Bru's Scenarios and Campaigns

[stan23]

Just finished playing your Bismarck scenario and I gotta say it was GREAT! I don't normally care for naval scenarios but this was an exception.
If someone told me it was part of the official Kriegsmarine DLC (and I didn't already know better), I would absolutely believe them.
River Plate is next
Absolutely Well Done!

[bru888]

Man your scenarios are excelent, because unlike many it genuinely feels like they are official content, they actually got flavor not to mention you back the situation up with additional extras from history, its above and beyond. honestly your scenarios alone without any extra effort would be worth it on its own. I kinda wonder if you throught about doing Westerplate with player commanding Polish.

Just finished playing your Bismarck scenario and I gotta say it was GREAT! I don't normally care for naval scenarios but this was an exception.
If someone told me it was part of the official Kriegsmarine DLC (and I didn't already know better), I would absolutely believe them.
River Plate is next
Absolutely Well Done!

Guys, thanks for the kudos.

Caesar, I have gathered some materials on Westerplatte. Looks interesting, but it's difficult to make a challenging scenario based on an obvious and foregone defeat like that. I have in mind something like "Hold out for X turns and win a moral victory."

Stan, I'll keep my eye out and mind open for another sea battle scenario. I love those ocean maps (deep water, fill map)!

[bru888]

The Raid on Turku is released. Download link is in the opening post.

I created this scenario in conjunction with BrucErik Studio's upcoming Winter War 1940 campaign. Growing a bit weary of gloomy forests, snow, and men on skis, I was looking to do a sea battle if I could. I had in mind the battle of Someri but that occurred in July of 1942, in the Continuation War, which of course ruled it out.

Perhaps there was something else? Then I read this in Wikipedia: "There was little naval activity during the Winter War. The Baltic Sea began to freeze over by the end of December, impeding the movement of warships; by mid-winter, only ice breakers and submarines could still move."

But I also read this: "The Finnish Navy was a coastal defence force with two coastal defence ships, five submarines, four gunboats, seven motor torpedo boats, one minelayer and six minesweepers. The two coastal defence ships, Ilmarinen and Väinämöinen, were moved to harbour in Turku where they were used to bolster the air defence. Their anti-aircraft guns shot down one or two planes over the city, and the ships remained there for the rest of the war."

And that is how this turned into an air battle named The Raid on Turku.

Screenshot 1.jpg (965.61 KiB) Viewed 3215 times

Screenshot 4.jpg (355.1 KiB) Viewed 3199 times

If you are wondering, the concrete bunkers represent major facilities in and around the city. While tactical bombers go after the ships, strategic bombers target these facilities:

• Arsenal

• Baltic Line Shipping

• Barracks

• Bus Terminal

• Fishery

• Fuel Depot

• Government House

• Granary

• Hospital

• Ironworks

• Locomotive Works

• Munitions Plant

• Oil Refinery

• Paper Mill

• Power Station

• Shipyard

• Steel Mill

• Textile Factory

• Tractor Plant

• Train Station

• Waterworks

Also in case you are wondering, I created a mechanism whereby strategic bombers inflict more damage on these concrete bunkers than normal.

Since it does not depend on initial resources or core units, and since it offers no rewards for secondary objectives, I am able to release The Raid on Turku as a standalone scenario as well as including it in the Winter War 1940 campaign. As usual, there are folders inside for maps and information.

[GabeKnight]

The Raid on Turku v1.0

First of all, this is not a sea battle...
(okay, there are ships involved)

No, seriously, I knew that, but I guess I hoped for control of the ships at least.
Played well overall, small and fast scenario with good balance and fast AI thinking/execution.
On the negative side - at the very least it's like this in the beginning of the scen: I have to watch the AI moving its units endlessly with only a few AA units of my own.

Suggestions/observations:

- if implemented into the campaign, the balance of the scen will shift towards the player as he'll have more starting RP to (elite) repair the planes
- don't know what purpose the allied aux. units serve (not the ships)? Basically all they do is move aimlessly around, block access to hexes, do not shoot at anything and more importantly: they are not being targeted by the enemy; that means, they do not even distract the AI units. Make them static.
- detonate the bunkers immediately, and not at turn start. The usual -3HP/attack mechanic is okay, but looks weird with the last 1HP. Or is it really that important to let the AI finish the turn before destroying the structure?

Thanks, Bruce!

Screenshot 66.jpg (933.81 KiB) Viewed 3173 times

[CoolDTA]

And that is how this turned into an air battle named The Raid on Turku.

Great stuff again, Bru! Also very appropriate because Turku was the most bombed city in Finland during the Winter War.

Couple of name changes:

Terrassen (a restaurant ) -> Pikisaari
Bocksundet -> Pukinsalmi
Lindblom (a modern conference hall) -> Ruissalo Docks

Note that the airfield was not where you have put it, but here.

[bru888]

The Raid on Turku v1.0

First of all, this is not a sea battle...
(okay, there are ships involved)

No, seriously, I knew that, but I guess I hoped for control of the ships at least.
Played well overall, small and fast scenario with good balance and fast AI thinking/execution.
On the negative side - at the very least it's like this in the beginning of the scen: I have to watch the AI moving its units endlessly with only a few AA units of my own.

Suggestions/observations:

- if implemented into the campaign, the balance of the scen will shift towards the player as he'll have more starting RP to (elite) repair the planes
- don't know what purpose the allied aux. units serve (not the ships)? Basically all they do is move aimlessly around, block access to hexes, do not shoot at anything and more importantly: they are not being targeted by the enemy; that means, they do not even distract the AI units. Make them static.
- detonate the bunkers immediately, and not at turn start. The usual -3HP/attack mechanic is okay, but looks weird with the last 1HP. Or is it really that important to let the AI finish the turn before destroying the structure?

Thanks, Bruce!

Yeah, I wanted it to be a sea battle, but things are frozen all over, you know? This is as close as I could come to it.

In the studio thread, Erik brought up the idea of human control of ships and I did have it that way but then an issue arose accompanied by a thought of you. This is how I answered him:

Ships: I originally had them under human control but then I discovered (before Gabe did) the cheat of using resource points to repair them because they are sitting on port hexes. I couldn't have docked ships without port hexes (piers), so they joined the garrison, trains, and cargo trucks.

Regarding the AI movement, there needs to be a larger amount of Soviet units for gameplay balance. The trains and cargo trucks are window dressing; I probably should have left them out but after working on them so much, I don't have the heart to take them out or immobilize them. Finally, there is a design decision involved in that I illuminate most of the map (except for the southwest corner) continuously for both sides. I figure it's an air raid, during the day, clear conditions, so of course all aircraft should be visible in the sky and all targets visible as well. I also wanted to reproduce the melee effect of an air battle; planes flying all over the place.

Erik mentioned about tweaking this scenario for incorporation into the Winter War 1940 campaign and I am taking his suggestion. How remains another matter, but I will work it out. I will set up the CP's, deployment, and rescources; once he takes over the official version of the campaign, he can tinker with it.

Regarding the bunker (structure) demolition, that is very finely choreographed for gameplay balance. I'm not going to touch that, else the scenario goes off the deep end again. And yes, it had to be timed for Turn Start rather than Combat Event; if you look at the triggers, it's simulating damage because strategic bombers cannot touch concrete bunkers in this game except to make them a bit dizzy.

Thanks as usual for comments and suggestions, Gabe.

[bru888]

And that is how this turned into an air battle named The Raid on Turku.

Great stuff again, Bru! Also very appropriate because Turku was the most bombed city in Finland during the Winter War.

Couple of name changes:

Terrassen (a restaurant ) -> Pikisaari
Bocksundet -> Pukinsalmi
Lindblom (a modern conference hall) -> Ruissalo Docks

Note that the airfield was not where you have put it, but here.

Heh. Well, Cool, I'm glad to have made you laugh (or at least chuckle a bit). YOU try using Google maps to pick out local place names without knowing a thing about the language!

Well, instead of "restaurant," please offer a location name that is nearby Pikisaari which is already taken by the village just to the southwest of "Terrassen." I need a village on that spot - the coast looks too empty directly across from the city without it. Is there something you can find in that area which is appropriate? *

I saw "Bocksundet" on a map; it's the name of the strait that leads to the Baltic Sea. However, it's Swedish for "Bock's Strait," I believe; perhaps the locals still refer to it that way, a persistence of Swedish words maybe? Besides, "Pukinsalmi" sounds close to "Pitkäsalmi," the body of water on the other side of the map, unless you can vouch for the difference.

I went with "Ruissalo Docks" for my "conference hall," thank you. No, we don't want people sitting there, bored, playing with their smartphones while presenters drone on and on. There's a war on, you know.

Actually, that airfield location is not too far from where I guessed it might be! Not a bad guess at all.

Thanks for the input, Cool.

EDIT: * How is "Marjaniemi"? Unless that means "fruit stand" or something. I don't care if it's just a neighborhood because that is all I am looking for; a flavor, if you will. Much if not all of this map is now within Turku city limits anyway but I don't want something that is obviously dumb like "restaurant" or "conference center" even if there is only one person around here who knows the truth.

[CoolDTA]

Heh. Well, Cool, I'm glad to have made you laugh (or at least chuckle a bit). YOU try using Google maps to pick out local place names without knowing a thing about the language!

I meant no offense. Sorry. You are doing superb work and I know the difficulties you are facing.

Pikisaari is the only useful location in the area. It is the name of that particular district. Can't you for example change Terrassen to Pikisaari and that other place... well, if it is SW of Pikisaari then put Särkilahti there.

I saw "Bocksundet" on a map; it's the name of the strait that leads to the Baltic Sea. However, it's Swedish for "Bock's Strait," I believe; perhaps the locals still refer to it that way, a persistence of Swedish words maybe? Besides, "Pukinsalmi" sounds close to "Pitkäsalmi," the body of water on the other side of the map, unless you can vouch for the difference.

No, the locals call it Pukinsalmi. Bocksundet is the Swedish name for it, but let's not use those, okay. It would look silly. Use a large grain of salt when using Google Maps outside of the US.

Actually, that airfield location is not too far from where I guessed it might be! Not a bad guess at all.

No, not bad at all. And nowadays the airport is farther from the city (Google would again lead you astray).

EDIT: * How is "Marjaniemi"? Unless that means "fruit stand" or something. I don't care if it's just a neighborhood because that is all I am looking for; a flavor, if you will. Much if not all of this map is now within Turku city limits anyway but I don't want something that is obviously dumb like "restaurant" or "conference center" even if there is only one person around here who knows the truth.

Maybe a lot of Finns will play this? Anyway, you would know.

If you have sthg in Marjaniemi then it is ok to use it. It means Berry Cape. Maybe a good location to pick a lot of berries? Such names tend to have roots in nature. Like that Pukinsalmi (Goat's Strait). There are two islands in it: Little Goat and Big Goat. It is quite likely goats were pastured on those islands in the past.

[bru888]

Anyway, you would know.

No offense whatsoever. And that short sentence above shows how well you have come to know me through our interactions here.

And since I am that way, Särkilahti would bother me. It's too far south and inland:

Image0268.jpg (405.53 KiB) Viewed 3079 times

But by zooming in a bit, I did find what appears to be a location (ironically, I could not find Marjaniemi again) - Latokari:

Image0269.jpg (400.32 KiB) Viewed 3079 times

It's approximately in the right location (remember, designer's license rules after a while) and it does seem to be a destination.

This source is even better; it has Latokari exactly where I want it:

Image0270.jpg (690.93 KiB) Viewed 3079 times

As a matter of fact, I wish I had found that source sooner; it would have made things a bit easier. Nice zoom map.

And definitely, it's Pukinsalmi (Goat Strait) on the left and Pitkäsalmi (Long Strait) on the right. And instead of Ruissalo Docks, it's Ruissalon Telakka. And it's Pohjoissalmi to the, uh, north.

Stop me before I go nutty and start naming streets! But, a lot of fun and I do wish I had that map source in the beginning.

[bru888]

The Raid on Turku v1.1 is uploaded. Download link is in the opening post.

Changes:
- added nearby map markers for all city facilities (arsenal, barracks, etc.)
- corrected date progress to be 18 turns per day rather than 18 days per turn.
- added another secondary objective: "Do not lose more than three aircraft units."
- added commanders for both sides.
- improved strategic bomber follow-up missions to find targets in the city proper.
- edited location names and city history

[GabeKnight]

In the studio thread, Erik brought up the idea of human control of ships and I did have it that way but then an issue arose accompanied by a thought of you. This is how I answered him:

Ships: I originally had them under human control but then I discovered (before Gabe did) the cheat of using resource points to repair them because they are sitting on port hexes. I couldn't have docked ships without port hexes (piers), so they joined the garrison, trains, and cargo trucks.

Yep, you're right, of course. Didn't think of that as I wrote my post.

Fun fact: The first time I've played the scen, I've actually assumed there would be no income in this scen. Yeah, I had some beers that night when I played the scen... .... but seriously, it was on the fifth turn and after the AI shot down two of my planes already that I've noticed that I could've landed and repaired my aux. planes. ( )²

FYI, I did a small test and placed the ships under human control and also removed all income. Basically both factions start with zero RP and have to make due with whatever units are already on the map. To be honest, played about the same. Your design decision was right.

Regarding the bunker (structure) demolition, that is very finely choreographed for gameplay balance. I'm not going to touch that, else the scenario goes off the deep end again. And yes, it had to be timed for Turn Start rather than Combat Event; if you look at the triggers...

I did now. Good heavens, each structure needs a separate trigger cascade for that "damage mechanic" of yours? There's no way to decrement unit HP? I thought that it could've been done by one trigger, which affects all bunkers at HP=1.

I've tested some trigger combinations to make my idea work nonetheless....and failed miserably. Do the trigger events only work for the human faction or just not with air units? There's no trigger that evaluates unit efficiency?

Sorry, Bruce, I hereby take back my suggestion with the bunkers. I realize that I have almost no scen building experience of my own, and should leave such matters in the hands of professionals...

EDIT: There's only one minor downside/problem to your solution with the "damage mechanic" that I've noticed: On the one hand, the trigger fires even if the enemy unit did not actually attack the bunker (sometimes the AI moves the plane above a target, re-evaluates the attack and remains idle instead attacking). On the other hand the trigger does not fire if an enemy unit attacks the bunker and then moves away to the neighboring hex.

[bru888]

Yeah, I won't say "unfortunately," because it works, but the only way that I could simulate bomber damage inflicted on city infrastructure was to:

1) use concrete bunkers. Nothing else in this game comes close in appearance to the urban structures that are in the Battle of Britain mod which this game sorely lacks. Here I will use "unfortunately" in that concrete bunkers are impervious to strategic bomber damage! And,

2) choreograph the effect by the mere presence of the bomber directly over the bunker - hence the dependence on Turn Start instead of Combat Event - which means if you are looking closely, damage may be inflicted even if no bombs are dropped! That makes up for all the times that bombs are dropped and are absolutely ineffective (except to the "combat efficiency" of the bunker. When you are a fishery, for example, that really doesn't matter much.

Anyway, the module gets the job done, so I am happy with it.

[CoolDTA]

But by zooming in a bit, I did find what appears to be a location (ironically, I could not find Marjaniemi again) - Latokari:

It's approximately in the right location (remember, designer's license rules after a while) and it does seem to be a destination.

Ermh, okay... the right location is just in the opposite direction? Well, if and when it is so, Latokari is a good choice. That map source (Turku Guide Map) is what I used and a helpful one. Using strictly Finnish names (eg. Ruissalon Telakka) is nice.

[bru888]

But by zooming in a bit, I did find what appears to be a location (ironically, I could not find Marjaniemi again) - Latokari:

It's approximately in the right location (remember, designer's license rules after a while) and it does seem to be a destination.

Ermh, okay... the right location is just in the opposite direction? Well, if and when it is so, Latokari is a good choice. That map source (Turku Guide Map) is what I used and a helpful one. Using strictly Finnish names (eg. Ruissalon Telakka) is nice.

Well, given how hard it was to find it, it will do nicely I think.

[conboy]

Bru,
Played Raid on Turku today. Got a minor victory -- lost too many planes, wasn't paying attention to that secondary objective. Even if I had been, I don't think I could have kept from losing more than 3 planes anyway, given the way I play.

But the scenario is very good - great map, challenging, kept me very interested the whole time. I wasn't sure of a victory until the last bomber went down -- flew right into the maw of my massed AA near the two ships. What a surprise - there were a couple of easy targets that would have put them over the 11 targets - but they chose to go for something else.

Congratulations on a very fine scenario. I must play more rather than groping along with my campaign all the time, if there is a whole lot of user material that is this good! Even close to it, really.

Thanks for the effort - I know it will be appreciated by very many players!
conboy

[bru888]

conboy, you made my day. Thanks.

Remember, that is one of 15 scenarios that are coming out soon with the Winter War 1940 campaign.

[Shards]

Yeah, I won't say "unfortunately," because it works, but the only way that I could simulate bomber damage inflicted on city infrastructure was to:

1) use concrete bunkers. Nothing else in this game comes close in appearance to the urban structures that are in the Battle of Britain mod which this game sorely lacks. Here I will use "unfortunately" in that concrete bunkers are impervious to strategic bomber damage! And,

2) choreograph the effect by the mere presence of the bomber directly over the bunker - hence the dependence on Turn Start instead of Combat Event - which means if you are looking closely, damage may be inflicted even if no bombs are dropped! That makes up for all the times that bombs are dropped and are absolutely ineffective (except to the "combat efficiency" of the bunker. When you are a fishery, for example, that really doesn't matter much.

Anyway, the module gets the job done, so I am happy with it.

Hi,

Not played the scenario, but just thinking about the issue with strat bombers. Could you put a supply source under each bunker, then use a trigger to test against % supply and use that to reduce the hp of the bunker? Or just do one that destroys the bunker at zero supply output? I'm sure I remember being able to test supply output of a hex as well as the standard supply reaching a hex?

[bru888]

Hi,

Not played the scenario, but just thinking about the issue with strat bombers. Could you put a supply source under each bunker, then use a trigger to test against % supply and use that to reduce the hp of the bunker? Or just do one that destroys the bunker at zero supply output? I'm sure I remember being able to test supply output of a hex as well as the standard supply reaching a hex?

Heh, where were you during those long candlelit hours spent in a freezing cell designing that module? Oh, the shrieks of agony and despair that you could have spared me! The module seems to be WAD now so I will leave it alone but I will keep your suggestion in mind for future use, thanks. Play the darned scenario, will you? ( )

[bru888]

The Raid on Turku v1.2 is uploaded. Download link is in the opening post.

Changes:
- illuminate the map for the Soviet side only. This cuts down on watching AI movements and lends a bit of mystery to the proceedings.
- moved coastal defense ship priority message to Turn 1 instead of Scenario Start. Don't know why I didn't do that in the first place.
- moved a Finn AA unit a couple of hexes north so that it could not spot two enemy fighters early, given the restored fog of war. Looks better.

These changes came from two things:
- editing this scenario for compatibility with the Winter War 1940 campaign.
- at some point recently, having dialed down my AI animation speed. Yes, it was somewhat tedious watching every enemy plane (and my own trains and trucks) move. I did not notice it because when testing the scenario, I had the speed dialed all the way up. Fog of war does have one benefit in this regard.

[Shards]

Hi,

What's this airfield in the bottom left?

Airstrip.jpg (31.14 KiB) Viewed 2758 times