Scope of a scenario - Platoon level - Pegasus Bridge

[Bie]

I'm thinking in giving scenario creation a shot. I want to start small and take a battle that I have at least some knowledge of. I'm thinking some kind of Pegasus Bridge scenario.

For this scenario to work the scope should be at platoon level. I haven't seen any scenario like this in Command Ops 2 though. Is a scenario of this scope even feasible in CO2?

 

[jimcarravallah]

I'm thinking in giving scenario creation a shot. I want to start small and take a battle that I have at least some knowledge of. I'm thinking some kind of Pegasus Bridge scenario.

For this scenario to work the scope should be at platoon level. I haven't seen any scenario like this in Command Ops 2 though. Is a scenario of this scope even feasible in CO2?

It really depends on how you draw the map and the level of echelons you fight on it.

If you scale a battle such as from the Meuse to the Rhine -- essentially the clash of two Armies battling over hundreds of square kilometers of space -- at a platoon level, the map would be so cluttered with units that managing the combat at an operational level would be nearly impossible not to mention the developer would go crazy trying to keep the number of platoons aligned with appropriate formations in defining the order of battle.

If the scenario is scaled at a few tens of square kilometers and the clash includes only a couple of regiments, then working at the platoon level may be possible.

One complication in going to the platoon level may be that the standard for mapping is scaled to accommodate a company-like frontage or span of control as the most prolific smallest unit. Smaller units may be included, but they make up for the difference in span of control with longer range or higher rate of fire weapons instead of manpower. It may be that the firepower of a lone platoon will not play well on a map with a 100-meter grid as the basis for evaluating terrain effects on combat.

But, the belief won't be demonstrated until someone steps up and develops a scenario at the platoon level with the current mapping to determine whether the terrain vs. unit size matters.

 

[Bie]

Been fiddling with all the tools today, made some additions to the base estab to account for Glider Borne Company HQ and Platoons. It seems to work just fine. Initial testing shows that they are a bit squishy though, but I'm guessing with decent testing and scenario tuning things might turn out ok.

 

[john connor]

It's been done, Bie. Chris Maiorana did a whole series of EF company level scenarios. They may still be available on his site - The Sharp End Gaming. If not, mail him from there - he's a nice guy and will probably send you his estabs and maps etc, if that's useful.

Plus there was once an official plan to do a company level (France '40?) scenario pack.

There are problems (which were to be addressed by coding changes in the official release, if it ever happened, iirc). A major issue is the los calculations. These can end up being very far from what you would need to make a platoon level scenario really work on a platoon level map. The los calculations in the code function at a higher level, basically. So with a company sized counter placed behind a factory in Stalingrad, for example, you might expect - because of the way the company is spread out with a hundred plus men taking up different positions - that los would extend through the factory, at least partially: of those 100 plus men, some will be slightly forward, some peering through gaps, some on the roof etc. And this is what happens at present in the game. But when you get down to a group of 10 men trying to hide behind a factory this is no good at all. I found that ten men would have the same loss behind, for example, a factory-type obstruction, as 120. This made getting a platoon level dynamic problematic.

I messed around with map values in the map editor to try to tweak this, as a work-around (I used Chris's already prepared company level scenarios for this). You can get quite far like this. You will have to dramatically (and I mean dramatically) increase the vis modifiers for various objects to get close to the results you need (increase the height of some objects too). It may be easier to achieve this now using the new vis rules in the beta build. You will have to mess around with los in the map editor, make the scenarios and test it (a long slow process because you can't really test los in the map editor), but I'm guessing you may end up dissatisfied.

Dave's advice to me, way back, was that the game was set up to calculate los on the basis of higher-level footprints. Hence there were to be tweaks if a platoon level pack ever went official.

Good luck, though! A Pegasus bridge scenario might be great even if you did it at normal company level.

Myself, I would LOVE there to be a proper platoon level version of the game.

 

[Bie]

Thanks John for pointing the way. I've taken a look and I've found estabs to be quite interesting. I'm using them to base my units on until I've found more specific data.

My map is just about done and I'm tinkering on the OOB's.

Just a question or two:

- How do you guys set up the correct scale of the map? For now I've used a printscreen of google maps and put it in the scanmap folder to be used as an overlay. I've tried to apporximate the scale as best as I could in the scenario maker. But still I've noticed that the scale is a bit off. The map is quite playable, but such things will nag in the back of my head.

- There is a part of the Cean Canal that has "spilled" over. The part south of the Bénouville bridge between the canal en the marshes should be clear ground but is actually water. This is normally the location where I should place a AT gun. I'd like to fix this without destroying to much the layout of the canal. Is there something I can do to remedy this?

 

[Bie]

Never mind, found what I was looking for. After wading through the internet I finally found a GSGS map that I could use. Those are really awesome!

 

[john connor]

Sorry, Bie. Was away and off line for a few days or so. I'm afraid it's so long since I properly used mapmaker that I can't recall how you trace maps etc, so can't help. I did manage to learn it all by reading the manual though, so the manual must be relatively clear...

I'm not sure what you mean by 'spilled over'. If you just mean you drew it wrong then just select the object and correct, no? Or do you mean the map values show the area as water when on the map it appears as land? I think, iirc, you have to be very careful about the proximity of roads and such like to water, or the program gets confused, but not sure if this is your issue?

 

[Kurt]

All the information is in the map-maker guide , the game engine sees the map as a grid of 100m squares , although for more detail on smaller maps you can set it to 50m squares . As John says , keep roads and other linear terrain features at least 100m away from water features .

 

[Bie]

Yes I meant the map grid. I changed the scale of the map and it sorted itself. For the moment though I'm going to ditch the platoons and settle for companies.

 

[Bie]

Just as an update for the Pegasus Bridge scenario. I reworked the map (again). This time to a 8x8km map. I'm planning to do a historical scenario with the 6th Airborne Division vs the 21st Panzer Division. I've done a bit of research and I've come to the conclusion that this map is going to be packed with units (even though it is only a 64km² map). Doing a platoon based map of this scenario is going to be nigh impossible, unless I focus on the 4km² around the bridge. I might do that still at some point though, who knows

Anyway the map I came up with:

And a closeup of both of the bridges:

 

[john connor]

Super map, Bie. Great job. I love the look of it. Good detail and good aesthetics. Especially like the use of fields. I notice the care taken too - for instance, care not to make the road joints sloppy. It is true, I guess, that some of the features are necessarily so close to each other that when put through the program they may not have the intended effect. But assuming your roads and crossings all work, that doesn't matter, I think. But there are some roads very near to water. Did you check they work?

If you want, by the way, I know that someone has done a neat bocage graphic. It comes with the Airborne scenario from Utah Beach that I uploaded somewhere here some time ago. In resources, maybe?


When can I try the scenario?

 

[Bie]

Super map, Bie. Great job. I love the look of it. Good detail and good aesthetics. Especially like the use of fields. I notice the care taken too - for instance, care not to make the road joints sloppy. It is true, I guess, that some of the features are necessarily so close to each other that when put through the program they may not have the intended effect. But assuming your roads and crossings all work, that doesn't matter, I think. But there are some roads very near to water. Did you check they work?

If you want, by the way, I know that someone has done a neat bocage graphic. It comes with the Airborne scenario from Utah Beach that I uploaded somewhere here some time ago. In resources, maybe?


When can I try the scenario?

Yeah I know the roads alongside the canal and the river are at best 50% usable. For the moment I've modeled them in as they were there in reality but game play wise I've got a good mind to remove them. They look really nice though, quite a shame...

Status of the scenario:
- Map: Done, yet might do some little retouching
- Scenario objectives: In place, needs testing
- OOB: Mostly done, still need to add an infantry brigade incoming from Sword beach
- Unit placement: Done
- Reinforcements: Mostly done, still needs tuning and testing
- Supplies: In place, needs testing
- Estabs: To do, for the moment I'm using placeholders close the real units

I'm not sure when I'll be done. But I'll keep you all updated.

 

[jimcarravallah]

Yeah I know the roads alongside the canal and the river are at best 50% usable. For the moment I've modeled them in as they were there in reality but game play wise I've got a good mind to remove them. They look really nice though, quite a shame...

Status of the scenario:
- Map: Done, yet might do some little retouching
- Scenario objectives: In place, needs testing
- OOB: Mostly done, still need to add an infantry brigade incoming from Sword beach
- Unit placement: Done
- Reinforcements: Mostly done, still needs tuning and testing
- Supplies: In place, needs testing
- Estabs: To do, for the moment I'm using placeholders close the real units

I'm not sure when I'll be done. But I'll keep you all updated.

The issue with roads along the river is the possibility of establishing unintended crossing points. The recommendation to keep linear effects at least 100-meters apart to avoid the ambiguity.

The issue is described on Pg. 53 of the MapMaker Manual.

 

[Kurt]

nice map Bie

 

[Bie]

I've uploaded the scenario to the resources section of the site. For the moment it is playable but probably not that fine tuned yet.

The OOB and Estabs are solid, so I won't change to much on that front. The unit strengths and commander skills are still mostly to be changed though. Flavour texts and alternated reinforcements are also still do be done.

For the moment I've mostly auto-run the scenario and played the first hours myself to check out the opening moves. So there is still quite a bit of polish to be done.

If anyone wants to check it out, go here

 

[john connor]

Hey Bie. I've started a 'private conversation' with you, in here, and have given some feedback in there. Peter

 

[Vancalten]

Very nice, I've started a quick test and I like it, I will be playing more seriously this weekend. Thank you for bringing good scenarios for guys like me that cannot afford tu purchase modules (In this part of the world). Again, nice job.

 

[Bie]

Very nice, I've started a quick test and I like it, I will be playing more seriously this weekend. Thank you for bringing good scenarios for guys like me that cannot afford tu purchase modules (In this part of the world). Again, nice job.

Thanks. If you take another look at it in the weekend be sure to download the latest version. I'll probably post another update tonight with all of the added flavour texts for the units and briefings.

Also I might revive my original plan to make the coup-de-main assault on the bridges in platoon level. It would be a 2x2 km map that would only span a couple of hours.

 

[jimcarravallah]

I've uploaded the scenario to the resources section of the site. For the moment it is playable but probably not that fine tuned yet.

The OOB and Estabs are solid, so I won't change to much on that front. The unit strengths and commander skills are still mostly to be changed though. Flavour texts and alternated reinforcements are also still do be done.

For the moment I've mostly auto-run the scenario and played the first hours myself to check out the opening moves. So there is still quite a bit of polish to be done.

If anyone wants to check it out, go here

Started playing it as the British, and find it very intriguing -- particularly in organizing and coordination of activities among the scattered early-arriving airborne forces to accomplish the mission.

It catches the flavor of the readings I've made regarding initial coordination of airborne operations during World War II.

 

[Vancalten]

I'm playin right now, it is not as easy as at the beginning, the combat is going really tuff, my guys are fighting bravely, waiting for reinforcement. In other words I'm enjoying this scen a lot !