Looking for early Cold War scenarios (M60A3 or T-55A)

[Sunbather_]

Hello there,

 

I've been looking for a Cold War scenario yesterday with either the M60A3 or T-55A (or similar like T-62) but to no avail. Preferably, in Europe since I have already found some African scenarios using the old Soviet tanks. Unfortunately, all Cold War scenarios seem to feature the M1 and T-72s and onwards.

 

I will be looking into creating some scenarios in this regard as well but for now I would love to see what more experienced creators have come up with already (if any).

 

Cheers,

 

Sunbather

[Ssnake]

You can always convert an existing scenario by simply replacing the unit type.

[mpow66m]

T55 vs M60 sounds interesting.Might just hv to do that

[TSe419E]

32 minutes ago, mpow66m said:

T55 vs M60 sounds interesting.Might just hv to do that

 

Somebody did that and it's really fun.  I can't remember the name of the scenario but I'll look around my files to see if I can find it.

 

Here is the "Border Patrol" scenario I modified where Blue force has two companies of M60A3(TTS) and one company of M113s.  The initial patrol is a Cavalry platoon circa 1982.

Border Patrol M60A3 v2.sce

[TSe419E]

On 11/7/2023 at 11:16 AM, mpow66m said:

T55 vs M60 sounds interesting.Might just hv to do that

By Maj.Hans.  Third scenario here:

NORTHAG 1966A.sce NORTHAG 1966B.sce NORTHAG 1966C.sce NORTHAG 1966E.sce

Edited November 9 by TSe419E

[mpow66m]

Great,tx alot!😁

[Ssnake]

Also, T-62/T-55 pairings with Leopard 1 could be interesting.

[Gibsonm]

Yes.

 

With a bit of care you can turn one scenario into several:

[Sunbather_]

On 11/7/2023 at 5:54 PM, Ssnake said:

You can always convert an existing scenario by simply replacing the unit type.

 

On 11/8/2023 at 12:18 AM, Gibsonm said:

Yes.

 

With a bit of care you can turn one scenario into several:

 

Both of you are right, of course. However, I'd like to think that scenario creators had a specific equipment in mind with their mission. It might also affect gameplay in a negative way. While it should be no problem to swap out a M1A2 for a Leo5 in a given scenario, the flow and functionality might be seriously hampered with the engagement range of T-55 and M60s. But again, theoretically (and practically) you're right, of course.

 

[Sunbather_]

On 11/7/2023 at 6:53 PM, TSe419E said:

 

Somebody did that and it's really fun.  I can't remember the name of the scenario but I'll look around my files to see if I can find it.

 

Here is the "Border Patrol" scenario I modified where Blue force has two companies of M60A3(TTS) and one company of M113s.  The initial patrol is a Cavalry platoon circa 1982.

Border Patrol M60A3 v2.sce 931.63 kB · 8 downloads

 

Thank you so much TSe419E! I've checked out the other mission first (NORTHAG 1966) which I found a bit boring. Also, it's with Centurios and not M60s (but should be easy to swap out). But then I had a quick look at your Border Patrol mission and this is EXACTLY what I was looking for! Intriguing mission, interesting set-up within a small town, cold weather and lots of mid-Cold War equipment. Can't wait to come home from work tomorrow to play it!

Edited November 8 by Sunbather_

[Sunbather_]

On a more general note, I didn't know that pre-4.1 scenarios can actually be played on 4.3 without hassle. What a nice suprise!

Edited November 8 by Sunbather_

[Gibsonm]

19 hours ago, Sunbather_ said:

 

 

Both of you are right, of course. However, I'd like to think that scenario creators had a specific equipment in mind with their mission. It might also affect gameplay in a negative way. While it should be no problem to swap out a M1A2 for a Leo5 in a given scenario, the flow and functionality might be seriously hampered with the engagement range of T-55 and M60s. But again, theoretically (and practically) you're right, of course.

 

 

Absolutely, hence why I've changed both Blue and Red as required.

e.g. Sho't Kal vs T-62, not Sho't Kal vs T-72, etc.

 

I also agree about users unbalancing scenarios.

 

I now only post password protected scenarios as I became tired of complaints about scenarios being "unbalanced" because the player had swapped out say M113s and replaced them with Bradleys - Who'd have thought adding a stabilised 25mm gun with thermals and 2 x TOW would result in a different outcome to a lone 0.50" where you need to stop to shoot?

 

Edited November 9 by Gibsonm

[TSe419E]

45 minutes ago, Sunbather_ said:

 

Thank you so much TSe419E! I've checked out the other mission first (NORTHAG 1966) which I found a bit boring. Also, it's with Centurios and not M60s (but should be easy to swap out). But then I had a quick look at your Border Patrol mission and this is EXACTLY what I was looking for! Intriguing mission, interesting set-up within a small town, cold weather and lots of mid-Cold War equipment. Can't wait to come home from work tomorrow to play it!

Sorry about that. NORTHAG 1966 is (or was) four scenarios.  The one with M60s is the third scenario.  I don't know why there is only one now so here are all four:

NORTHAG 1966A.sce NORTHAG 1966B.sce NORTHAG 1966C.sce NORTHAG 1966E.sce

Edited November 9 by TSe419E

[Ssnake]

8 hours ago, Sunbather_ said:

I'd like to think that scenario creators had a specific equipment in mind with their mission. It might also affect gameplay in a negative way.

This is where you enter the next level of scenario editing. Making adjustments after finding out that simply swapping out units does not always work out perfectly. IMO, there's nothing wrong with that. It's more than just a theoretical option. It's a legitimate way to learn the art of scenario design.

You want something that isn't there, and Steel Beasts provides all the tools that are needed to create what you want. You just don't know yet how to do it - so you do it in steps, and learn something in the process.

[Ssnake]

8 hours ago, Sunbather_ said:

On a more general note, I didn't know that pre-4.1 scenarios can actually be played on 4.3 without hassle. What a nice suprise!

With a little bit of conversion effort you can also still play much older scenarios - going back as far as 1.0 if you want to take it to the extreme.

[Arch]

FWIW I've been working on re-imagining Ben's Counterattack at Bommelsen and it's mostly done, so there might be a "Leopard 1A4" scenario coming out sometime.

[mpow66m]

7 hours ago, Arch said:

FWIW I've been working on re-imagining Ben's Counterattack at Bommelsen and it's mostly done, so there might be a "Leopard 1A4" scenario coming out sometime.

please share😃

[mpow66m]

21 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

 

Absolutely, hence why I've changed both Blue and Red as required.

e.g. Sho't Kal vs T-62, not Sho't Kal vs T-72, etc.

 

I also agree about users unbalancing scenarios.

 

I now only post password protected scenarios as I became tired of complaints about scenarios being "unbalanced" because the player had swapped out say M113s and replaced them with Bradleys - Who'd have thought adding a stabilised 25mm gun with thermals and 2 x TOW would result in a different outcome to a lone 0.50" where you need to stop to shoot?

But the .50 cal in COD can take out a T90

21 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

 

 

[Ssnake]

....which is absolutely realistic - in COD.

[mpow66m]

Yes you that,I know that but they dont realize that.when some check out SB

Btw off topic while i hv your attention I found a copy of SB1 in its org box.Its open but in mint condition.Is there market for this I dont really want it.Maybe a Christmas giveaway or New Years prize or such.

 

 

Edited November 9 by mpow66m

[Ssnake]

I might be interested for my personal collection.

[Arch]

10 hours ago, mpow66m said:

please share😃

It will release when it's done sometime during the next two weeks.

[Hedgehog]

I should probably update my "valley of heros" mission

[mpow66m]

15 hours ago, Ssnake said:

I might be interested for my personal collection.

send me an email and ill send you a pic.

[Nike-Ajax]

On 11/9/2023 at 12:49 AM, Sunbather_ said:

 

 

Both of you are right, of course. However, I'd like to think that scenario creators had a specific equipment in mind with their mission. It might also affect gameplay in a negative way. While it should be no problem to swap out a M1A2 for a Leo5 in a given scenario, the flow and functionality might be seriously hampered with the engagement range of T-55 and M60s. But again, theoretically (and practically) you're right, of course.

 

 

 

There are MANY types and levels of scenarios.

One is not better than the other nor is one more "correct" or "right".
They can all be good  (or bad) depending on what you are looking for. There are so many parameters: historic vs. ahistoric and building on that realistic vs. unrealistic (given a set number of specific parameters which in THEMSELVES are a choice).

Then size: big vs. small - what are your vision and what are you trying to emulate - putting more units on the map because bigger is better is NOT a good idea IMHO. A well made PLT sized scenario is FAR better than a allright BTN sized.

Smaller tends to make it more sharply defined and easier of scope and angle to get right. BUT ... some scenarios needs a bigger footprint. So choices and decisions again.

Then you come to playability: are bot sides equal more or less ? Important if you are doing H2H or PvP - but absolutely non-relevant if you play H2R or vs. a OPFOR ... and yet you then come to other choices: is it achievable ? And what lesson or experience do you want to give the player...

And on that note: is it made for SP or MP ... and if so roughly for how many players.

Then comes the choices of terrain and following on that choices with regards to Ammo, replenishment, obstacles and more ...

And then - for me at least, some people dont give a s***  - a believable and relevant backdrop and backstory.

And then as outlined by others - none mentioned none forgotten - make it rest in itself so not do weird stuff like have a trigger that spawns ENY units in areas already cleared or magic ENY reinforcements out of nowhere that havent been mentioned in the orders.

... AND then of course playtesting. First for functionality and then for playability and the VERY important but illusive Fun Factor.

Making an OK scenario is not that hard.
Making a good one much less so.

And making a great one almost impossible ...