Jump to content
Gibsonm

Rolling Thunder: Operation Rising Bear

Recommended Posts

Well on the comms front all I'm going to say to finish off from my POV is that if Tjay was happy - that's the acid test for me (given the "discussions" we have had in the past on this) :)

Volcano,

Thanks for the offer and I'll send you a PM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well on the comms front all I'm going to say to finish off from my POV is that if Tjay was happy - that's the acid test for me (given the "discussions" we have had in the past on this) :)

.

Thank you. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some pointers from initial correspondence with Volcano that maybe of use to other designers:

1) Number of sides should not make a difference as far as network overload, only the number of units matters.

2) Map size should not matter for network overload, but the map can play a role resources (memory requirements).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that I was being very general. Of course more sides and a larger map makes a difference, but not to a degree that it would cause the scenario to work over a network if things are kept at a reasonable level.

Also, the presence of a nav mesh may or may not make a difference on system resources on the client side, depending on the size of the map. Essentially it really isn't one thing specifically that causes a problem, it is a combination of too much of everything together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So exactly was it that happend? massive lag or? From the thread I gather it was some network based problems, but not exactly what happend.

/KT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens on Rolling Thunder, stays on Rolling Thunder. :)

Esp. as you went off to chase booze and girls (or was it girls and booze). :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Networking issues, lag, people being kicked off, server crashing, take your pick. :)

Bottom line is I think we gave it indigestion because it didn't like Mission 1 or 2.

After that (after about 7 hours [0200 - 1000 for me]) we called it quits and we are currently looking at ways to gut the scenario so they can run but not loose the intent / flavour.

Will set up a poll for new dates in the not too distant future but I doubt it will run until at least after PzBtl's 911 LNoT session in July.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well on the comms front all I'm going to say to finish off from my POV is that if Tjay was happy - that's the acid test for me (given the "discussions" we have had in the past on this) :)

May I also comment that I thought the Opord was very good in that it made clear the tasks of each CT in the various missions. IIRC (and I might be wrong) CT/unit/whatever tasks were previously only given to the Commanders in the reasonable expectation that they would be passed down to the rank and file. While I realise that this is the only possible method in RL, it is less reliable in SB Pro PE as not everyone is militarily trained. Full disclosure of the Opord in RB meant there was/is no reason for anyone not to know their own CT's tasks, and those of the other CTs as well.

Back Brief and RFI (Requests for Further Information). Whereas the latter is self explanatory, I'm sure I'm not the only one to be unfamiliar with the former. So if you have the time Mark, a few words on what you expect would be useful.

Assuming Back Brief means 'feedback', for CT Perseus, I think our Back Brief would have consisted simply of 'Orders received and understood', and our RFI would have been 'None required at this stage'. (Hoggy may wish to correct me if I've got this wrong). This reflects very favourably on the quality of the Opord as mentioned above.

CT Perseus did convene a unit briefing prior to the event and everyone was happy they knew what the plan was and what was expected of them - again due to the general dissemination of the Opord.

Bearing in mind our past misunderstandings, I would like emphasize that this post is essentially complimentary and a genuine attempt to provide feedback from CT Perseus that you might find useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, atleast everything worked out for me :wink2:

(Girl, booze, food... )

/KT

Any tips on how to achieve such an outstanding success?:clin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Back Brief and RFI (Requests for Further Information). Whereas the latter is self explanatory, I'm sure I'm not the only one to be unfamiliar with the former. So if you have the time Mark, a few words on what you expect would be useful.

The OPORD only details the "What" I need the CT Commander to do and usually also "When".

Its doesn't prescribe the "How".

The "How" is up to the CT Commander to work out for themselves. Its where they value add to the process and come with their own solutions (the alternative is that I tell every vehicle where to setup and the CT Commander rightfully questions why they are there).

To ensure their "How" links in to my expectations and also with their neighbour's "How", you usually give a back brief to the person who gave you the job, so they know your idea as to "How", otherwise its just four CTs all working as independent units.

So for example:

"Tjay, I want you to cross this busy road and buy a paper, no rush" - the What.

"Tell me how you are going to do it?"

"Mark, OK I intend to run across the road and hope my reflexes and agility get me across unscathed" - your back brief of the way you are going to do it - the How.

"Maybe a better option given you have plenty of time is to walk 10 metres up the road and cross at the crossing." - CO's guidance on a better How.

So in the missions conducted.

I told CT Perseus to get down the road and to their position on the BHL (amongst other things).

The back brief on the how might have been:

Tank Troop, followed by Mech Inf, followed by Anti Armour, followed by CT HQ, followed by Mech Inf, followed by Mortars with a 5min gap on the road between each Troop / Platoon.

or

Mech Inf, followed by CT HQ, followed by Mech Inf, followed by Anti Armour, followed by Tank Troop, followed by Mortars with a 5min gap on the road between each Troop / Platoon.

So two different "Hows".

In Mission 2 it was more important as we needed to make sure your "How" linked into the Canadian "How" and in turn these two linked into the US and German "Hows".

You may recall I dragged the Canadians further forward as their initial "How" left a 2 to 3 km gap between the UK and Canadians.

Similarly when I warned Crusty about not hanging around he put everything as close as possible to the left edge of the deployment zone. Yes a "How" but not a "How" that supported the overall plan, so I asked him to adjust.

There are other examples with the Engineers and Fire plan as well.

To link back to your past life, a bit like the need to log a flight plan before you just take off and fly between Heathrow and Charles de Gaulle.

Does that help?

CT Perseus did convene a unit briefing prior to the event and everyone was happy they knew what the plan was and what was expected of them - again due to the general dissemination of the Opord.

Great but nobody told me, :) and I need to ensure the CT Perseus plan syncs with the all the other plans - as above. :)

Bearing in mind our past misunderstandings, I would like emphasize that this post is essentially complimentary and a genuine attempt to provide feedback from CT Perseus that you might find useful.

All good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most useful Mark - many thanks. I was unaware how much importance you put on the 'how', assuming that your approach would be more like, 'This is what I require you to do. How you do it is up to you as that is what you are trained for - and I am bloody busy with other stuff'.

So our lack of feedback was, I think, largely due to a desire to keep out of your hair and not bother you with details. We will know better in future. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to thank Gibsonm and the others for all the work they put into this. I was extremely "Wowed" by the maps, battle book, skins, etc. Reading all that was half the fun! :) You can count me in on the next try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:mad3:

It's completely unfair that you allowed the Russian forces to deploy dangerous chemical weapons upon our forces that so distorted our sense of time and space that our own units seemed to teleport around randomly, with many members of the coalition so drugged as to be completely disconnected from reality.

;)

I too will be looking forward to the rematch, hopefully everything gets sorted out so you don't have to trim down things too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:mad3:

It's completely unfair ...

;)

Unfair?

Who said it was going to be fair.

If its a fair fight, there is something wrong with your plan. :)

:mad3:

It's completely unfair that you allowed the Russian forces to deploy dangerous chemical weapons upon our forces that so distorted our sense of time and space that our own units seemed to teleport around randomly, with many members of the coalition so drugged as to be completely disconnected from reality.

;)

That must have been from the neighbouring Dutch Battle Group. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That must have been from the neighbouring Dutch Battle Group. ;)

I thought those brownies they baked for us tasted a little funny! :hallucin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SITREP:

Well Budget cuts mean the BG has lost some assets.

We have had to trim the tail in most missions to keep most of the teeth.

For example the Artillery have retained all their guns but have lost 50% of their resupply capability.

The BG Log piece is also cut so while Azure Lion will have less assets to control he will be busier with them as the line units will be drawing more on his units to make up in the shortfall of their own (e.g. the artillery example above).

Note: I wont be re-writing the OPORD or the Battle Book to reflect these new structures

The alternative was to cut a CT and massively rewrite all the scenarios, or bring each CT down to say 60% strength but still expect the CT Commanders to achieve the same results.

The "cosmetic" parts of the RusFed forces are gone too.

So if we succeed in Mission 3 for example there wont be any gun parks or Log areas for target practice.

Also the "colour" of vehicle wrecks, etc are gone and so are the navmeshes so movement in towns may not be as easy as you'd like.

I'm currently checking when the authors will be finished with their re-writes.

We'll then see if we can play test (maybe ask Sean if we can run one or two as TGIF curtain raisers - Run a mission for maybe 15-20 mins to see how it goes and then let the main event TGIF session proceed. This would probably capture people who can't make Rolling Thunder but retain a "realistic" test in terms of numbers participating).

I need to give Pz Btl 911 at least a month of "clean air" so as to not disrupt their activity in mid July.

So I guess the process is:

1. Talk to authors and see which dates they can make between X and say 14 June, GMT (15 June for BG ANZAC and others).

2. Take that list to Pz Blt 911 and ask about server and "staff" availability.

3. Create a new "preferred date" poll based on those viable dates.

4. Conduct it on the resulting date.

Combat indicators of progress:

- Maybe seeing these missions as curtain raisers for TGIF sessions over the next few weeks.

- Seeing a new poll for dates.

So stay tuned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

General question.

Has anybody checked who has the best server for large events.

I know from experience Pz Blt 911 server is excellent ,but maybe somebody has a better

Server the Target VU server is pretty good as well.

Or maybe all the various Virtual units could chip in and rent a high speed high capacity Server some ware. (just a thought)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great news Mark, looking forward to more info soon.

+1. Would be happy to turn up for 'play testing' if required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thanks to Sean, Volcano and the 12 or so others who allowed me to use about 15mins of their TGIF time to test the start of Mission 2.

Some "random" stuff (refer the YouTube video) but mostly no complaints.

Will need to further refine it but so far so good.

With a bit of luck next week we can rotate another mission through and so on until they have all had one go.

No doubt all the missions will be further adjusted so just because you have say version "c" of Mission 2 now, that may well not be the finished product. :)

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...