Market Garden

[David boutwell]

Originally posted by Cyricist


Yeah I'm a real semi off topic history freak :rolleyes: [/B]

Cyricist, I feel your pain! In fact, I view SPWAW as more of a tool to help me study a battle than a game, which puts me well out on the fringe of this community. I enjoy doing the research for a scenario and designing it more than I do playing it.

Pops, don't tempt me! Now you guys have gone and given me the itch to drop working on SPCW for a bit and get back to my Market Garden Mania!

The only problem is that I have never designed a campaign. I prefer to design historical scenarios. One reason for my aversion to campaigns is that my gut instinct is that if a player were allowed to choose the forces in a scenario, 99% would naturally would choose those that would provide them with the best chances of winning the scenario. This would result in a force that in no way resembled the historical unit mix of a battle that I had spent hours researching and designing. If that is the case, why go through the trouble? Just play a scratch battle with no historical background.

Imagine the producers of the "Band of Brothers" Crossroads episode deciding that the suicidal morning assault by a fraction of Easy Company on two companies of SS troops was too likely to come out as a loss, and therefore the attackers needed to have several tanks and a P-47 rocket attack? How would the veterans of that engagement feel about that? It'd be "Pearl Harbor" all over again!

If I could do a series of linked scenarios that are designed like a campaign, then I would consider it. Otherwise, I'll just continue to design large scenarios that many people don't like for two reasons.

First, many people in this community don't want to play a scenario that takes more than an hour or two, even though most of us that are past their twenties started gaming with monsters like Terrible Swift Sword, Highway to the Reich, Wellington's Victory, The Longest Day, Streets of Stalingrad and the regular-sized ASL scenario with all of the hours of reviewing rules, checking tables and stats, etc. The Market Garden scenarios that I have completed to this point include two monster scenarios. Both of which are historical scenarios with historical units that often max out both sides. The first depicts the battle for Arnhem Bridge and 1st Para Brigade's attempt to reinforce Frost. The second depicts the battle for Nijmegan focusing on the fight for the approaches to the Waal River Bridge, as well as the Amphibious crossing of the Waal River..all in one scenario, because both events were coordinated attacks on different ends of the bridge.

The second is the fact that I prefer to provide my forces with historical unit designations. Apparently, people don't want to have to deal with this, but my opinion is that it makes the scenario much more historically rich.

I know, I know...people want to debate about what is historical, etc. I've heard it all, and I don't buy it. A historical scenario is one in which the designer says, "I want to design a scenario that depicts a battle to the best of my abilty and resources". Period. The designer themselves can easily make this determination for themselves. Either they did, or they didn't. Everything else is just excuses because they never really intended to make a historical scenario in the first place.

See, I now have the philosophy of the Lt. in the Band of Brothers episode who, while standing above the red-headed private in the bocage of Normandy, told the private that, until he accepted the fact that he was already a dead man, he would never be an effective soldier. Once upon a time, I tried to do things in such a manner that would be accepted by others in the community. That was like swimming up Niagara Falls. Once I accepted that my philosophy no longer jived with the vast majority of the guys in this community, and that my days here were numbered, I was much better off. But I can definitely say that if someone does try to pass off something with "Market Garden" attached to it, that in no way resembles what it is suppoesd to represent, I will definitely make my opinion be known, whether it holds any weight or not.

On the other hand, if anyone is definitely hardcore about doing anything related to Market Garden that is quality, and historically based, then I will be the first person to throw in my support.

Regards,

David Boutwell

"Out of ammunition. God save the King."

[M4Jess]

never mind

[David boutwell]

Just marking my territory, Jess. You have yours. I have what I consider to be mine.

After being gone for a while, and returning to thread after thread of stuff that reads like it was from the Warcraft III forum, I felt that I needed to stir the waters again. People have said before. There's plenty of room for everyone in here. There are plenty of people patting each other on the back and saying that everything is great. I am of the opinion that if everyone staked out a claim to a particular area, such as Bastogne, Caen, Stalingrad, Berlin or Omaha Beach, etc., and became an expert of sorts on each of these and other areas, then this site would have far greater value as an educational/gaming resource than it is now. Why don't you tell me how many threads in here focus on specific battles and provide other interested parties with quality resources on those battles. If there are what I deem as a sufficient number, I'll shut up. Until then......

I play with others who are interested in the history of the historical scenarios that we design. We play them as an educational experience, as well as for the purpose of playing a good game.

You have many threads in this forum to state your opinion, do you not???

Cyricist, if all you want to do is play scenarios, don't listen to me.....Plus you might want to "fit in" in this forum. If that's the case, avoid me like the plague!


David Boutwell

[Orzel Bialy]

Gentlemen, before this goes too far and people take real offense, I shall jump in and try to head this off.

There are several distinct groups of people who play SPWAW. Some are in it for the sheer shoot up and blast em play, others are interested in playing only generated Pbem's, while others like scenarios that allow "alternative" possibilities to history and then there are those who might want 100+% historical...not to mention all those who like a combination of all of the above.

The thing is that no one set of them is totally right and no set totally wrong. They are preferences. Because one person doesn't like one variation of the game that should not be considered a visa to come in and berate the other styles.

If you dislike what you see...have the class to send a PM to the person(s) you want to "enlighten" David. Because to waltz into a thread and start "preaching from the pulpit" does little else than generate what is now happening here.

You state that you play with a group of people that "see things as you do"...and that's great. So why don't you invite others to join your group for a look via a thread of your own or a PM?

Instead of dropping bombs on other peoples posts that only serve to disrupt things...why not share your own views on your own thread? Is that too much to ask...or time consuming for you? I mean...you will get your view across to the intended target, will you not? Why do it this way? If it's to send ripples or waves across the water because you think yourself entitled to do so (because of your knowledge of a subject) then I would have to say that doesn't paint an overly pleasant picture of you in general.

I think you would take a fair amount offense if someone came in on a thread and started doing this to one of your designs...and rightfully so.

I don't think it too much to ask that we be polite to each other whenever possible...and that includes not engaging in what basically ends up "talking down" to other forum members because you are of the opinion that your vast knowledge of a topic grants you that right through the claim of "marking territory" as your own.

SPWAW historical or semi-historical based scenarios are the territory of no one person(s). As I stated at the beginning of this post...there are many different styles of play. Pick the one (or more) you like...enjoy it...and allow others to do the same.

[David boutwell]

Orzel, I think that I'm fine right here.

What did I say that was so offensive, unless something that I said hit close to home? If it did, good. Can this forum not handle someone preaching their ideas, which happen to rub someone the wrong way, from the "pulpit"?

Is there a concern that I would give "new recruits" the wrong impression of this forum? If so, where is the concern that gamers, who have an interest in what the game has to offer to those who like to focus on research and "historical" scenarios, might be turned off by what they see here. The reason why the folks that I PBEM don't come here is exactly that.

And where did I say anything that indiacted to David that I did not like what I saw about any comments that he made? Is it only ok to make comments if they are what everyone else wants to hear? He's probably a big boy and can probably speak for himself. If he is hardcore into Market Garden and trying to depict it in SPWAW, or whether he is into general scenarios, he can say, I'd imagine.

If there are several "distinct" groups of people in this forum, then, although I've been here since the beginning, I still must be too naive to spot the group that is working on developing the definitive scenarios and campaigns for most of the battles in Western Europe, after what is it, six years? That's the problem. The "and then" group is terribly under-represented (Please tell me where those threads are. After that much time, they must be here already. No need for me to start a new one). And then when one of "us" pushes for air time, it's not one of "us" that argues for restraint. Sounds like repression to me!

And give me a break about berating others' styles. If I opened a thread advocating my style (large, long scenarios, using historically designated units), do you not think that someone would "come in" and "berate" mine??? Because it wouldn't take much to raise an alternative opinion to the level of berating, based upon your standard. I would hear counter-opinions all the way to the "top". I've heard them all. Man, those other styles are just encouraged, big time!

"you are of the opinion that your vast knowledge of a topic grants you that right through the claim of "marking territory" as your own."

You've never heard of setting the standard or raising the bar? Guys can lay claim to the largest number of posts, or the most number of kills, etc., or the best looking icons or whatever they are called, but not to the real "meat and potatoes" of the game, huh? that's sad. Because if everyone said, "beat this", how would that negatively impact the game? Didn't this forum have a map contest to supposedly lay claim to a certain title? What the heck was that title gonna be??? best crossroads map? Best map with houses in the shape of a square?? No, people entered because they wanted their stuff to be judged the best. That is "marking" one's "territory", like the term or not! If someone can make a better map of whatever I do than me, I'll be the first one to download it! If somone can do a better job of power spraying my pool deck, doing my laundry and changing dirty diapers than me, I want to see it! Get the point???

Like I said, I stopped worrying so much about the picture I painted. I'm not here to win a popularity contest, and i'm not here to find opponents. I'm here to advocate for some balance. And in this arena, it won't happen by tossing rose petals at people. You can think that i'm an a-hole or not. that's your choice, and I'm not going to loose a tremendous amount of sleep over it. But at the end of the day, if you and I have a common goal or interest, we'll still talk, because there aren't a lot of guys out there who have an interest in working on graphics/icons, making maps and studying Western Europe campaigns and battles with a fine-toothed comb. I'll contact an a-hole any day if they know something that I want or need to know. I learned that from my college organic chemistry professor.

So, lets stop this crap, and whomever wants to talk about Market Garden stuff, chime in! Or you can continue to perpetuate exactly what you are arguing against.

David Boutwell

[Kokoda]

...would play historical, or hypothetical, or an obviously 'losing' battle, without caring too much at all which camp we are in. We can get pleasure from the game in many different forms.

Some of us don't even care if we win, as long as it's entertaining. That's a pretty handy attitude for me, still learning and all.

I don't believe there needs to be a dichotomy between the different styles or motivations for playing, and I don't believe we need to maintain that there are distinct groups. That in itself suggests there is a right and a wrong way to play.

[RobW]

All, I think I need to add something here. I have played PBEM (and lost every time), I have played against the computer, I have played the "based on actual battles" scenarios and I have played random maps. Each time I am after something different so fall into no-ones camp. The only thing I want each time is a challenge - if that is available in an historical setting like Jess's Market Garden (which is a visually stunning and very challenging map) then I am happy, if its a random map I am also happy.

In all of this I have only played 1 game I didn't enjoy - that was my own fault and I think I got beaten after about 10 turns. What we all need to remember is that SPWAW, when calculating hits, casualties, reactions etc is random (ish). Historical only goes so far (like the first move of the first turn). We make do with what we have and enjoy ourselves. The only really historical thing that can be created is the map of the area (to a point as SPWAW cannot render everything we would like) and the starting compositions of the forces - we are all individual, have different style, use different (and unconventional tactics) and get breaks that did not occur in reality (like seeing artillery smoke from 50 hexes away when visibility is only 10 hexes).

I guess what I am trying to say is relax, enjoy playing what we are given and try to educate each other - I would love to be able to place a scenario on here, have people play it and give me feedback - I would never claim that anything I did was historical - perhaps the term should be "slightly more accurate than a random map with some bridges and towns on it".

Any way, enough from me, time for me to get these Germans moving again!

[M4Jess]

and....

Where are the DAR/AARs on Davids "perfect" designs?

Oh thats right..those guys are playing and enjoying mine!;)

And while out of scale..mine rocks!

[cadmus]

Gentlemen ... Gentlemen .. no need for rancor or bruised sensitivites here. One of the beauties of SP:WaW is that it creates a really "big tent", with room enough to accomodate gamers with a wide variety of tastes, preferences and vices. Mr. Boutwell's thoughts on the joys and satisfactions associated with a rigorously "historical" approach, with opportunities for learning and close study, struck a responsive chord with me. And his references to past classics such as Terrible Swift Sword, Highway to the Reich, Wellington's Victory, etc., bought back pleasant memories of many long, intense hours of gaming and learning. His approach allows SP:WaW to provide the same sort of pleasures.

On the other hand, Jess has designed an incredible number of scenarios (does he ever sleep?) that, by virtue of his careful thought, scrupulous attention to detail and incredible understanding of the system have given me some of the best challenges, highest intensity and greatest fun I've had in gaming in many a year.

Why do I have to choose one approach over the other? Thanks to the flexibility of SP:WaW and the efforts of chaps like Jess and Dave, I don't have to. My profound thanks to all you guys. Keep it up.

[tracer]

Originally posted by Kokoda


I don't believe there needs to be a dichotomy between the different styles or motivations for playing, and I don't believe we need to maintain that there are distinct groups. That in itself suggests there is a right and a wrong way to play.

Beer! This same friction occurred not too long ago between the C&C'ers and the non-C&C'ers, and thankfully blew over. Remember that these are preferences; I expect everyone to have a 'better/worse' opinion about any aspect of SPWAW, but elevating that to 'right & wrong' is a mistake. I encourage ANY opinion; by nurturing a larger fan-base we all benefit.

[Orzel Bialy]

Originally posted by David boutwell
Orzel, I think that I'm fine right here.
You always think that. lol

What did I say that was so offensive, unless something that I said hit close to home? Don't rush to pat yourself on the back for anything David. It had nothing to do with you "hitting close to home" on anything. If it did, good. Can this forum not handle someone preaching their ideas, which happen to rub someone the wrong way, from the "pulpit"? Not when it is done at the expense of others in a manner which comes across as this one did.

Is there a concern that I would give "new recruits" the wrong impression of this forum? If so, where is the concern that gamers, who have an interest in what the game has to offer to those who like to focus on research and "historical" scenarios, might be turned off by what they see here. The reason why the folks that I PBEM don't come here is exactly that. You make it sound like there are vying SPWAW cults trying to brainwash and dumb-down people from some form of "truth" that you obviously believe you are the guardian of. If you are so concerned about Historically Correct Scenarios...form a webpage and post about it. Why do you feel the need to drop in and basically walk on other peoples material? If someone were to do this to a post/scenario or map of yours you'd have a fit. I know you would, because I've seen some of your outbursts first hand when you feel your works aren't mentioned or praised enough for your liking.

And where did I say anything that indiacted to David that I did not like what I saw about any comments that he made? Is it only ok to make comments if they are what everyone else wants to hear? He's probably a big boy and can probably speak for himself. If he is hardcore into Market Garden and trying to depict it in SPWAW, or whether he is into general scenarios, he can say, I'd imagine. Again the missed point is the manner you choose to convey your message. I can't force you to stop or do things in another way...but I can suggest it. You may not care that your posts cause disruptions...or that you come across in a somewhat demeaning, arrogant manner of an over-critical fusspot...but your message would probably be received better if it was approached differently. My 2 cents...not that you care...or that I care if you don't.

If there are several "distinct" groups of people in this forum, then, although I've been here since the beginning, I still must be too naive to spot the group that is working on developing the definitive scenarios and campaigns for most of the battles in Western Europe, after what is it, six years? So be the one to take that task under wing rather than complain about there being a void.
That's the problem. The "and then" group is terribly under-represented (Please tell me where those threads are. After that much time, they must be here already. No need for me to start a new one). And then when one of "us" pushes for air time, it's not one of "us" that argues for restraint. Sounds like repression to me! Yes David...it's a massive conspiracy. You always have reasons for not starting your own threads...I grant you that. I still say "build it and they might come".

And give me a break about berating others' styles. If I opened a thread advocating my style (large, long scenarios, using historically designated units), do you not think that someone would "come in" and "berate" mine??? Do they? I haven't seen anyone berate your work. If someone wanted to bad enough they could...but obviously most people have more tact than that. I get this sense that you think you must attack to defend yourself from hordes of people who would demolish your vision of the perfect SPWAW world. Relax...there are no Barbarians at your gate. Because it wouldn't take much to raise an alternative opinion to the level of berating, based upon your standard. I would hear counter-opinions all the way to the "top". I've heard them all. Man, those other styles are just encouraged, big time!

"you are of the opinion that your vast knowledge of a topic grants you that right through the claim of "marking territory" as your own."

You've never heard of setting the standard or raising the bar? Guys can lay claim to the largest number of posts, or the most number of kills, etc., or the best looking icons or whatever they are called, but not to the real "meat and potatoes" of the game, huh? that's sad. Again, all this is assumed that everyone see's things the same as you. Surprise!!! They don't! Some people come here to have fun...not be 100% historically correct 100% of the time. They have fun with the game engine from time to time in different ways...and they don't all have to use it as you do, as some educational learning tool. Because if everyone said, "beat this", how would that negatively impact the game? Didn't this forum have a map contest to supposedly lay claim to a certain title? Yes David...a contest for people to have FUN with...as well as to encourage other people to take a shot at making maps...not to mention making a pool of maps for people to have to play games on for their enjoyment. What the heck was that title gonna be??? best crossroads map? Best map with houses in the shape of a square?? No, people entered because they wanted their stuff to be judged the best. again...if the contest was only about "being the best" then it would have scared off more 1st time people than encourage them. Amazing how much you forget that some people do this only for the fun of it...and not always for a history lesson or for accolades That is "marking" one's "territory", like the term or not! If someone can make a better map of whatever I do than me, I'll be the first one to download it! If somone can do a better job of power spraying my pool deck, doing my laundry and changing dirty diapers than me, I want to see it! Get the point??? glad to hear it.

Like I said, I stopped worrying so much about the picture I painted. I'm not here to win a popularity contest, and i'm not here to find opponents. Hmmmm...I'll live and let live here. Pretty nice of me, eh? lol I'm here to advocate for some balance. And in this arena, it won't happen by tossing rose petals at people. You can think that i'm an a-hole or not. that's your choice, and I'm not going to loose a tremendous amount of sleep over it. But at the end of the day, if you and I have a common goal or interest, we'll still talk, because there aren't a lot of guys out there who have an interest in working on graphics/icons, making maps and studying Western Europe campaigns and battles with a fine-toothed comb. I'll contact an a-hole any day if they know something that I want or need to know. I learned that from my college organic chemistry professor.David, I personally have no interest in swaying the masses to see things in one particular light. To each their own. If a designer touts something as 100% historical (an impossibility in SPWAW as others have mention already once the first turn is taken) then people will be able to understand on their own that this isn't a random generated battle...and that it was meant to serve as an educational aid as well as being a form of entertainment. That said...since I don't believe that my vision of what is "historical" may be to everyones liking I won't say that something is not enjoyable simply because every house wasn't in the correct spot or every unit wasn't labelled.

So, lets stop this crap, and whomever wants to talk about Market Garden stuff, chime in! Or you can continue to perpetuate exactly what you are arguing against. Yes, let's stop this crap indeed. I still don't think it's right to take over threads because you believe that something is "amiss" in terms of historical accuracy. If this "lack" of historical accurate scenarios really does bother you that bad...then do something about it in a thread or post of your own. Create that 100% accurate SPWAW scenario website. That's my point...get it? lol

David Boutwell

[LordCucumber]

Hmmm.. I haven't played any of David's own maps yet, just that Market Garden Jess conversion thingy, so I cannot judge on the historical accuracy. Now, for one thing, it may be out of scale Jess, but it does FEEL (to a certain extent) historical.. real.. whatever you wanna call it, and that makes it worth playing. It is better than a random map because you have real goals set in a real historical background with (again to a certain extent) real geographical sites (I am sure you had pick and choose here, since I do miss some of the nearby towns on this map).

[M4Jess]

PBEM-Meeting Engagement*
Valley*
*
*
A large map (100x120) with a city between two parallel rivers, running north-south. Designed for meeting engagements, the player-2 startline is closer to the victory objectives. The map contains a large number of bridges which are vital to reach the city, so those who like to drop bridges with their arty will have a good time with this one. It will also give some players plenty of places to park their M4's (gurgle, gurgle).**

LMOL!!!!!:D

[tracer]

Now let's hope that map makes it into the patch!

[Martin Sabre]

David,

How about sending me a copy of your historical Market Garden, my e mail is Martinsaba@aol.com. I'd really like to see it and give it a go.

I am currently playing Jess' version and enjoying it thoroughly...well as much as you can against the AI

[tracer]

Martin...look on page 1 of this thread.

[tracer]

By the way, I meant to post those maps in the 'Hill 112' thread, where someone made a request. My error appears to have precipitated the current 'environment' here...my apologies to all affected parties.

[M4Jess]

Originally posted by tracer
By the way, I meant to post those maps in the 'Hill 112' thread, where someone made a request. My error appears to have precipitated the current 'environment' here...my apologies to all affected parties.

Trouble maker!!!!!:mad:

spank spank spank........:rolleyes:

[tracer]

Hey! It was an honest mistake: "Market Garden maps...hmmmm, they must go....here.":D I'm not a trouble maker...****-up, yes....but not a trouble maker! :p

[Martin Sabre]

Originally posted by tracer
Martin...look on page 1 of this thread.

Jim,

thanks, I already got those maps and very good they are too Prehaps I should have been more careful with my wording, I meant if David had a historical scenario made up, maybe he could have sent that.