TGIF 2014: scenario list, discussion, and house rules

[MDF]

Volcano,

You might want to consider making the surrounded US element a separate side.

[Volcano]

Volcano,

You might want to consider making the surrounded US element a separate side.

That is not a bad idea but there are several problems with that approach:

• 
  Since the scenario was made before multiparty was possible, to do it now would involve splitting up and duplicating logic and scoring, which is a lot of work and an invitation to disaster.
  

• 
  All the infantry units were carefully placed and I wouldn't want to do that all over again.
  

• 
  It would be difficult to find someone to CO the isolated infantry unit side.
  

• 
  At certain points in the scenario, when all forces are on the same blue side, users who command other units can help out the isolated infantry unit from time to time by taking over some units (such as when they have lost their own mobile units, or when they have nothing to do).
  

I am not sure how many benefits there would be to splitting the infantry to their own side. If anything, the scenario should be split up by nationality (US, DE, UK) but the problem with doing that is that you ensure that people will quit when they lose their units since they cannot spectate or be given more units from the combined force. Needless to say, I had been thinking about all of this already.

Edited May 10, 2014 by Volcano
Typos

[MDF]

That is not a bad idea but there are several problems with that approach:

• 
  Since the scenario was made before multiparty was possible, to do it know would involve splitting up and duplicating logic and scoring, which is a lot of work and an invitation to disaster.
  

• 
  All the infantry units were carefully placed and I wouldn't want to do that all over again.
  

• 
  It would be difficult to find someone to CO the isolated infantry unit side.
  

• 
  At certain points in the scenario, when all forces are on the same blue side, users who command other units can help out the isolated infantry unit from time to time by taking over some units (such as when they have lost their own mobile units, or when they have nothing to do).
  

I am not sure how many benefits there would be to splitting the infantry to their own side. If anything, the scenario should be split up by nationality (US, DE, UK) but the problem with doing that is that you ensure that people will quit when they lose their units since they cannot spectate or be given more units from the combined force. Needless to say, I had been thinking about all of this already.

Good points. I was thinking it might make for an elegant way to represent loss of comms/SA with the surrounded element, using the friendly/neutral-if functionality. Friendly sides share a "common operational picture" and neutrals don't, right?

I didn't take a close look at the surrounded element, but if they have ATGMs, that might be a "draw" for a CO. I always have fun with TOW/MILAN, etc. Maybe give them a few disabled tanks (assuming these can be repositioned in the Planning Phase).

[Volcano]

Yeah, well, it is probably more trouble than it is worth, although I might split the scenario by nationality at some point, to give everyone unique infantry and make it slightly more difficult to coordinate. I do like the idea about having some disabled and inferior tanks in the region that can be deployed (perhaps they are Leo 1s with 1 or 2% fuel, just enough to get into a BP) --I will look into that.

I also might make it own party map updates, to make it a little difficult for red to systematically exterminate the isolated infantry unit, but of course it goes both ways.

[Gibsonm]

Just for those not tracking the 3.017 beta thread.

This series of posts indicate that in 4 or so days time (depends where you live) but certainly before the next TGIF 3.017 will expire and we will running 3.011 until maybe June or so:

Right so in 5 days or so (based on the warning message I receive on launch) 3.017 will stop working.

Are we then back to 3.011 until the things being tested in 3.017, and the earlier public betas, are rolled into "3.0something else"?

Correct. In June we'll start the next open beta with the 64 bit version of SB Pro PE. Once that that test is over too we will probably wrap it up and release another free update for the current release. Beyond that all work will go into the next upgrade, scheduled for the second half of 2015.

Taken from here:

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=20713&page=3

[Volcano]

Just for those not tracking the 3.017 beta thread.

This series of posts indicate that in 4 or so days time (depends where you live) but certainly before the next TGIF 3.017 will expire and we will running 3.011 until maybe June or so:

Taken from here:

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=20713&page=3

Thanks, yes, it appears that TGIF next week will have to be in the non-Beta version.

[Tango29]

Remember what I said about "learning curves" in Post 172? Well, here's another example:

When the current license for 3.017 expires, what action (if any) do we follow to access our version 3.011? Will the computer systems automatically revert to 3.011, or is there a protocol that must be followed to "reacquire" the earlier version? If so, what might that be? IIRC, we've "over-written" the earlier versions. Have they "gone," or are they still resident on the system, which will revert automatically to 3.011 on the day?

Geez,that vertical line is getting longer and higher...! :bigsmile:

[Gibsonm]

Well you should have both if you installed the beta correctly with the "Release" folder containing:

"SBProPEcm3_011.exe" amazingly enough, the earlier 3.011 version

while

"SBProPEcm.exe" is the soon to be worthless 3.017 version.

[Tango29]

Well you should have both if you installed the beta correctly with the "Release" folder containing:

"SBProPEcm3_011.exe" amazingly enough, the earlier 3.011 version

while

"SBProPEcm.exe" is the soon to be worthless 3.017 version.

Just checked, and I have them both. Thx for the lead.

[Volcano]

16 MAY scenario:

Tactical Chess 01-HV-3011-OMU

NOTES:

• Avoid studying the enemy's side; only gather intel from the briefing and exposed enemy unit icons (enemy intel), and briefly looking over both sides to figure out which one you want to CO. Anything beyond that ruins the fog of war element.
  
• To avoid passwords, open the scenario in Network Session as HOST and choose the side you want to play and go to planning phase. You may briefly look at both sides like this to see which side you want to play or CO on. As CO, once you choose a side, go to that side and create your plan.
  
• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com community rules.
  

Edited May 21, 2014 by Volcano

[Gibsonm]

Just in case people are wondering - no RT testing "today"/"tonight".

[Volcano]

23 MAY scenario:

Deliberate Defense 03-3011-OMU

NOTES:

• Avoid studying the enemy's side; only gather intel from the briefing and exposed enemy unit icons (enemy intel), and briefly looking over both sides to figure out which one you want to CO. Anything beyond that ruins the fog of war element.
  
• To avoid passwords, open the scenario in Network Session as HOST and choose the side you want to play and go to planning phase. You may briefly look at both sides like this to see which side you want to play or CO on. As CO, once you choose a side, go to that side and create your plan.
  
• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com community rules.
  

Edited May 28, 2014 by Volcano

[Gibsonm]

And "yes" I'll be after your support for a 10 min "curtain raiser" test of a RT scenario beforehand.

That should give us 3 out of 4 tested by the end of the weekend.

UPDATE: Or maybe not.

It appears that things will be slightly different this week compared to "normal" so we will delay until next week so that we are testing all files with the same server/network connection configuration.

Edited May 21, 2014 by Gibsonm

[Tacbat]

23 MAY scenario:

Deliberate Defense 03-3011-OMU

Red CO checking in.

[Volcano]

Red CO checking in.

Excellent. Fresh blood. :clin:

[Tacbat]

"All in the valley of Death

Rode the six hundred."

[Volcano]

30 MAY scenario:

Clash of Armor 2014

NOTES:

• Avoid studying the enemy's side; only gather intel from the briefing and exposed enemy unit icons (enemy intel), and briefly looking over both sides to figure out which one you want to CO. Anything beyond that ruins the fog of war element.
  
• To avoid passwords, open the scenario in Network Session as HOST and choose the side you want to play and go to planning phase. You may briefly look at both sides like this to see which side you want to play or CO on. As CO, once you choose a side, go to that side and create your plan.
  
• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com community rules.
  

Edited June 2, 2014 by Volcano

[Assassin 7]

Sean, are you going to run Hamaci this Friday?

[Gibsonm]

Guys,

Room to fit in a RT scenario test at this week's TGIF?

[Volcano]

Sean will have to answer both questions.

[Gibsonm]

Thanks for the opportunity to test RT #3.

With a bit of luck RT #4 next week and then the disruptions are over.

[Rotareneg]

Here's the AAR for the 2014-05-30 TGIF:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzS6i2JCDwdtOWVSaFBiNTZtMHM/edit?usp=sharing

[Rotareneg]

The night wasn't a total loss I guess:

:gun:

[Tacbat]

So that's how blue lost their only M1A1.

[Viper-3]

LOL and it was mine. He caught me sipping java going through that town then BAM!! I almost choked...