Scenario design: relative experience levels

Command Ops: Battles From The Bulge takes the highly acclaimed Airborne Assault engine back to the West Front for the crucial engagements during the Ardennes Offensive. Test your command skills in the fiery crucible of Airborne Assault’s “pausable continuous time” uber-realistic game engine. It's up to you to develop the strategy, issue the orders, set the pace, and try to win the laurels of victory in the cold, shadowy Ardennes.
Command Ops: Highway to the Reich brings us to the setting of one of the most epic and controversial battles of World War II: Operation Market-Garden, covering every major engagement along Hell’s Highway, from the surprise capture of Joe’s Bridge by the Irish Guards a week before the offensive to the final battles on “The Island” south of Arnhem.

Moderators: Panther Paul, Arjuna

Post Reply
Count Sessine
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 4:13 pm

Scenario design: relative experience levels

Post by Count Sessine »

Hi all

I think that in most scenarios the relative experience levels are too biased in favor of the allies.

Example: the german attack on Eisenborn Ridge (I think thats the scenario). The 106 US Inf Div is defending and is described a 'green' or 'raw'. In the game, however, the average experience levels of the units in the division is +50%, which is not green, but regulars.

The German units, the 277 VG Div and the 12 VG Div (described in the briefing as the best German infantry division in the Ardennes) both have identical experience levels of about 25% (or green).

I know this could be subject to endless debate, but I feel the scenario designers are in the wrong here and that maybe they make the scenarios harder for the Germans that they should be.

As axample, even units like the 1SS are represented with 25% experience levels - although the division had received a lot of recruits after Normandy, it was reported (in various books I've read, fx History of the 7th Panzer kompanie by Ralf Tiemann) to contain about 50% veterans. That should at least make it a 50% division :-)

Food for thought and maybe discussion :-)

User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Scenario design: relative experience levels

Post by wodin »

Might be worth looking at actually....so I concour...
User avatar
simovitch
Posts: 5947
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 7:01 pm

RE: Scenario design: relative experience levels

Post by simovitch »

I agree and I thought I made the adjustments before release already just as you describe. I assume the scenarios you are describing are from Losheim Gap and Elsenborn Ridge or Final Jump. And I assume we are not talking about 'training.'

If I can I'll take a look tonight.
simovitch

Count Sessine
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 4:13 pm

RE: Scenario design: relative experience levels

Post by Count Sessine »

Hi simovitch,

Yes, I mean those scenarios and yes its experience not training levels I'm referring to. Thanks for looking into it.
Tophat1815
Posts: 1824
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:11 pm

RE: Scenario design: relative experience levels

Post by Tophat1815 »

ORIGINAL: simovitch

I agree and I thought I made the adjustments before release already just as you describe. I assume the scenarios you are describing are from Losheim Gap and Elsenborn Ridge or Final Jump. And I assume we are not talking about 'training.'

If I can I'll take a look tonight.

Good,I was wondering about this also.Agree fully about the 106th's apparent experience level being out of whack.
Post Reply

Return to “Command Ops Series”