Jump to content

Volcano

Members
  • Posts

    8,125
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Volcano

  1. 21 JAN 2022: Civil War Santa Catalina-4167 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Draft? Yes. Random CO selection? Yes. Minimum # players: 12 NOTES: Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.
  2. Yes, I did throw it out of balance with all the smart arty quantity, but I fixed that and OPFOR put up a great fight despite that (the convoy BARELY made it, with less than 2 minutes remaining).
  3. 14 JAN 2022: Convoy Ops 01-Multiside-4268 (if we have less, then we have a nice CO-OP) SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Draft? Yes (teams are chosen as BRRG). Random CO selection? Yes. 3x (Blue & Green vs. Red) Minimum # players: 12 NOTES: Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.
  4. 7 JAN 2022: !Battle for Schwaben Creek Valley T-72 v16-4268-OMU (if we have less, then we have a nice CO-OP) SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Draft? Yes. Random CO selection? Yes. Minimum # players: 9 NOTES: Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.
  5. 31 DEC 2021: Battlezone 2017-4153 (New Years party - we will play this once, so bring your A game - it can either be short and quick, or... hard and long). 👀 If there are more than 8 or 10 then we will play something larger. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Draft? No. Random CO selection? No. Minimum # players: 4 NOTES: Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.
  6. 24 DEC 2021: No TGIF this Friday Spend some time away from the PC with family and have a good Christmas. 🎅
  7. 17 DEC 2021: Allied Force MTC 01-smaller-4268 (or something smaller) SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Draft? Yes. Random CO selection? Yes. Minimum # players: 10-12 (2 or 3 Blue, 3 Green vs. 2 or 3 Red, 3 Orange) NOTES: Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.
  8. 10 DEC 2021: Brush Fire-Town Dispute-UN-4268-MAD (We will try this one again, from a few weeks ago). SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Draft? Yes. Random CO selection? Yes. Minimum # players: 10-12 (4-5 vs 4-5 vs 2-3) NOTES: Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.
  9. 3 DEC 2021: !OBJ PV - MP-smaller_4167a (Or Battlezone again, if less people, or preferred - it's that time of year). SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Draft? Yes. Random CO selection? Yes. Minimum # players: 8 NOTES: Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.
  10. Thanks for playing Battlezone: The Cooperative Scenario for Steel Beasts™️©️®️. I updated the score here: https://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=Battlezone I did remove two of the top scores because they were played back when there was a bug that caused some of the waves to be skipped. Current record is now Wave 8 completed. 🎮
  11. Yeah, didn't have enough players for it, but I will put it back into the list for next TGIF (DEC 10).
  12. 26 NOV 2021: Brush Fire-Town Dispute-UN-4268-MAD If we don't have enough then we will do something smaller. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Draft? Yes. Random CO selection? Yes. Minimum # players: 10-12 (4-5 vs 4-5 vs 2-3) NOTES: Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.
  13. Yes, being able to fire RPGs (that have actual ballistics), would be very nice.
  14. Thanks for playing scenario 9. The battle was very close, the only point difference between both sides was 20 points(!), which actually made it to the closest fought scenario of the entire campaign (second closest battle was a difference of 149 points). That concludes the campaign in a NATO Victory. If you desire it, for fun and totally pleasant memories, the campaign participation ribbon is here: (or you can find it on the MBT-21 page below) Here are the results + awards... (the table is now so large that I can't fit it on the screen, so I am only showing the final scenario and total) MBT 87-21 Thanks to everyone who participated. It was intended as a test of endurance. If you made it to the end, you passed! Congrats! 🤝 🍹 As I mentioned, this campaign was a test to see how it played (not bad for being a complete estimate all around) so I would get enough information to be able to adjust it for the better. I gathered a lot of data that will help with that. The main change of course being something I already mentioned: there will be NATO attack type scenarios added. The 1st and last mission will always be the same, but 7 missions in between will be directly determined by who had the most points in the previous mission (the side with the most points in the previous mission will be attacking in the next mission). That will be quite fun I think, as it will place the strain on the side that is gaining points to keep attacking. I like that idea to help dynamically mix things up. 😎 Besides that, the normal tweaks and corrections to various scenarios and map, along with fixing any normal screw ups that I made. Also, the Awards system will be improved. It worked well as a complete guess, but the thresholds for the awards will be adjusted based on the info gathered. Thanks!
  15. Had to update the scenario just now to MBT-S09-07-Head-to-Head-4268. Had to fix some events, the artillery, and added an important note to the Scenario Notes section on both sides. Since a saved plan isn't that important in this mission (given the random spawns), then I think its OK to update so soon before the game.
  16. Ah yes, I guess the description wasn't obvious. Basically, when the vehicles drove around previously, the mist was like a lingering long dust trail that some said looked like white smoke. Now its more of a grayish cloud that sweeps outwards to the sides, and doesn't linger as long. Not 100% perfect, but hopefully an improvement.
  17. Actually, it didn't take as long as I thought to look over the scenario. Seems to be good to go and is uploaded now if anyone is interested. Not much planning can probably be done though, given the situation (randomized meeting engagement with no 3D view in the center). But in any case, its available.
  18. BTW, due to some projects going on, I haven't been able to look over the next scenario yet. I will hopefully be able to do that tonight or if not, then certainly at least several hours before TGIF it will be posted. I will mention here when it happens, of course...
  19. 19 NOV 2021: MBT-S09-07-Head-to-Head-4265a (I will announce when the scenario is uploaded and available for planning) NOTE: The scenarios can have long time limits in the MBT campaign (some up to 180 minutes), but scenarios will seldom play to the full time limit. We should try to limit planning to 30 minutes. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Draft? No, but by side if no CO is available. Random CO selection? No. Any new players will go to the side that needs them at the moment. Minimum # players: 8 (Red [4] vs Blue [4]) NOTES: Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.
  20. Yes, its always fun to play a campaign where the scenarios have meaning and weight to them, rather than one-off scenarios. But most of all, we had to play it out so I could get enough information to know how to improve it.
  21. Not a criticism but, one word of caution here to keep in mind: In real life, it is never a good idea to have a friendly behind another friendly. We can say "dumb AI!" for shooting that friendly in front, sure, but I recall this nearly happening in real life on a gunnery range (Tank Table XII). I think we have to be careful here -- we expect the AI to act perfectly, but there should be a level of chaos and error present and possible, because (for example) the user didn't have them in the best formation for the situation at the time. That is not to say that there shouldn't be a check for an obstruction in the gun sight, and that it shouldn't be lessened -- all I am saying here is that often we expect perfection from the AI, when in real life "stuff happens" too - when the solution would be to avoid certain formations in some situations. I think recently something happened in a game where the AI made a mistake (like got a vehicle stuck in a marsh). My thought was -- its frustrating, but that does indeed happen in real life, things are always going wrong. Commo doesn't work, vehicles get lost, driver makes mistakes and drives somewhere they shouldn't, tracks are thrown, friendly fire occurs, but it is very interesting how we don't expect the AI to make mistakes. So I guess its a balance between allowing AI error, but not having too much of it. (just thinking out loud here) 😎
  22. No, I wasn't saying that you were -- just trying to keep it from going there. I just want everyone to keep in mind that winning gracefully is just as important as losing gracefully.
  23. "Infantry are totally broken, and I can't do anything at all with them" -Sensational people on this forum I think what people want is a realistic infantry discussion (limitations, problems, and what-works, in all).
  24. Infantry morale can be simulated with the use of Surrender if... conditions (it has been done in other scenarios). You can say, something like: this_unit's strength < 25% (or whatever) AND random variable NEW is between 0 to 15 (or whatever) Then if an infantry teams strength drops below 25%, then there is a 15% chance they will surrender (like a 1d6, rolling 1), in this example. Adjust how you like. The main thing to be aware of is that you must make sure the infantry squads are split into teams at start, otherwise splitting the squad into a team in mid game will trigger the condition.
  25. Now now, there is a fine line between good natured ribbing and being arrogant in victory. Let's not cross that line, especially seeing how I know some on Blue wouldn't be in high spirits if it were the other way around.
×
×
  • Create New...