Koen

Listy things: * Repair the broken Defend-tactic at BP's: http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=13865 * Mission editor: in the events/conditions make scroll down screens available to select e.g. the various units that can appear in them. Would be much less time-consuming and tiring way then having to click on each & every unit, as needs to be done now. * Mission editor: make it possible to copy regions that indicate artillery-targets = a much quicker way for scenario-designers to create preplanned arty. * Planningphase: What about making Red's obstacles, bunkers and especially emplacements, invisible during the planningphase (unless the sce.designer decides otherwise), when examining the terrain in 3D. It's such a giveaway, to see immediately all or many of Red positions : That's the job of the UAV (if the sce.designer added one), not the function of the planningphase where 3D is a way to compensate for the limitations of a computergame versus being in the field ? * In game: make it possible to cycle backward through units, and not just forward (ALT + F10). * In game: make it possible to cycle forward/backward just through vehicles, so while excluding infantry-units = win time. * In game: Make veh. emplacments, obstacles, bunkers, ... spawnable. So you could simulate engineers creating them somewhere in the rear. Which may mean that you have to delay OPFOR long enough, in order for the ENG to build those defensive positions ... IMHO, could increase immersion & add a new tactical dimension to SB. * M109 ! One can dream, no ? Anyway SB as it is now, is already a beauty (except maybe for the defend-tactics-thingy) Rgds, Koen

Could we, the "fanbase" of the forum, be involved in the creation of new objects (for ex. houses) for SB ? If 10 ppl (eventually on a voluntary basis) would create each 5 new types of buildings, then 50 new buildings would imply a serious refresh for the looks of SB - while not necessary, it also would not be unwelcome at all. I guess, this could be done in a way that technically for Al the work to integrate those new buidings into SB would be totally limited ?? Yes, there were some vague rumours that a new way to create/include objects is on the list (?), but I guess it may still take a lot of time before that ever gets implemented ? Rgds, Koen

Hi ChanceBS, 1) Cool idea how you implemented the A-10 rocket strike in your scenario "OPERATION GRAFTON NOTCH" ! Simple, but you have to think about it - first time I see this anyway in a scenario. For those who want to experience it: it happens very early in the mission, when you attack your 1st objective, Conway. -> http://www.steelbeasts.com/Downloads/p13_sectionid/24/p13_fileid/1801 Hmm, looking at this, it shouldn't be that difficult for Al to include the A-10 in SB (of course without precise fliying characteristics, external view only etc ...). In fact, SB with its air strikes, RBS70 & Tunguska is just ready to include the A-10, no ? Voila, another one for the list ... The scenario itself, I haven't played it out completely yet. But it looks very promising, thanks to it's realistic setup (and the spectacular entry of the A-10 ...). Will try to write a debrief. One point though: the red troops in Conway are maybe a bit too static ? * When under too strong pressure, they don't call in reinforcements, * or neither do they fall back to Grafton They just fight it out, till death ! That's noble - but maybe not that realistic either ? What do you think about this, Chance BS ? NB I know how much time it would take to set up for RED in the scneario the routes that would be necessary to have them behave as mentioned above ... 2) And another interesting idea that you included in this other scenario of yours: "EW FAILURE" The Blue player is based in a NATO Hq, that he has to defend. But some km's away, there is also an Early Warning Station. Your orders: Defend NATO Position from enemy push into sector. Protect EW Station from capture. Players will lose map view if EW Equipment Station is Lost. Must recapture to get Map View back. Now that's a nice tactical challenge ! Again, simple idea, but didn't think about it before. This kind of challenge should be added to more scenario's ? -> http://www.steelbeasts.com/Downloads/p13_sectionid/262/p13_fileid/1797 THX and congrats for your efforts to create these scenario's, which are innovative as well ! Koen

Battalion Commander DrDevice, this is Team Aces: So we exited the Hidden Valley - are waiting for you orders - which new missions do you have in store for us ? - we want to participate in this Campaign - Over & out Cdr, Team Aces ----------------- Just being curious, if you would be designing a new scenario (or even a campaign ...) ? NB Can be quite time-consuming in SB to do so, isn't it ? Rgds, Koen :-)

What would be the advantages/disadvantages of APK43 vs SB, as a tactical game ? -> Do you have more or other tactical possibilities ? -> Or is it more userfriendly to play - cfr. how SB can be a bit time-consuming in Single Player to develop plans for more than 1 coy. etc ... Asking the question, because one the one hand I want to support creative guys (with a commercially very enticing low price-offer). On the other hand, my free time is so limited, and SB as such is already an incredibly "rich" simulation, which takes up almost all of my gaming-time, that I'm not sure whether I would "need" APK43 (well, one never "needs" a computergame, one just wants it, no ...) THX, Koen

THX for sharing this - will asap have a look at it. All the best also, for both Scott & 3Star. Rgds, Koen

Totally agree, s p l e n d i d book. Will go now to the cellar where I keep older books, & find back this one & start reading it again. Rgds, K

THx for the info ! K

Shows again how good a simulator SB is, as it includes the impredictability of battle in RL Looking forward to this. What I also plan to game mentally is the medevacing of casualties: * I'll let a dice decide how many KIA, and especially WIA there are after the destruction of a tank (can be done also with a random number in excel or a random number in SB generating a msg with a number of WIA). * Then I'll try to organise medevacing - thx to the med track and the helo that you added to the scenario. Maybe OPFOR should have a med track as well. Or we should - IF possible - also medevac their wounded ... * Maybe I will withdraw even if the number of WIA is becoming too large and/or their evacuation becomes too difficult. => How does this go in real life ? To what degree does one take care of the wounded (be it own or adversary) ? => How many med tracks accompany normally a US or German tankcoy ? => How many wounded can a med track carry ? And a helo ? => I guess SB as a sim underestimates a bit this problem of medevacing , in fact does not pay enough attention to it - or not yet, Ssnake ? And pardon if I ramble on a bit more about the "phyrric victories" that you rightly mentioned: This can be gamed mentally as well by the player, without that you have to adapt your scenario. Why ? The presence of an OPFOR QRF is indeed a realistic add-on to this scenario. But then it may be realistic as well to give to BLUE: a) the option to call in reinforcements as well, given that a larger battle is developing. But that would be making life even more difficult for SP: too much units to handle ... (unless you all script them ...) or b) if such reinforcements would not be available, the possibility to withdraw, when faced with a superior force. Which would be in line with your original tactical lesson: "defeat an inferior force, and use speed of advance to keep the enemy off balance". So I probably will game the mission as if there were an option b) - without that you have to program it into the scenario. It's all in the mind, isn't it ? Again this shows how a "simple" scenario is quite fun & inspiring, - way more than the "shooting stuff" scenario's - thx to your realistic approach, DrDevice ! Rgds, Koen

Played version 1.1 & met only 3 ENY tks, that we could destroy. Result: * 2 M1A1 destroyed by T-80; 2 KIA, 3 wounded (picked up by the Med track) * Then the rest of the column got blocked by these 2 wreckages, got caught by arty, while I was manoeuvring with the M88 to tow a damaged tank => 3 more M1A1 destroyed; 5 KIA, 6 wounded (med evaced by the Kiowa) * We exited the pass, via an alternative road through the hills (4445 0850 & further), which was reconoittred by the helo & found to be safe. Unfortunately, it was a very narrow road, which I decided to take at high speed => 3 vehicles had to be left behind due to damaged tracks, among them the M88 ... Their personnel could be flown out with the helo. ... So that was not a defeat but a catastrophe. Can you believe this ? You meet only 3 ENY tks and end up with 7 KIA, 8 wounded, some of them severely, I hope they will make it ... those burnwounds :-( and 8 vehicles lost ... What could I have done better ? WHAT COULD I HAVE DONE BETTER ?? YOU TELL ME, DRDEVICE, yes you, because you're the one who got me and the team in this mess ! I will get back there & fight it out again - but what tactics should I use ? I know, probably it's a case of better handling the company, to avoid arty ... Also, given the losses that we took early on, should we have continued the mission or retreated ? Cdr, Team Aces ------------------ In other words, this was fun. Rgds, Koen

THX Gary, for all this scanning ! Must have taken a lot of work. I'm more interested in tactical vignettes, than gunnery. So before I download 29 mb, are there vignettes (that could be turned into SB-scenario's) in the file ? Rgds, Koen

Looking forward to another version. Out of curiosity: * If you would simulate an OPFOR reaction force, how do you think the US Company should react to it ? -> Fight it out, if they think it's doable ? -> Retreat, if they think they cannot take on this reaction force -> ? * And would you include this in the victory conditions (correct vs wrong behaviour, depending on size of reaction force) ? Nope, never saw them. Rgds, Koen

More or less the same experience here, but I also encountered 3 ENY tanks, which were quickly dealt with. Will replay later once more. IMHO scenario's do not have to be always very difficult. Good idea also to use "66 tales" as source for inspiration. -> What chapter did you use here ? -> What tactical challenge do you want the player to surmount here ? Finding the path of least resistance (e.g. through the rocky terrain on the other side of the valley, instead of going via the road ?), or what ? THX for your effort to create this scenario, Koen

Tempting, Crusty, very much even, but I have to check with das oppercommando at home ... :-) Will let you know, rgds, Koen

Now that would be great. K

Very nice ! A lot of work to create these ?

OK, no option for me. Rgds, Koen

El Cacho, since you are interested in Hunter-Killer teams: You are probably familiar with the book Armor Attacks:The Tank Platoon: An Interactive Exercise in Small-Unit Tactics and Leadership by John F. Antal. -> http://www.amazon.com/Armor-Attacks-Interactive-Small-Unit-Leadership/dp/0891413839 The 2nd half of the book deals with Hunter-Killer teams, in the counter-recon role. I created a scenario based on this tactical vignette, as it is in the book. The scneario dates from the SB1-times, but I adapted it a little bit to SB Pro PE. Could be on interest to you - if so, give it a try. (don't find it anymore on the Download-pages, see http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showpost.php?p=144156&postcount=13) Rgds, Koen

Actually, it is ... :-) I'm a bit looking for a new hobby, and this could be an interesting one. Whether it is a realistic option: we should discuss this together; will contact you via email. Rgds, Koen

What computerlanguage would I need to learn, in order to be a candidate ? K

In single-player scenario's, the Red AI units are sometimes/often scripted in a rather static way, together with Blue having a well developed plan on the contrary. Can anyone recommend scenario's that are a bit more immersive and tactically challenging due to: 1. A more or less realistic set-up of the Red forces: not too much/ too little troops, given a certain situation. 2. Most important - Red is dynamic and reacts to Blue moves, by either: -> calling in reserves to shore up defenses (OK - this you can find in most scenario's) -> and/or counterattacking (IMHO less present in current stock of scenario's ?) -> and/or by retreating if need be (even more rare in scenario's ??) -> ... So chess turned into SB ... An example could be the "MSSattack-small" scenario (although it's a long time since I tried this one). Any tips would be greatly appreciated i Koen

A new feature in 2.483 that I appreciate a lot: "Obstacles can be moved in planning phase. Mission designer can choose where the obstacles can be deployed then by the player: anywhere, nowhere, in deployment zones" => this adds a another tactical dimension to SB, which is welcome next to the majority of new technical features. Rgds, Koen

mpow, sent you a pm with the pword rgds, K

Lessons from SB: * "Think fast ! Act fast" Don't stop, take the initiative ! * Making scenario's can be great fun - and painful, when perfectionism kills creativity ... * Al's & Nils'es example of making something with a lot of passion, is inciting, yes it is. Rgds, Koen

Camp Hornfelt (6) Conduct a Platoon Defense and Displace: played it quickly - nicely done, thx GO. One question about the behaviour of Red: I have the impression that once they are ambushed, they don't change their tactics, but just keeping streaming forward. (but I didn't check the Red routes in the mission editor, so I may be wrong) -> Is this standard opfor/warpac tactics ? -> Or, instead of behaving like lemmings, couldn't they adapt their tactics once they are in contact ? E.g. deploy infantry - before the kill zone - who advance then through the woods, next to the valley, to attack Blue from the rear. -> Also, in real life, couldn't the Blue troops of the M2A2 be deployed next on the flanks of the tanks - to protect them from Red deploying infantry that would advance next ? And a word of criticism: ahem, triggers 5 & 6 ("contact"; "displace") are not explained in the briefing ? just a detail of course Thx again for your efforts to create these nice tactical vignettes, Koen