CMCW 2v2 on new map

JTimo said:
Great work! Will need some time to review to provide my opinion / suggestions.
Based on @Aurelius’ earlier statement,
I was wondering if there would be a way to break this up into phases. Probably too complex, but was hoping to get some ideas. Not for now, but might be something we could try in the future.
Click to expand...
I read somewhere that using shortcuts one can assign units as reinforcements even in QBs. Although never tried it.
 
We could use qb points as a basis and then create a scenario with different deployment zones (colours) and reinforcements.

I propose regular experience levels for all, with max high morale and +1 leadership. That way no one has to deal with bunch of green troops that won't obey.
 
Hello,

I'm glad you all gonna kill each other on this map. Hope you like it.
Regarding sequencing (reinfrocement and all), only possible with good reability with scenario. I'm ready to help if you want to go down this road as a neutral person.
 
Aurelius said:
We could use qb points as a basis and then create a scenario with different deployment zones (colours) and reinforcements.

I propose regular experience levels for all, with max high morale and +1 leadership. That way no one has to deal with bunch of green troops that won't obey.
Click to expand...

Also fine with the regular experience and soft factor limitations. And indeed a scenario would be more easy to deal with reinforcements like @Bartimeus states. If @Bartimeus agrees he could even put our QB purchase in the editor so the fog of war is fully enforced :)
 
I agree. I will post a couple of screens later today (past 20.00 UTC+1) of what I intended with different deployment zones.
 
olaf said:
Ok I installed the steam version for this
Click to expand...
Only issue with Steam is that there is no Mac support afaik and @JTimo is on a mac. But if wat redwolf says is true I guess the patch will arrive for BFC probably before we manage to set this up. I'm fine with the current version though (if it doesn't come out soon), for a match like this the fixes are probably details and the experience will be more important :)
 
JTimo said:
Shortcuts? Not familiar with them for CM. Can you point me to this?
Click to expand...
Can't remember where I read it. But it's more of an editor thing (which I'm not really an expert with), how I understood it is that you can assign units to reinforcements group using a shortcut (ctrl-shift-1/9 or something). Anyway I read that someone said those shortcuts also work in the QB screen, although there is no visual feedback.
Another handy shortcut I read is that pressing the spacebar in the QB purchase screen will show which units belong to which DLC (can be useful for CMSF2/CMBN etc with a lot of DLC).
 
Both side will have reinforcement or just one side(the attacker maybe ?) ?
Because in this case it's pretty simple, the side who have reinforcement put his troop on the map itself, with the reinforcement timing etc etc and the other side(the defensive one) will just do a force selection on an empty map and send me files. I will import them on the map (using the core unit tool) and just make sure they are all in the deployement zone.
Otherwise, i will just do as Letha said :)
 
Unfortunately Aurelius got repeated out of memory error when forced were placed on the map. So we will have to make it a bit smaller

I have some ideas how/where to do that which will preserve the general idea.
 
Lethaface said:
Unfortunately Aurelius got repeated out of memory error when forced were placed on the map. So we will have to make it a bit smaller

I have some ideas how/where to do that which will preserve the general idea.
Click to expand...

Is that with an ATI/AMD video card and new drivers? Known problem. Downgrading drives helps.
 
@Lethaface Responding to your earlier post with setup zones and VLs. I would have no complaints regarding either. One thing I noticed VLs looked like something more for an Attack scenario than a Probe. I don't think of probes as battles that would end with a breakthrough, and the 4000m looks a little long for the point allotments a probe provides. With that in mind, I did some force selection testing using the Attack level points, and I will say that the amount of blue forces is less than I would hope to have to defend this map. Of course, one never feels like they have enough points.

Having a third party set the game up for us sounds like a great idea! I don't think reinforcements plays into it though. In an Attack scenario, the blue side needs all its forces, and an attacker would usually not plan/launch an attack without immediate access to his whole force either.
On the other hand, if we were planning to play this in multiple phases, then the use of reinforcements might make sense. I say "might" because the initial phase would likely be a recon phase. Typically the attacker would recon either to look for a weak point (little or no contact) or to test the defense (some contact), while the defender would recon to determine where the attack is coming from. The point I’m trying to make here is that recon isn’t very valuable when the forces you are trying to collect intel on are not on the map yet. Seems like we need to setup those reinforcements from the start, but not proactively control them until the recon phase ends.
 
JTimo said:
@Lethaface Responding to your earlier post with setup zones and VLs. I would have no complaints regarding either. One thing I noticed VLs looked like something more for an Attack scenario than a Probe. I don't think of probes as battles that would end with a breakthrough, and the 4000m looks a little long for the point allotments a probe provides. With that in mind, I did some force selection testing using the Attack level points, and I will say that the amount of blue forces is less than I would hope to have to defend this map. Of course, one never feels like they have enough points.

Having a third party set the game up for us sounds like a great idea! I don't think reinforcements plays into it though. In an Attack scenario, the blue side needs all its forces, and an attacker would usually not plan/launch an attack without immediate access to his whole force either.
On the other hand, if we were planning to play this in multiple phases, then the use of reinforcements might make sense. I say "might" because the initial phase would likely be a recon phase. Typically the attacker would recon either to look for a weak point (little or no contact) or to test the defense (some contact), while the defender would recon to determine where the attack is coming from. The point I’m trying to make here is that recon isn’t very valuable when the forces you are trying to collect intel on are not on the map yet. Seems like we need to setup those reinforcements from the start, but not proactively control them until the recon phase ends.
Click to expand...

Good points. Usually I'd think that all defender forces are on the map, while probe/attack starts with recon. But @Aurelius had some plans to show things, until his game crashed. Hopefully he can fix it with rollback of ati/radeon drivers (or even better new drivers will fix the issue).

Regarding the objectives, they were indeed a mix of objectives / breakthrough and just some area's that looked like maybe good for objectives. Regarding points we could also do probe and if we think attacker needs a bit more, adjust that.
@Bartimeus has offered to help out with the setting up so I think that will be great :).

Anyway let's first see if @Aurelius driver thing can fix things, otherwise we will cut the map.

Another point, I understood @nektoman is also interested in the battle from a CO perspective so we could do a 3v3 with 1 CO per side. I think that's a nice idea (worked good before). Maybe @Nathangun or someone else is also interested as a CO role?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom