Apocalypse 31

Something is wrong with this scenario - I achieved the mission of clearing OBJ MARK (was given the notification even though there was still enemy in the OBJ). The mission never ended but when I stopped it I was given a DEFEAT. I noticed in the mission that your END SCENARIO script is incomplete and won't work. I also noticed that one of the scenario end criteria is when RED AFVs are below 65%, but that's never specified anywhere in the briefing - again, I was able to clear the OBJ but I had no idea that I needed to destroy more stuff.

I would recommend that you post the scoring criteria in the briefing.

Also - please avoid urban combat in Steel Beasts. Infantry is terrible in SB and the defenders will hold buildings even when they're burning. In fact, this scenario is very heavy with infantry - which I would avoid in SB. Infantry play is just too janky in this game. It's not fun and takes away from what the game actually does well - turret stuff. 

I would also remove the East German mortar teams - unless you want this to be a PVP Game - the AI will not use them. 

1 minute ago, Maic said:

 Not sure what you mean about the camo, the tanks have standard strv 122 camo (right?) and CV9030s and troops have Finnish camo as intended.

The current camo is set as Finnish not Swedish. 

I'd recommend turning off AI ability to call for fire on BLUE. They tied up the guns the whole mission. 

Also - why not give the Swedes their proper camo?

why not use the embed feature?

On 6/4/2022 at 1:08 AM, F.T said:

I want to know what the criteria for task completion are in phase 3. Even though I destroyed the supply point, the system still ruled the mission a failure.

You're correct. Looks like an error. I have sent you a new file and will upload again shortly. 

On 1/29/2022 at 9:47 AM, Boner said:

I don't think I can delete it but Apoc,s info suggests I can fix it ,maybe change the vehicles from U.S. to U.K. or German

You can delete the old one. 

Look at the bottom of your file entry

You know that you can just update the file instead of posting two versions?

All key vehicles and personnel in the two clearly marked enemy positions are eliminated.

Or 

"Clear enemy from both marked positions"

...I think either of these would be your "mission statement".

I'm looking forward to playing this.

12 hours ago, newjackcity said:

hi Apocalypse

 

good work, you have created a solid foundation. You have taken into account the force ratio of attacker 3 to defender 1 (3:1).

2 points:
the technical advantage Leopard tank vs T-55 is not in balance. T-55 have almost zero chance without prepared position.
the size of a tank company is between 20 to 50 square kilometers. Your attack strip is very narrow, which limits the freedom of movement and that also just in terms of 4 vehicles per platoon.
but again, good work!

with comradely greetings from Switzerland

 

Adrian

Adrian- thank you for the feedback.

1. LEO 2A4 vs T-55: I can, and should probably re-look this pairing. I was trying to balance this scenario for new players and keep it fairly simple. I took inspiration from a few of Zipuli's missions where he used this pairing and I found it to be enjoyable....yeah, probably a bit overkill for the player.

In my testing, I also found that the T-55 could do some damage to your Leo2A4, and it ultimately could prevent you from achieving your objectives. I'll run through it again, and consider either upgrading the T-55 ammunition quality or giving the Malinska Brigade some better equipment from the north.

2. AO Size / PLT Boundaries. I will admit that I screwed this up from the start. I didn't pick the best map/ location to support armored maneuver and then I had to work within my limitations for terrain. 

I also deliberately chose to make the platoon boundaries a bit smaller. The first was what you pointed out, in terms of force ratios. Larger BLUE platoon boundaries means the higher likelihood of simply driving past your enemy without a fight - it happened during testing a lot, and it was not awesome. It would mean that I would have to almost double the amount of RED equipment to ensure that the players had a good fight. 

Keeping smaller platoon boundaries also meant that I could better-build the OPFOR defense, knowing that the player would drive through it. 

Again, I appreciate the feedback. Let me know what else you think. 

Thanks. 

I'm having an issue with this one. 

It seems that the details of the skin are consolidated with the AUS pattern- therefore making it impossible to add a new camo pattern. 

Looks like you're using a custom map "Hanno Weserbergland M1BT Camp V2"

Easily solve though - Download Package is working

I'm getting errors for all of the scenarios - related to maps. 

C:\ProgramData\eSim Games\Steel Beasts\Unit Templates\US