(The following is a set of ramblings and ideas I’ve had after numerous rides to and from work on public transport. If I ever get a company car I will probably daydream, swerve off the road and die with my last words being recorded as ‘Pixeltrüppen headcount replenishment rates…')
I’m apparently part of a small breed of the CM community that misses the old CMx1 style operations.
For those younger CM Generals among us, CMx1 Operations were essentially one large map with an end objective to reach by the end of a set time period broken up into multiple engagements. Force Preservation and forward thinking were key to success. For example: “Okay, I’ve taken this village, do I keep pushing now while the enemy in front of me is disorganized or do I wait until sundown before creeping forward with additional forces that are due to arrive.†It wasn’t a perfect system by any means, for example there were issues regarding how the CMx1 titles calculated the deployment zones for follow up missions based on how far the player pushed forward. (It could be gamed a bit). The new CMx2 Campaign system is obviously more Designer controlled and is suited to following a more narrative structured event. My biggest gripe with the current system is depending on how the Designer builds the campaign and handles reinforcements/replenishment; it can heavily encourage players turning to a ‘save scum’ mentality, (a constant reloading of older saves when something goes wrong), knowing they are unlikely to achieve victory later on if they lose ‘x’ unit now.
Thing is I think we can create a CMx1 style Operation in the CMx2 engine. This is now largely possible due to:
- The far greater map sizes and units the engine can handle now compared to CMx2’s debut.
- The variety of forces now on offer in most titles once modules and packs are released.
- General beefiness of current computers.
So a CMx2 campaign is essentially a series of linked scenarios that form either one or two pathways to another (through 'winning' or 'losing' a preceding scenario). The thing is why do we always think of campaign progression as a ‘line’ and why not a ‘table.’ If the player ‘loses’ a scenario, let them try the same mission again with what forces they have on hand but push the time along a little bit for the follow engagement. Essentially:
- The player has one large map to clear.
- A player must hit numerous terrain based objectives in a set order to reach the final objective which ends the campaign.
- These terrain objectives are provided in an order set out by ‘higher command’ (the designer).
- If the player wins, they move on to the next objective in the next allotted time slot.
- If the player loses, they repeat the same scenario with time progressing to the next allotted time slot.
- As time progresses both sides receive reinforcements and replenishment though given the small time frames there would be at set periods or only in small increments.
- An extensive initial Campaign Briefing would be required.
- Briefings between missions would be minimal to represent the lack of orders from higher command during a prolonged engagement. Perhaps limited to some on the ground intel or feedback to the player on what type of support is coming in up in future engagements to help them make an informed decision around ‘commit now or later.’
- Forces on both sides would be essentially all Core Units and tracked for the duration of the fight.
The major limit to this approach is the fact that the CMx2 engine doesn’t support terrain damage carrying over between missions. The designer would have to be a little bit creative here and slow damage / rubble down the map as time progresses depending on the circumstances. Perhaps at a set point you damage key focus points on the map to take into account pre-planned bombardments from Army HQ assets.
Finally, what type of historical engagement would you be able to apply this to? One of my favourite CMx1 experiences was playing the Carentan Operation that came with CMBO. Yeah not exactly the most historically accurate, but it was a lot of fun slowly progressing towards the city with the 101st Airborne. If @WynnterGreen hasn’t disappeared fully (hint hint nudge nudge), we were doing some initial work on creating a ‘Master Map’ covering the area from St Come Du Mont down the causeway to also include Carentan itself. Gives you a sense of what the engine can actually do now in terms of map scale. If that map is ever completed I think it would be a prime candidate for some experimentation.
A rough early take on the structure of this scenario (note will have lots more potential engagements - only trying map out those that roughly close to the historical fight). The goal for the player is to get to the bottom of the table, but when this occurs is depends on how well the player proceeds. For example, they may get to the edge of Carentan, however they are two days late so it's already the 13th of June. This means elements of the 17th SS Panzer Grenandier have actually made it to Carentan to reinforce the beleaguered defenders.
I’m really looking for thoughts and design considerations I may have missed regarding this pie in the sky idea. Oh and some hands up to help if there is any on offer.
I’m apparently part of a small breed of the CM community that misses the old CMx1 style operations.
For those younger CM Generals among us, CMx1 Operations were essentially one large map with an end objective to reach by the end of a set time period broken up into multiple engagements. Force Preservation and forward thinking were key to success. For example: “Okay, I’ve taken this village, do I keep pushing now while the enemy in front of me is disorganized or do I wait until sundown before creeping forward with additional forces that are due to arrive.†It wasn’t a perfect system by any means, for example there were issues regarding how the CMx1 titles calculated the deployment zones for follow up missions based on how far the player pushed forward. (It could be gamed a bit). The new CMx2 Campaign system is obviously more Designer controlled and is suited to following a more narrative structured event. My biggest gripe with the current system is depending on how the Designer builds the campaign and handles reinforcements/replenishment; it can heavily encourage players turning to a ‘save scum’ mentality, (a constant reloading of older saves when something goes wrong), knowing they are unlikely to achieve victory later on if they lose ‘x’ unit now.
Thing is I think we can create a CMx1 style Operation in the CMx2 engine. This is now largely possible due to:
- The far greater map sizes and units the engine can handle now compared to CMx2’s debut.
- The variety of forces now on offer in most titles once modules and packs are released.
- General beefiness of current computers.
So a CMx2 campaign is essentially a series of linked scenarios that form either one or two pathways to another (through 'winning' or 'losing' a preceding scenario). The thing is why do we always think of campaign progression as a ‘line’ and why not a ‘table.’ If the player ‘loses’ a scenario, let them try the same mission again with what forces they have on hand but push the time along a little bit for the follow engagement. Essentially:
- The player has one large map to clear.
- A player must hit numerous terrain based objectives in a set order to reach the final objective which ends the campaign.
- These terrain objectives are provided in an order set out by ‘higher command’ (the designer).
- If the player wins, they move on to the next objective in the next allotted time slot.
- If the player loses, they repeat the same scenario with time progressing to the next allotted time slot.
- As time progresses both sides receive reinforcements and replenishment though given the small time frames there would be at set periods or only in small increments.
- An extensive initial Campaign Briefing would be required.
- Briefings between missions would be minimal to represent the lack of orders from higher command during a prolonged engagement. Perhaps limited to some on the ground intel or feedback to the player on what type of support is coming in up in future engagements to help them make an informed decision around ‘commit now or later.’
- Forces on both sides would be essentially all Core Units and tracked for the duration of the fight.
The major limit to this approach is the fact that the CMx2 engine doesn’t support terrain damage carrying over between missions. The designer would have to be a little bit creative here and slow damage / rubble down the map as time progresses depending on the circumstances. Perhaps at a set point you damage key focus points on the map to take into account pre-planned bombardments from Army HQ assets.
Finally, what type of historical engagement would you be able to apply this to? One of my favourite CMx1 experiences was playing the Carentan Operation that came with CMBO. Yeah not exactly the most historically accurate, but it was a lot of fun slowly progressing towards the city with the 101st Airborne. If @WynnterGreen hasn’t disappeared fully (hint hint nudge nudge), we were doing some initial work on creating a ‘Master Map’ covering the area from St Come Du Mont down the causeway to also include Carentan itself. Gives you a sense of what the engine can actually do now in terms of map scale. If that map is ever completed I think it would be a prime candidate for some experimentation.
A rough early take on the structure of this scenario (note will have lots more potential engagements - only trying map out those that roughly close to the historical fight). The goal for the player is to get to the bottom of the table, but when this occurs is depends on how well the player proceeds. For example, they may get to the edge of Carentan, however they are two days late so it's already the 13th of June. This means elements of the 17th SS Panzer Grenandier have actually made it to Carentan to reinforce the beleaguered defenders.
I’m really looking for thoughts and design considerations I may have missed regarding this pie in the sky idea. Oh and some hands up to help if there is any on offer.
