Elsenborn Ridge OOB

[dazkaz15]

I've been doing this for my AAR but it is going to be a long time before I get round to doing it.
Also the scenario is HUGE [X(] So probably won't even get started on it, never mind finish it.

Anyway I hope this can be of some use to you guys. Maybe give it a go yourself.

I used the Gradient fill in the reinforcements list, then used the eyedropper tool to pick the colour next to the unit icon that is due for reinforcemen, then used that to put a background on the troops that are due to arrive over the next few days, so you can see at a glance what to expect, and roughly when they will arrive.

The more green in their background colour the later they will arrive.

[Phoenix100]

Fantastic. Might even try the scenario, armed with that!

[dazkaz15]

ORIGINAL: phoenix

Fantastic. Might even try the scenario, armed with that!

Thanks phoenix [:)]

Let us know how you get on.
I did try to play this a few months ago when I was new to the game, and was completely daunted by the amount fo the units, and the effectiveness of the American Arty so never got far with it.

Now I know a bit more I thought I would give it a go again.

I wish there were more Regiment size scenarios to play.

I really have to take my hat off to the guys that made this one. It took me 2 whole days to do the OOB pic, god knows how long it must have taken to put together the whole scenario from scratch.

I do prefer the smaller ones though. Joe's Bridge is my favourite, and a perfect manageable size.

I was wondering how you guys feel. Do you prefer the big ones or the smaller Regiment, Division size ones.

My view is that the Scenarios should be about 2/3rds small scale, and 1/3rd large huge scale ones when expansions are released, but I'm sure others will think differently.

[wodin]

Dazkaz I'm with you on this one..I enjoy small unit count but over a long period of time maybe three days or so. COTA had a fair few good scenarios at that scale..I reinstalled the other week and I have to say I much prefer the scenarios in that game over BFTB.

[Phoenix100]

I like them all. I used to prefer small and used to get daunted by the size of the big things, the sheer quantity of materiel, the confusing OOB, but now I really enjoy the huge things. My favourites have been From the Meuse to the Rhine, Spearhead v Reich and the Centaurs scenario from COTA. It changed for me when I started to force myself to look at the big battles as many small scale, manageable battles, each wholly engrossing - so you get, I think, the same fun as if you were playing several smaller battles, but with the added tactical element that controlling all the forces allows. I haven't played either Elsenborn or Loshiem since BFTB was released, but should go back to them. I only ever played them as Allies back then, but would enjoy playing Axis now too, I think. And they're pretty big, you're right. Race for Bastogne is a nice big one too. All these scenarios you have to really get into it, really spend a long time looking at the OOB, the reinforcement schedule, the terrain the VPs etc before you even begin. And to play properly you then need to run it on slow speed most of the time. So they're long committments. A week of my time to play FTMTTR properly. You can get into it though. Anyone who can spend 2 days doing a neat reinforcement OOB chart like that could get into the bigger ones and enjoy!!

Hey Wodin, why don't you just make scenarios that are your ideal size in the Scenmaker? It's not hard. Take one that's too big and strip some units out. Maybe strip some Vic locs out too. I just did a little armoured fight on the Manhay map, with just two Vic Locs - Manhay and Grandmenil - no arty, no reinforcements, 3 days to play it, roughly even forces each side, with the supply and stats beefed up for almost everything - so that it's like 2 elite armoured spearheads contesting Manhay. There are about 130 MBTs on the Allied side, only 100 for the Axis (is that the kind of size you like?). Plus the Allies have 27 Stuarts. Both sides have small numbers of supporting infantry. You're controlling about 20 units, I guess - something like 4 battallion strength. The Allies have more tanks (and a greater strength showing if you tot up the counters) but the Axis seem to do better whether I play Allies or Axis. As if the Axis armour was quite a bit better than the Allied armour, as per the 'myth'. Interesting. It's quite easy to put together things like that, whatever size you wish. I guess you know that already.

[con]

Elsinborne Ridge is my personal Homeric odyssey right now. I think I have played it over a dozen times at this point (but only to completion three or four times). All times has been as Axis.

Even with all the settings to favour Axis best I can manage is a marginal victory. Every new patch I fire it up and see if things go better for Axis (in earlier versions blocking US troops fighting to the last man in the initial versions made it impossible to generate any type of win as Axis). A large amount of micro managing arty is necessary, as well as timing your moves to not clog up the few roads.

Having read a lot of the new patch notes on supply I am getting ready to strap this one on and give it a run again this time watching units specific ammo during attacks.

This is one scenario which screams for a very experienced Command Ops player to give a thorough AAR with either movies or powerpoint slides clearly showing their strategy.

Thanks
Con

[Arjuna]

Con,

I'd wait till I send out the next build. It will address the ammo problems reported.

[BigDuke66]

Oh would love to see such a view in-game.
The in-game OB list is good but it often bothers me that the side bar can be adjusted by the player to get anything on it, also that you can't view the OB and can go thruh all the unit tabs at the same time is a bit annoying.

[Arjuna]

I agree BigDuke66. I would like to overhaul the sidebar with the following changes. But before I list them, let me make it clear that this is just my wish list and I have no idea if and when we'll get to them.

• Provide a control on the right edge that can be dragged to expand or contract the width of the sidebar
• Provide the means to vertically collapse or expand three sets of data views. We currently just have one. Note that this could then take advantage of larger screen depths.
• Allow the user to configure what is shown in each of the three data views.
• Default the data views with Side data / task data views on top, unit data views in the middle and OB display at the bottom.
• Provide the means to multiply select units within the OB display.
• Add aditional tab views to the task data display - for assigned forces under command and in support and another forlinked tasks ( for when we do sequential tasking )
• Allow drag and drop from OB to Task\AsignedForces list.
• Expand the task orders and tools area to allow greater access
• Provide an extra play button for "real time" ie one minute of game time = 1 minute of real time.

[BigDuke66]

Sounds great!
If I could choose one I would go for the second point, viewing the Gen, E&S and Cmd tabs all together would be really useful.

[Arjuna]

BigDuke66,

Of course you would need a bigger screen than the minimum 1024 x 768. But it would fit perfctly on a 1920 x 1080 display. [:)]

[dazkaz15]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Provide the means to multiply select units within the OB display.

They all sound awesome Dave.
That one has to be my favourite though. Would help making groups so much easier!

One day then [;)]

[dazkaz15]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

BigDuke66,

Of course you would need a bigger screen than the minimum 1024 x 768. But it would fit perfctly on a 1920 x 1080 display. [:)]

With reference to the bigger screen, could it not be done with a dock able tool roll, so that people with small screens can keep it docked to the edge of the screen, but people with big ones (like me) can keep it open on screen, and drag it where we want it?

[BigDuke66]

Well I'm running 1920x1200 so that wouldn't be a problem, in the patch thread there is someone running a low-end machine, I wonder what screen size the CO community usually uses but I guess it doesn't really mater as you ultimately aim for a user adjustable sidebar.

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: dazkaz15

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

BigDuke66,

Of course you would need a bigger screen than the minimum 1024 x 768. But it would fit perfctly on a 1920 x 1080 display. [:)]

With reference to the bigger screen, could it not be done with a dock able tool roll, so that people with small screens can keep it docked to the edge of the screen, but people with big ones (like me) can keep it open on screen, and drag it where we want it?

The way I see it is that each of the data views has a thin titlebar you would double-click to expand or collapse. That way on a smaller screen you may have to collapse one or two of these, depending on vertical space.

[jimcarravall]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

I agree BigDuke66. I would like to overhaul the sidebar with the following changes. But before I list them, let me make it clear that this is just my wish list and I have no idea if and when we'll get to them.

• Provide a control on the right edge that can be dragged to expand or contract the width of the sidebar
• Provide the means to vertically collapse or expand three sets of data views. We currently just have one. Note that this could then take advantage of larger screen depths.
• Allow the user to configure what is shown in each of the three data views.
• Default the data views with Side data / task data views on top, unit data views in the middle and OB display at the bottom.
• Provide the means to multiply select units within the OB display.
• Add aditional tab views to the task data display - for assigned forces under command and in support and another forlinked tasks ( for when we do sequential tasking )
• Allow drag and drop from OB to Task\AsignedForces list.
• Expand the task orders and tools area to allow greater access
• Provide an extra play button for "real time" ie one minute of game time = 1 minute of real time.

I like the idea of three parallel data views to monitor plan progress.

It's akin to the commander ordering the staff to analyze only those aspects of the overall battlefield situation he considers most important for command and control purposes.

Go much beyond three different parallel reports, and he might as well make monitoring his coffee mug the staff's primary analysis mission. [;)]

I like the proposed flexibility for handling battlefield control, with, perhaps, the "real time" option substituted for the "pause" option as part of the command difficulty options.

Even though the speed up capability in effect creates a "real time" cushion for planning, under battlefield conditions any analysis, planning, and ordering occurs while the battle situation continues to change.

I fully understand these changes are well beyond "immediate" update issues.

I do see their utility in maturing the game into a battlefield simulation for those customers who want to feel what a "Rommel" feels when he is forced to monitor progress and make operational decisions in the heat of battle.

[dazkaz15]

Made another image for my AAR, for when I get round to doing it, that others might find usefull in the mean time.

[wodin]

I have a 19inch 1440x900 screen..with little to no chance of affording a bigger screen in the next three years at least.

Daz good work, but not sure if it's any less confusing..I'd just have a time bar with colour coded strips sitting above the time bar each strip having the obj name on it..have them in start order..colour code circles on map to match colour of strip. Just a thought. That way no need for lots of arrows and you get to put the Obj's in time order..

[dazkaz15]

Ok mate.
Ill see what I can do.
You know you can zoom in and out of your browser by holding Ctrl down, and using the mouse wheel?

It is kind of in order. It is in reverse order from the botom up. Its the order you will be reaching the objectives.

[Phoenix100]

Cheers Daz. It's lovely. And I didn't know you could zoom in and out like that!! Thanks again.