Now THAT was fun!

[kaburke61]

Have been playing the new Tanks! scenario (many, many, times) as only the TC. Finally beat it! (OK...I used the UAV to find the last two, I hadn't spawned it up to that point. Next time no drone!).

I haven't had this much fun since the 'ol Microprose M1 Tank Platoon game.

I stumbled across the M1A2 and the sweet CITV..that made a big difference if you are only playing as TC.

I am having fun learning the more complex scenarios, but for just jump in a tank and have a blast..this was great. Great Job! Thanks.

Kevin

[MDF]

Have been playing the new Tanks! scenario (many, many, times) as only the TC. Finally beat it! (OK...I used the UAV to find the last two, I hadn't spawned it up to that point. Next time no drone!).

I haven't had this much fun since the 'ol Microprose M1 Tank Platoon game.

I stumbled across the M1A2 and the sweet CITV..that made a big difference if you are only playing as TC.

I am having fun learning the more complex scenarios, but for just jump in a tank and have a blast..this was great. Great Job! Thanks.

Kevin

So, a new guy can beat my scenario, yet I cannot! I must be completely frikkin inept at this game.

Well, I'm glad you enjoyed it. If you find any bugs, please do let me know. If you look at the AAR afterwards (using the "show actual enemy" setting) and you see that a particular red tank has stopped moving for more than, say 3-4 minutes, could you let me know the 8-digit grid where the vehicle is stuck?

[RedWardancer]

For some reason, my WinZip doesn't want to extract and download. Bet it's really my fault for not doing it right. Was given some good suggestions on infantry scenarios to download. It's ok, I have almost 20K students at this college who can help if I buy them pizza :clin:

[Daimaju]

Yep, that scenario is fun indeed!

My best so far was cracking 6-7 targets, then I got smoked.

Only thing I dislike is the lack of randomness in this scenario. At least, I had the feeling the enemy tanks appear at the same spots again and again - but that might have been coincidence, so correct me if I'm wrong please.

Was the usage of DM33 (crap) for the Leo2A5 intended though?

I switched it to DM53 in the editor to compensate for my noob-factor

Would love more scenarios like this, really!

[MDF]

Yep, that scenario is fun indeed!

My best so far was cracking 6-7 targets, then I got smoked.

Only thing I dislike is the lack of randomness in this scenario. At least, I had the feeling the enemy tanks appear at the same spots again and again - but that might have been coincidence, so correct me if I'm wrong please.

Was the usage of DM33 (crap) for the Leo2A5 intended though?

I switched it to DM53 in the editor to compensate for my noob-factor

Would love more scenarios like this, really!

Are you sure you mean the "Tanks! Again" mission I posted a month or so back, and not the original?

In Tanks! Again, each of the 9 tanks has 10 different, widely-separated possible starting locations (unique not only for themselves but also unique from the other 8 tanks), which are randomly determined. So, there are 900 different initial setups. Plus, the movement routes are not only randomized, but adapt to spotting reports.

Also, I used the default ammo loadout for everything except the M109.

[MDF]

For comparison's sake, attached are images from the mission editor showing the Red deployment and routes from the original mission (actually, an update that someone did) and the deployment/routes from my version.

[spoiler ALERT!!!!!!!!!!] Do not view the image for the original (the one on the left) if you want to retain uncertainty about Red dispositions/routes in the original mission; no spoiler issues with respect to newer version.]

Edited March 28, 2014 by MDF

[kaburke61]

If you find any bugs, please do let me know. If you look at the AAR afterwards (using the "show actual enemy" setting) and you see that a particular red tank has stopped moving for more than, say 3-4 minutes, could you let me know the 8-digit grid where the vehicle is stuck?

Yep, sure will. I noticed one tank that was hiding (probably hull down) on a ridge, and sat there for a long time, then moved somewhat, and stopped again. I didn't keep the AAR. If I see it again, I will let you know. I remember it was down in the southern end of the map.

One other question, does the various different enemy "groups" have a different set of random starting positions? I played the game ALOT, and noticed a "pattern" (not exact of course just generalized) that seemed to be different when I was using the M1A1(HA), vs. the M1A2(SEP).

[MDF]

Yep, sure will. I noticed one tank that was hiding (probably hull down) on a ridge, and sat there for a long time, then moved somewhat, and stopped again. I didn't keep the AAR. If I see it again, I will let you know. I remember it was down in the southern end of the map.

One other question, does the various different enemy "groups" have a different set of random starting positions? I played the game ALOT, and noticed a "pattern" (not exact of course just generalized) that seemed to be different when I was using the M1A1(HA), vs. the M1A2(SEP).

There shouldn't be any discernible pattern in the setups, unless you have played the mission an absurd number of times and are incredibly perceptive There are 900 unique setups -- see my prior post. (Actually a multiple of that, because there are 5 different groupings of Red vehicles, depending on which Blue vehicle you select.)

Vehicles will take up defensive positions as a result of Engage route logic (if they are on such a route). In addition, I created numerous ambush positions they might occupy.

I'm a little concerned that two different people have said they detected deployment patterns. This is one of the things I typically looked at during my testing, and it sure looked properly randomized to me.

[kaburke61]

Yep, that scenario is fun indeed!

Would love more scenarios like this, really!

I agree with you on that one. While I like the larger ones some times, these small, highly randomized scenarios are what I enjoy the most.

[Gibsonm]

Well its possible, just not likely.

[kaburke61]

(Actually a multiple of that, because there are 5 different groupings of Red vehicles, depending on which Blue vehicle you select.)

That's what I was wondering. I could see a different "look" (certain tank or tanks would show in a certain area a percentage of time, but when I used a different tank, they would almost never be in that area).

While I understand why you password protected it, I would have loved to look at the red scripting/logic. I could learn ALOT as far as scenario design (my preferred type of scenario).

[MDF]

I agree with you on that one. While I like the larger ones some times, these small, highly randomized scenarios are what I enjoy the most.

Well, at the risk of "plugging" another one of my missions, I created a platoon-sized mission (M1A1(HA) only) that includes a highly-randomized REDFOR. It's a more "serious" mission though -- no inexplicable roaming around an engagement area with 9 enemy tanks scattered randomly -- and will repay a more serious planning effort by the player. But the mission is small(ish) and should be replayable many times (nothing like the "Tanks! Again" mission though). Just search for "MDF" in the author field of the Downloads page search box. Also, Zipuli has a series of platoon-level missions that are fairly random and there are numerous other good platoon-level ones available for download as well as in the the stock mission sets that come with SB (although I can't speak to the randomization level of most of them).

[MDF]

That's what I was wondering. I could see a different "look" (certain tank or tanks would show in a certain area a percentage of time, but when I used a different tank, they would almost never be in that area).

While I understand why you password protected it, I would have loved to look at the red scripting/logic. I could learn ALOT as far as scenario design (my preferred type of scenario).

I have a few "proprietary" tricks in there which I'm not ready to disclose to the consuming public just yet.:clin: But if you have specific questions about mission scripting, I'd be happy to try to answer (as would many even more knowledgeable people here, I'm sure). Randomization and replayability, in and of themselves, are not difficult on a conceptual level. But to create multiple REDFOR courses of action is time consuming. The two missions I uploaded each took ~80 hours to create, and probably 75% of the time is attributable to REDFOR scripting.

[Volcano]

For comparison's sake, attached are images from the mission editor showing the Red deployment and routes from the original mission (actually, an update that someone did) and the deployment/routes from my version.

[spoiler ALERT!!!!!!!!!!] Do not view the image for the original (the one on the left) if you want to retain uncertainty about Red dispositions, although the routes do have randomized branching.]

OK, you win the most-routes-and-waypoints award. I bequeath the crown to you.

[kaburke61]

OK, you win the most-routes-and-waypoints award. I bequeath the crown to you.

OMG..no kidding..looking at that screen cap...wow!

[kaburke61]

Well, at the risk of "plugging" another one of my missions, I created a platoon-sized mission (M1A1(HA) only) that includes a highly-randomized REDFOR. It's a more "serious" mission though -- no inexplicable roaming around an engagement area with 9 enemy tanks scattered randomly -- and will repay a more serious planning effort by the player. But the mission is small(ish) and should be replayable many times (nothing like the "Tanks! Again" mission though). Just search for "MDF" in the author field of the Downloads page search box. Also, Zipuli has a series of platoon-level missions that are fairly random and there are numerous other good platoon-level ones available for download as well as in the the stock mission sets that come with SB (although I can't speak to the randomization level of most of them).

I will go get them. Thanks for the help!

[Daimaju]

Are you sure you mean the "Tanks! Again" mission I posted a month or so back, and not the original?

In Tanks! Again, each of the 9 tanks has 10 different, widely-separated possible starting locations (unique not only for themselves but also unique from the other 8 tanks), which are randomly determined. So, there are 900 different initial setups. Plus, the movement routes are not only randomized, but adapt to spotting reports.

Also, I used the default ammo loadout for everything except the M109.

I'm positive I played the one released recently

" Plus, the movement routes are not only randomized, but adapt to spotting reports."

Now, that explains why I had the feeling they have the same routes...

I was too long at the same spot I guess... I didn't dare to leave that precious forest, so never mind what I said, great scenario!

Oh, again... what's up with the DM33 for the Leo2A5?

[MDF]

OK, you win the most-routes-and-waypoints award. I bequeath the crown to you.

Thanks! And probably 80 percent of those routes have conditional logic. :casstet:

[MDF]

I'm positive I played the one released recently

" Plus, the movement routes are not only randomized, but adapt to spotting reports."

Now, that explains why I had the feeling they have the same routes...

I was too long at the same spot I guess... I didn't dare to leave that precious forest, so never mind what I said, great scenario!

Yeah, that would explain it. Once you are detected, they will converge on you. In the AAR phase, turn on the map view, select "Show . . . Actual enemy" from the menu, and run the AAR "tape". You will see this in action.

Oh, again... what's up with the DM33 for the Leo2A5?

That is the default ammo loadout for the Leo2A5's. It's fine with me if you want to change it in the editor. Or just choose the Leo2E or Leo2A5A1/A2-DK. I believe they have the DM53. REDFOR will have somewhat better vehicles if you select these MBTs or M1A2(SEP), however.

[Daimaju]

Will do, thanks!

[MDF]

Incidentally, I just fired up the mission again and after several attempts was finally able to win (with Leo2A5-DK).:gun: First time I have beaten the mission fairly (I did win once in the editor test mode, but only after I used the repair function at one point).

[Daimaju]

Well... Leopard!

I am going for another try as well... can be a tough nut to crack, that's for sure.

[MDF]

Oh, and to both kaburke61 and Daimaju, I would say that if you're familiar enough with SB to do well at this mission, you are probably capable of performing reasonably well in multiplayer. Multiplayer is a very different and, IMO, superior experience. The AI just can't compare to human adversaries (and this is true of every wargame or sim I've ever tried). So, I invite you to join the TGIF game this weekend and even the Rolling Thunder campaign on April 5. (But if you haven't squared away the port-forwarding issue for your router, you should definitely show up well in advance so people can walk you through it if necessary. I don't think either upcoming game is using the new beta that obviates port forwarding for clients)

[Daimaju]

Thanks!

Gotta pass though unfortunately, my machine really has problems handling multiple clients/larger missions so the performance is just terrible/not fun to play. For now, I have to stick with small scenarios - like this one - to be able to enjoy SBP.

Will come back to this offer once I have a stronger machine though :clin:

[MDF]

Thanks!

Gotta pass though unfortunately, my machine really has problems handling multiple clients/larger missions so the performance is just terrible/not fun to play. For now, I have to stick with small scenarios - like this one - to be able to enjoy SBP.

Will come back to this offer once I have a stronger machine though :clin:

I can't claim detailed knowledge here, but it's possible you might have better performance in MP because most of the vehicles are owned by the server AI or other players rather than your machine, and most of the line-of-sight calculations (which is one of the big performance hits in larger scenarios) are performed by the server (I suspect) or other clients. Whether this is sufficient to offset the additional computing load from the network communications, I dunno. Someone else can probably give you a better answer. Might be worth a try if you haven't already.