Matrix Games Forums

Will it be possible please to indicate (when done) which of these very good Community Scenarios have been updated to work with the new patch.
And again grateful thanks to all community battle creators for all their work broadening the scenario scope of this game.

ORIGINAL: pcelt

Will it be possible please to indicate (when done) which of these very good Community Scenarios have been updated to work with the new patch.
And again grateful thanks to all community battle creators for all their work broadening the scenario scope of this game.

All of them should "work" as in "load & play". The only change - as far as I know - that scenarios needed were to remove AT Platoons from US Army Battalions, since now these platoons guns are spread evenly amongst Battalion companies. Therefore, in unedited scenarios, US Army Battalions will have the double of AT guns they should (if they started at full strength).

I sent a corrected version of "Stabilizing..." to sweeteye, but I'm not sure he updated his thread.

Will go over the threads again.

Thanks BG---could be a brief window of opportunity to take on German armour with U.S. infantry AT guns---but even then perhaps not.........
Should have added you to my thankyou list in previous contri--very valuable to have someone drawing all the community threads together and checking upgrades/ compatibility etc.
Please feel added.......

ORIGINAL: pcelt

Thanks BG---could be a brief window of opportunity to take on German armour with U.S. infantry AT guns---but even then perhaps not.........

With the AI... anything goes, right? [:D] For H2H play, yes, I think it's very necessary.

Actually the changes are very easy to do (I need to get some spare time to go over them all):

1. Open Scenario Editor
2. Load Scenario (.cog file)
3. Go to the OOB browser, hunt down those Bn AT Platoons and Delete them
4. Save Scenario as (whatever-no-AT-Plt.cog)

and then you're set. Depending on the scenario, it's about 5 minutes work or less. Just be careful about deleting something else besides those platoons

ORIGINAL: pcelt
Should have added you to my thankyou list in previous contri--very valuable to have someone drawing all the community threads together and checking upgrades/ compatibility etc.
Please feel added.......

Thank you, but really, the point of this thread was to make the sterling work of the scenario designers here more visible, so people can give them feedback and comments. If anything gets a scenario designer happy is to get comments (either praise or constructive criticism) because that means people are playing their scenarios and caring.

ORIGINAL: pcelt

Will it be possible please to indicate (when done) which of these very good Community Scenarios have been updated to work with the new patch.

Arjuna should chime in here, but I think all the pre-patch user-scenarios may need to be ported over to us for some conversion work. This is related to the bug: Converted scenarios ensuring siteTask StartAt times were all valid ( ie = start time )

You should also change your reinforcement schedules to cater to the new 'Historical' slot, and perhaps add some variable reinforcement shedules to the standard slots. And also, put them in a 'My Scenarios' sub folder of 'Scenarios'.

And while I'm at it, I don't recommend designing scenarios without Bn HQ's. We went through a lot of trouble to provide you all with force list templates for scenario creation, I suggest you stick with those.[:)]

Well folks,just wanted to state that I am completely stuck on fixing up my scenarios until I am able to join the members area.As Bletchley stated it is a very simple task to delete the 57mm AT platoons from the scenarios and re save them. My MLR scenario is the one that needs the most work done as I made the mistake of not using the stock unit structure and as a result there are no support units.After reading Simovichs' last post I see there is some other work that could be done on all of the user made scenarios. The scenario editor is very easy to work with,easiest one I have ever used. Also....I would be more than happy to help anyone with the scenario editor that needs help. Just PM me...

Bletchley ... I do also have a few Mini scenarios out there....Two Wingen-sur-Moder mini scenarios... Battle for the Toul Bridgehead and the Pont a Mousson Bridgehead...

ORIGINAL: sweeteye

Bletchley ... I do also have a few Mini scenarios out there....Two Wingen-sur-Moder mini scenarios... Battle for the Toul Bridgehead and the Pont a Mousson Bridgehead...

Hey sweet,

for some reason the forums weren't notifying me of posts on the thread.

I found the "Battle for Toul Bridgehead" and the "Pont a Mousson Bridgehead" scenarios, but for the Wingen-sur-Moder ones I can't find an specific thread. On the thread I'm linking already I see two Wingen scenarios, one covering the action from Jan 2nd to Jan 3rd, and then another "campaign one", covering the whole thing from Jan 2nd to Jan 7th. Could you point me into the right direction?

The two Wingen mini scenarios are in the same Mini Scenarios thread as the Toul and Pont a Mousson scenarios. Sooner or later I will put all my scenarios in one thread.

ORIGINAL: sweeteye

The two Wingen mini scenarios are in the same Mini Scenarios thread as the Toul and Pont a Mousson scenarios. Sooner or later I will put all my scenarios in one thread.

Got it

Are they using the same map and estabs as the full-blown Nordwind scenarios, right?

Negative....The two mini scenarios use their own much smaller map.When I go to adjusting scenarios for the new patch I am going to change the unit effectiveness values back to much more historical settings.I changed them trying to make the scenarios more balanced but I think it was a mistake.

ORIGINAL: sweeteye

Negative....The two mini scenarios use their own much smaller map.When I go to adjusting scenarios for the new patch I am going to change the unit effectiveness values back to much more historical settings.I changed them trying to make the scenarios more balanced but I think it was a mistake.

Ok, will add your comments on the notes.

Hello Bletchley....I should have mentioned that the Toul Bridgehead and Pont a Mousson scenarios each have their own map also.They are smaller maps cropped from the V 3.0 Nancy map and are included with the scenario files. Merry Christmas to all [:'(]

ORIGINAL: sweeteye

Hello Bletchley....I should have mentioned that the Toul Bridgehead and Pont a Mousson scenarios each have their own map also.They are smaller maps cropped from the V 3.0 Nancy map and are included with the scenario files. Merry Christmas to all [:'(]

Merry Christmas to you as well and thank you for the clarification [:)]

Happy New Year to all! .......... I am currently going over all my scenarios to edit and do another round of test plays..will try to get a couple of them to Arjuna for final editing by next weekend...

B_G------------I am a little uncertain re the community scenarios listed and their current compatibility with the latest patch v.2248 .
Are all of these currently listed compatible with 2248 ?-- but if not would it be possible to identify in some way those that are and those that are not.
Many thanks for any clarification on this.

ORIGINAL: pcelt

B_G------------I am a little uncertain re the community scenarios listed and their current compatibility with the latest patch v.2248 .
Are all of these currently listed compatible with 2248 ?-- but if not would it be possible to identify in some way those that are and those that are not.
Many thanks for any clarification on this.

Hey,

I haven't found problems as in BftB crashing or error messages popping up in any scenario I have tried. And I have tried all of them but Merdjayoun and Woenschedt Isthmus. The only issue is a graphical glitch (?) with the bocage textures in St Lo.

Other than that, I don't recall any change that would cause unstability. However, a different issue is whether latest changes have preserved the gameplay the scenario designers originally envisioned.

In any case, you're my guest to try the scenarios and let us know over here if you find some problem with them

Thanks --happy that there seem to be no obvious technical problems --but there is a difficulty ( having not played through many of the battles prior to the current patch) in determining whether they are playing out now in the manner initially intended by the designer in times of yore. I guess only the designers can really evaluate this.
In any event ,in my case, it would probably be far more likely that any strange or unlikely battle outcomes ( especially adverse ones ) result from some bizarre tactical play on my part rather than by a gameplay change brought about by the recent patch.

ORIGINAL: pcelt

Thanks --happy that there seem to be no obvious technical problems --but there is a difficulty ( having not played through many of the battles prior to the current patch) in determining whether they are playing out now in the manner initially intended by the designer in times of yore. I guess only the designers can really evaluate this.
In any event ,in my case, it would probably be far more likely that any strange or unlikely battle outcomes ( especially adverse ones ) result from some bizarre tactical play on my part rather than by a gameplay change brought about by the recent patch.

The last change to estabs, where Battalion AT platoons were factored into companies might indeed. You'll have those US Army Infantry Battalions sporting twice as many 57mm AT Guns, for instance.

So there's the HttR mini-expansion that just came out. Is there anything similar expected for CotA scenarios?