MISSION STATEMENT

Our aim is twofold:

1) To test theories of player/unit organization that maximizes the effectiveness of players while minimizing micromanagement of units.
2) To share our simulation style of play over the dominant head to head style prevalent in the community at present.

If our theories pan out, we will release our notes in the form of ‘how to’ guides for download from the SB.com site for the benefit of the entire SB community. We think we’re on to something and if it works it could add a new dynamic to the game we know and love.

A word on the philosophy of the labs (WAV file)

EXECUTION

We will be calling this ongoing series of MP games ‘Battle Labs’ and will use the following format for setting up the games:

1) Scenario will be uploaded to the Battle Labs Program section of SB.com one week in advance of the scheduled game.
2) In the Multi-player registry forum we will advertise the details of the Battle Lab including:

a. Date/time of game
b. Briefing details
c. RSVP for OPFOR players
d. Other pertinent details

3) An AAR will be set up in the General Discussion forum for all players to provide feedback on the scenario and their experiences after the game. The threads will be named after the lab, I.E: ‘Battle Lab 1 UP!’

1st Canadian will act as host and will elect a backup player to host in the event that the primary host becomes unavailable at the last moment. We will pick up players from IRC chat who RSVP and any other players interested in playing if the OPFOR is running short.

There will be two phases to the Battle Lab scenarios. The first will be the typical head to head style of games with equally matched forces and objectives. We will be testing our player/unit organization theories vs. the usual sniper-tank style of play of the OPFOR. Later on we’ll mismatch objectives and force structures, continuing to test our theories in positions of advantage and disadvantage.

Phase two will be a shift to simulation of NATO/Warsaw Pact battles. These will utilize actual force structures of the Cold War period. Rules of engagement will be established for both teams to simulate the conditions further. As no crewable Warsaw Pact vehicles exist until the release of SB2, playable tanks (Leopard and Abrams) will sit in for T-72s and T-80s. Ammo loadouts will be balanced to simulate the armour/gun overmatch of the simulated tanks to balance the differences out. Also, some degrading of systems may be used to simulate overmatch between tank types. 1st Canadian will begin as BLUEFOR for these simulation games and will then change to REDFOR. The final element of this phase will be OPFOR execution of plans using actual Warsaw Pact tactics and restrictions.

With SB2 on the horizon offering more crewable vehicles and increased functionality in scenario design, we’d like to offer an alternative to ‘Tank-Quake’ game play that offers more depth to the game. We think many players will enjoy this game style as much as we have.

And it should be a whole lot of fun!

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

PROGRAM OUTLINE

This outline is tentative and subject to change!

The labs will be structured to try several different ideas in unit/player organization and scenario design to get the best use of vehicles and create the most dynamic scenarios.

The players on the OPFOR side are the guinea pigs. They will have general instructions on how to play the scenario to test these theories. For example, on one map they may be told to spread out and attempt to attack/defend along the entire length of the map (very common in most MP games). Other times they'll be told to focus over a narrow front and coordinate their attack as best they can. Some games the instructions will be to fight as rugged individuals, other games will encourage them to use voice communication to coordinate.

There are going to be eight modules for the labs, each consisting of 6 labs:

1) Head to Head: Meeting Engagement

This is the common 'run to the centre' type of map with equal forces equidistant to the objective. Some labs will have objectives where each team must cross past the other to get at the other team's base. These labs are NATO vs. NATO

2) Head to Head: Advance

For these labs 1 CDN will be attacking OPFOR as they try to delay our advance. Early labs will have nearly equal forces, later labs will have superior forces and artillery for the advancing team. These labs are NATO vs. WP.

3) Head to Head: Delay

Roles changes for these labs with 1 CDN delaying an advance by the OPFOR players. Same setup as above, we just change places on different maps. These labs are NATO vs. WP.

4) Simulation: Delay

The labs will begin with the release of Steel Beasts 2. 1 CDN will be delaying REDFOR with actual unit structures and tactics adopted for both teams. Most likely the NATO team will be outnumbered 3-1 and be at an artillery disadvantage.

5) Simulation: Advance

1 CDN in the Warsaw Pact role will advance against a NATO force attempting to delay. Same deal as above, roles are reversed.

6) Simulation: Defend

1 CDN in the NATO role in prepared positions in the defence with mines.

7) Simulation: Assault

1 CDN in the Warsaw Pact role against BLUEFOR in prepared positions in the defence with mines.

8) Simulation: Meeting Engagement

NATO vs. Warsaw Pact moving on a common objective.

That's 48 games total.

Some maps will be re-used three times per module as variations on the same scenario. Right now I'm thinking to get the best results that each OPFOR team is different for each of these scenarios and keep quiet about how they played so as to not influence the next team's plan. After the three teams have played and provided me with their feedback I'll release the official AAR as a Word document for review by the community. An AAR thread for those labs will be opened for further comment.

There will be times that the scenario is posted a week in advance of the game date and a CO elected to make a pre-made plan. There will be other times that the map is not released and the night of the game the OPFOR goes with the '10 minute plan.' Simulation games will always have the scenario map released well in advance. Again, you are guinea pigs and all angles of MP issues will be explored in the labs.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

BATTLE LAB MAPS – IMPORTANT INFORMATION

Map out of bounds is a unit destruction penalty zone. The beginning of the penalty zone begins at the edge of the map so be careful with your maneuver near map edges.
Beginning with Lab 5, both sides of the map will be labeled with terrain markers. These markers are numbered 101 to 7010 and at intervals forming 3kmX3km grids. The locations of the markers are identical for both teams. Use these terrain reference points to discuss actions made in the game afterwards in SB Chat, the AAR discussion board or in correspondence to me.
Beginning in Lab 5, all woods are immobilization penalty zones. Driving vehicles into woods not on a road or a trail will result in vehicle immobilization. This scenario feature of the labs is intended to simulate real-world conditions and tactics. The only units that can bypass heavy woods are infantry, they will not be affected by the penalty. Adjust your tactics accordingly. The zone begins roughly 30-50m in from the treeline but is variable just like real terrain. All penalty zones are transparent. Traverse woods at your own risk!