How versatile is the scenario design?

[Dagfinn]

Im very interested in aquiering this game, but it realy depends how friendly it is to user created scenarios. So I have a couple of questions:

1. What kind of troops is it possible to display? "Only" German, Italian, Greek, British, Aussie and Kiwi?

2. Is terrain limited to Aegean, or could any European battelfield be displayed?

3. How complicated is it to make a new map? Those posted in AAR's realy look good.

4. Could some of the PG guys do a little runthrough of a scenario creation prosess? Please?

[Grouchy]

1.
Germany: Army, Waffen SS, Luftwaffe troops

Italy: Regio Esercito, Regio Aeronautica, Fascist Militia (CCNN), Marines

Britain: British Line, British Commando, Royal Malta Forces and a couple of estabs for British Airborne & British Royal Marines (Lt AA, HAA, base, HQ)

United States: Rangers (Coy and HQ)

New Zealand: NZEF

Australia: AIF

Greece: Greek Army, Greek Police

France: Free French Forces (Mot inf Coy, HQ and a 3in Mor Pl)

2. Yup, basically the same MapMaker was used for HttR, CotA and BftB and will be used for North Africa, the Eastern front and the Pacific.

3. Both the mapmaker and ScenMaker are very flexible and powerfull tools. It's not complicated imo but it can be very timeconsuming.

4. You start with the map. First the heights, then the water, the vegetation, ground, roads & rails and then finally the urban terrain and embankments.

After the map is ready you can use it in the ScenMaker. There you build your OOB's, place them on the map, set objectives etc etc. But don't worry CotA includes 2 seperate manuals dealing with the MapMaker(55 pages) and the ScenMaker (80 pages).

[simovitch]

You can represent these forces as any nationality you want really. The scenario editor allows you to change the name of formations already in the game, including the text description that shows up on the counters during play. The composition of each unit is geared toward the the battles represented in this period of the war only. You can't add Panthers and Tigers, etc.

For example, if you make a scenario about, say Norway 1940, have the greeks (or any allied formation) represent Norwegian troops (although they will be using greek, etc. equipment). I did a similar thing in HttR by creating a Battle of the Bulge scenario using the British forces (estabs) but in the scenario they had the historical American unit designations.

I think a terrain mod can be made available to make the maps you create look more "Northern European".

[tukker]

When creating a scenario, you usually start by picking a battle, and then create the map. The best way to go is to scan a topographical map (1:50,000 or 1:100,000), if possible a historical one (though these may be hard to come by). You can then 'trace' all the contour lines, terrain features, roads, etc. Terrain is moddable- you can easily change the properties (including the name) of the different types of terrain. Making a map is not difficult, but does take some time.
After the map is finished, you'll usually create an OOB. For this, you can only use the Estabs that come with the game (as pointed out above), so you're basically restricted to the 1941-1942 Axis and western Allied troops. You can use Excel to set the properties of the different units (fitness, fatigue etc.) You can download a special Excel Add-in to make this easier hereThe next step is to place the units on the map, and determine which ones will arrive as reinforcements. Then you set the different objectives, the weather, and write the scenario introduction and briefings. That's all [;)]
Both the Scenmaker and Mapmaker manuals will tell you clearly how to go about it. It will take some time, but if you use an existing map and/or OOB you can greatly reduce the number of hours you'll need. I'd give it a try if I were you, creating a scenario is as much fun as playing one!

Pieter

[jungelsj_slith]

Would it be feasible to create France '40 scenarios using british estabs for the french? Are there any armor formations that could be used to replace the Matildas, Chars, etc in France? Are german panzer formations there?

[jungelsj_slith]

Do you set goals for the AI forces? Or will they formulate their own plans based on objective points vs loss points etc.?

[simovitch]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

Would it be feasible to create France '40 scenarios using british estabs for the french? Are there any armor formations that could be used to replace the Matildas, Chars, etc in France? Are german panzer formations there?

Do you set goals for the AI forces? Or will they formulate their own plans based on objective points vs loss points etc.?

Matildas and Cruiser tanks are in the estabs, but the french tanks (Char, Renault, etc.) are not.

German Armored division establishment did not change too much from May 1940 so I think that is doable. The game comes with some scenario templates that have force OOB, including a panzer division already created. I suggest opening up the scenario editor and take a look around at the different templates and estabs[8D]

The AI will formulate their own plans based on objectives. You can "script" the AI quite effectively with the timing and location of "zero-point value" AI objectives that only the AI will see.

[jungelsj_slith]

ORIGINAL: simovitch

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

Would it be feasible to create France '40 scenarios using british estabs for the french? Are there any armor formations that could be used to replace the Matildas, Chars, etc in France? Are german panzer formations there?

Do you set goals for the AI forces? Or will they formulate their own plans based on objective points vs loss points etc.?

Matildas and Cruiser tanks are in the estabs, but the french tanks (Char, Renault, etc.) are not.

German Armored division establishment did not change too much from May 1940 so I think that is doable. The game comes with some scenario templates that have force OOB, including a panzer division already created. I suggest opening up the scenario editor and take a look around at the different templates and estabs[8D]

The AI will formulate their own plans based on objectives. You can "script" the AI quite effectively with the timing and location of "zero-point value" AI objectives that only the AI will see.

Cool, thanks. I will fire up that scen editor as soon as the box COTA version is available [8D]

[Dagfinn]

ORIGINAL: simovitch

You can represent these forces as any nationality you want really. The scenario editor allows you to change the name of formations already in the game, including the text description that shows up on the counters during play. The composition of each unit is geared toward the the battles represented in this period of the war only. You can't add Panthers and Tigers, etc.

For example, if you make a scenario about, say Norway 1940, have the greeks (or any allied formation) represent Norwegian troops (although they will be using greek, etc. equipment). I did a similar thing in HttR by creating a Battle of the Bulge scenario using the British forces (estabs) but in the scenario they had the historical American unit designations.

I think a terrain mod can be made available to make the maps you create look more "Northern European".

Not even Yugoslavian, Bulgarian or Turkish units for "what if" scenarios?

So the amount of unit types are limited to those used in exsisting scenarios and you cant change the equipment of a unit?

Hmmm, me not like [:-]

This looks like Squad battles, and I does not like their approach to user scenarios... [:(]

[simovitch]

ORIGINAL: Not even Yugoslavian, Bulgarian or Turkish units for "what if" scenarios?

So the amount of unit types are limited to those used in exsisting scenarios and you cant change the equipment of a unit?

Dagfin,

The Greek estabs include various calibers of the Mannlicher rifle, also used by Yugoslavian, & Bulgarian, and to some extent Turkish forces (they actually used a 8mm Mauser, very similar to the 7.92mm Mannlicher which is in the game) at this stage of WW2.

With no less than 9 unit characteristics ( fittness, moral, staff quality, experience, training, etc. ) that can be modified by the scenario designer, Any of the nationalities you mentioned could be represented to a level of historical accuracy that would satisfy even the alpha-grogs. IMHO.

The unit color for these minor country forces would be white (can't change that), but the similarity would end there.

[Rooster]

ORIGINAL: Dagfinn

Im very interested in aquiering this game, but it realy depends how friendly it is to user created scenarios. So I have a couple of questions:

1. What kind of troops is it possible to display? "Only" German, Italian, Greek, British, Aussie and Kiwi?

2. Is terrain limited to Aegean, or could any European battelfield be displayed?

3. How complicated is it to make a new map? Those posted in AAR's realy look good.

4. Could some of the PG guys do a little runthrough of a scenario creation prosess? Please?

Hi Dagfinn - Check my site if you want a little more detail about designing scenarios, maps, modified terrain etc. It's very do-able. And the documentation and support from the Panther guys is excellent - nothing quite compares.

[Rooster]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

Would it be feasible to create France '40 scenarios using british estabs for the french? Are there any armor formations that could be used to replace the Matildas, Chars, etc in France? Are german panzer formations there?

Hi molotov_billy - You've got Matilda IIs in the COTA, which were in the battle of France. But no Matilda Is, which comprised a fair amount of the BEF's armored contingent. Nonetheless, you could make up some good scenarios - just would have to play with the force balance a little to do "Arras." Let me know if you want some map info - I've got a good collection going, but won't be able to get to it for a while.

[Alexander Seil]

Is there reason as to why creation of new sides, estabs, etc. is prohibited? I understand if there are some issues with hardcoded equipment characteristics, but why not just allow the modders to use that equipment in any units they'd like?

[simovitch]

That's a fair question. Arjuna will answer this better than me, but from what I can gather, the development philosophy for the AA series is geared toward expanding the simulation of operational warfare within the 4 general theaters of WW2: Mediterranean, West Front, East Front, and Pacific - not to develop a generic TOAW type structure.

I believe the intent is to eventually have an estab file specific to each of these theaters, but the feasibility is still being investigated. i.e. will the East Front estab eventually have 1941 through 1945 formations? As a scenario designer, the concept of building say a historical 1943 East Front formation from such a broad estab would be a bit mind boggling

To answer your question more specifically, to allow the masses to develop there own estabs could cause problems with compatibility with other scenarios. Also, as the estab is developed and improved through the development of the engine, you could be left with a "custom" estab that you created that works only for that scenario you designed. And before long, there is a hundred different estab files floating around the community.

I think most importantly, because the estab is integrated with the internal coding of the game, the crashes that could result from allowing "custom" estabs would mean the game itself could no longer be supported by the developers, who would have no clue who has done what to which estab.

[Alexander Seil]

I don't see why creating new lists of equipment from existing pieces would prevent the developers from supporting the game. And shouldn't it be up to the modders to sort out their estab files? What exactly do you mean by "compatible" estabs? If I create a custom set of estabs and use it in a set of scenarios, why in the world would that screw up the game, unless I'm changing the original estabs rather than creating new ones?

[Rooster]

As Simovitch said, Arjuna will explain this better than anyone. My take is it's a supply/demand thing. If there's a large amount of free scenarios out there, the demand for the next official Panther release will be low. Conversely, if there's limited amount of scenarios/theatres available, demand for the future releases will be higher.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Rooster

Conversely, if there's limited amount of scenarios/theatres available, demand for the future releases will be higher.

Hmm, I'm not sure......While HttR and COTA feature high replay-values, many expert AA gamers will be done with the game sooner or later, ok ok - maybe some rather after playing painfully realistic, both sides, and with all sets of reinf. schedules tested. [;)]

On one hand, I suspect that the lack of custom scenarios, and especially the lack of moddable estabs, might have hampered the creation of a bigger fanbase + a bigger base of mappers. The general rule of thumb, imho:

the more (challenging/interesting) custom scenarios available, the bigger the hype/attraction. Sure, a game should be solid/well thought-out too.

But just check the "Gamesdepot", there is a massive number of scenarios for many different games, and I'm sure that such kind of flexibility offered by developers keeps a community/hobby alive, and it would create some additional customer loyalty (I'm convinced that Panther already gained some serious loyalty by delivering a great game, but hey, the more the better, eh? :p).

On the other hand, I understand the risk to create a product that delivers such a high level of customer satisfaction (in terms of flexibility, customization), that there'd be no need to develop any sequel, the death of a small developer. Also, a 100% customizable game would also cause a situation where the devs would have to invent a ton of new features (that would attract new/old customers) for each sequel.........in order to be able to feed the kids, like we say, hehe. But in fact, looking at the general game market (not the niche markets), it's just like that. Devs have to reinvent the wheel, often, if they want a sequel to be successful.

Anyway, but it would be great if there'd be a happy medium somewhere, where customization would be allowed, maybe only on a Coy level, which would allow the creation of small custom scenarios, but with the theater/region/era determined by the mapper, not the developer, to some extent at least.

With a future release, and with a somewhat flexible estab (very restricted, maybe allow the inclusion of let's say a custom estab with 20 (empty) custom slots) I could imagine the creation of patrol boats/amphibious tanks or Coys crossing a river in assault boats (both would look good in historic/fictional Vietnam maps, for example, or the latter would come in handy for WWII maps covering final operations in Germany 1945).

Well, my 2 cents.

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: Alexander Seil

Is there reason as to why creation of new sides, estabs, etc. is prohibited? I understand if there are some issues with hardcoded equipment characteristics, but why not just allow the modders to use that equipment in any units they'd like?

There area number of reasons why we decided not to release an Estab Editor. In order of importance they include:

• We would have to write a full blown, commercially supported application, rather than the current in house development tool. So that's lot's of development time and money and I'm not sure that providing an Estab Editor would increase sales to make it worthwhile. This is especially so when you consider that in the same time we could release a new title.
• Releasing an Estab Editor would mean we would have to provide support like we do for the MapMaker and ScenMaker. Supporting the Estab Editor, would consume a lot of time, especially with conversions as each new title was released with changes. We are only a small team and I would rather commit that time to developing the engine than to supporting the development of estabs.
• Releasing an Estab Editor could lead to users releasing a set of scenarios on the same battle as we plan to focus on and that would impact adversely on our sales ( and we need every sale just to stay in business ). Though I must admit that this point is of far less a concern that the first two.

What is critical for us to survive, let alone thrive, is to release and sell more games. Anything which detracts us from that end is to be eschewed. Once we are financially viable and can invest the resources into something like this, then we can look at it. But it will still be a case of looking at what other things we could be doing, like adding Team Play or overhauling the graphics engine, both of which I would put as a greater priority.

[GoodGuy]

Looks like we were writing our replies at the same time, so I guess you couldn't read mine....

Any chance of getting something like this?

.......with a somewhat flexible estab (very restricted, maybe allow the inclusion of let's say a custom estab with 20 (empty) custom slots) I could imagine the creation of patrol boats/amphibious tanks or Coys crossing a river in assault boats (both would look good in historic/fictional Vietnam maps, for example, or the latter would come in handy for WWII maps covering final operations in Germany 1945).

[GoodGuy]

* BUMP *