good scenario.
     
  7. jimcarravallah

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    685
    Likes Received:
    50
    Part of the issue is the map drawer's decisions on movement effects for the terrain features you cite. The rail lines default at 10-percent normal movement for all vehicular traffic (an improved highway would be 100-percent, road 86-percent, and minor road 70-percent). The Odon river is classified as a minor river, with a default rate of 5-percent of normal vehicular traffic movement (major river is impassible except at designated ferry points and bridges). Unfortunately, the availability of graphic layers is limited, and a major river designation has a different graphic construct -- more a 2-D object than a line -- and to draw one could distort the map image.

    Structuring the software to drawing the map requires some compromises to account for calculating power necessary to reproduce all effects with a set of images. The compromise is between fidelity of the map and either slowing or crashing the rest of the game engine to account for the added calculations needed to represent it on a standard PC platform.

    One of the features of Command Ops 2 is you are given the tools to modify scenarios to address the gamut of options you mention. In the SceneMaker application there are tools for alternate force structures and dispositions to provide the human player with variations in the problems he faces with the Artificial Intelligence. Those options are addressed directly with the "favor Axis / favor Allies" toggles for reinforcements (which can also include changes in original dispositions of combat units) and supplies).

    Lacking alternatives with those toggles, user-shared scenarios can be modified to create more "what if" options.

    Usual courtesy includes a note recognizing the original scenario creator of original content used to support mods, and sound software management practices would involve designating at least a different version of the original scenario to insure the original content remains intact.
     

Share This Page