Experienced Player... Novice Designer

[AnalogGamer]

Greetings all,

Would like to pick your brains and get some opinions if I may. Links to appropriate areas of knowledge are just as welcome as typed responses. First a bit of background...

56-year old semi-grog. Lots of WW2 history as a child and still have my complete Advanced Squad Leader game set(hence my handle here). Did a lot of map and scenario design in Combat Mission, and wanted to give this a go a while back. Have the time to do so now.

Made a few scenarios back in Panzer General, but that was ages ago. My specialty is large, fictional, H2H(always) battles that are akin to single-map campaigns in one long battle. Historical formations in fictional, but realistic, locales. Small niche "market", but it is a labor of design and love. If only two people play it and like it then I am happy. Master challenge for pairs of long-term gaming partners, who know each other and the usual scenarios.

I would like to lay out the general framework, and seek any critique and assistance in bringing this about with the lowest number of false starts and ignorance-based decisions.

Early '43 equipment. German v Soviet. Technically a German Attack, but more of what I call a "static operation". Early gains, then see-saw according to opportunities and abilities, culminating in one side or the other getting the upper hand.

Current map(under construction/less than 40% finished terrain/90% major terrain) - 95+ hex West/East. 50+ hex North/South. This needs to get larger. Always happens. Southern 20% is open water, with a large island near center. This area is open ocean to West with land curving up along East map area into a large bay. Main land mass has a large mountain range coming down from North near center that peters out well short of Southern coast, and various terrains throughout map. Natural progression of watersheds and elevations. Ex.- if there is a swamp, there is an obvious geologic/hydrologic reason.

Hex = 15/20km. Turn = 1 day. Unit = Regiment/Squadron. Turn limit = TBD(I have to run units around it first but let's call it close to the entire '43 campaign season of three months(100+). Eat the elephant one bite at a time.

The main objective of the entire exercise is to encourage and reward the best use of rail, air and sea transport. It's Russia. The road system was not ready for large-scale military action. Plus, I am betting that our lowly transports are the b@stard step-children of PzC. They deserve their chance to show their true value in the right circumstances. Strategic depth and width, varied and difficult terrain, a comparative lack of roads, and limited reinforcement zones.

As the front moves, one side gets closer to their source of supply, while one side gets farther away.

Both sides get a small stipend every turn and scripted reinforcements. Both sides start with some open slots, and enough prestige to fill them as they see fit.

My "plan" is for the Soviets to have four major production centers. The Southern bay near the East end of the map has a three-port area for Russian naval units to be launched from. North of that on the main landmass are multi-hex cities spaced near the Eastern edge, that each produce armor/art, aircraft, or troops... according to their purpose.

The Germans get three "transportation hubs" to start with. All future units start near one of these. The Southern-most hub city is a port.

Each of these major areas have multiple rail stations and airfields and/or ports.

Every major VL is a multi-station/airfield area. Each major terrain obstacle that is traversed by rail has stations on either side.

Well-connected national rail system. Hard roads connecting close major cities. Dirt roads leading to logical destinations, then trailing off. Many of the airfields present represent the aircraft of the time being able to operate from "rough fields".



------------


So, that's the plan anyway. Here are the direct questions...

Do I have to have a city hex for a rail station? Does the "station" I place have any meaning other than visual? Can I place a "station" in a non-city hex along a railway and allow units to embark/disembark?

By "flipping" every VL's flag to white every turn, I can prevent production and placement, but is there an easier way to corral where units may be placed?

Can capturing a hex or area negate future scripted reinforcements from that hex/area?

Can a non-VL city be made into a reinforcement placement hex? If so, can bombing it white turn off reinforcements?

Can I make a "rough field" that will not re-supply combat aircraft, but accept transports? That would be a godsend. Maybe a "perma-white" airfield.

What is the maximum number of hexes reasonably possible? I am not trying to break a record, but it seems like I could use some more room.

Is there a specific equipment mod that the majority of H2H players use? That makes crucial differences in design.

Please chime in with any advice that may point towards my goal.



---------------------------

To address in advance some valid points that some may come to... I have addressed these before in other games. I tend to make these kinds of scenarios.

Why so large? Why not chop it up into a campaign? Because then the Soviets could not horde enough for a surprise sea landing to take back territory and cut lines of communication. Because then the Germans could not save up and rally to mount a massive airborne operation to capture and hold a strategic hub that will screw the Russians and open up opportunities for the Germans. The map itself helps to facilitate reasons for having it all going on at once.

Why fictional? Because you have all seen the areas where battles took place. I have looked at pictures since I was 12. H2H players know the scenarios as a rule. Instead of a different take on the same battles, why not a personal challenge on believable terrain? My maps always look "real".

My forces are historic. No 15-strength Tigers. Raus(my favorite tactician) and Guderian get the OOBs they always wanted, but that is as far as I push it. My players always get some input in the form of units they may purchase at start, and to replace losses.

The longer a battle like this progresses, the more it becomes a unique experience that can not be duplicated. Plus it has the "epic quest" thing going for it that long-term partners tend to enjoy.

Garrison troops become needed. Patrolling with armored trains to keep rail lines from being impeded becomes a thing. A +1 range rail gun is a jewel beyond price.

Plenty of panzer room, but they have T34s, and sooner or later the VLs that have be dealt with are not out in the open.

Lots of transport but not a cornucopia. That is a lot of airspace to get jumped in. The railways should be swept. Neither Navy should just be going away.

Thank you for your attention, and may your rounds never fall short.

Humble offering for making it this far...

One of the few features mostly complete...

[AnalogGamer]

прохождение пяти опекунов

The Passage of the Five Guardians...



That rail line is the only easy way across the top 30% of the map at that longitude... and those are NOT "strongpoints". Eastern plains are about the 50% mark East/West.

--------

South of the mountains, a ring of hills has trapped a river and formed a swamp. Rails across the top or dirt path around...

[Yrfin]

Good to see any Designers of PzC

Hex = 15/20km. Turn = 1 day.

I dont think that Hex size good for PzC in common.
My opinion : 5-7 km/hex. Turn: 1/2 - 1/4 day.
For Units like Batallion/Division of coz.

Do I have to have a city hex for a rail station? Does the "station" I place have any meaning other than visual? Can I place a "station" in a non-city hex along a railway and allow units to embark/disembark?

You can did additional Type of Terrain (like Intenso82 did) for Rail Station.

[AnalogGamer]

Thanks for reading, and chiming in.

I usually agree on the described unit/hex/turn values, but this is a larger more strategic offering. I am attempting to keep it manageable in various ways, while attaining the circumstances being designed.

The 1,000 mile/3-month scale is needed to advocate rail, air and sea transport; as well as give both side opportunities to horde and attack at times and places of their choosing.

The scale means lots of Divisions. A Panzer Division has 1/2 armor regiments, 2/3 gren/pioneer regiments, 2 artillery and 1 AAA(in general). To reduce that to Btn level means multiplying by three. Daunting even for me, and I play Hearts of Iron.

Having two turns per day was my preference, but was concerned about doubling the number of emails. Plus I would have to make the map even larger, but it already is growing for other reasons. So two a day does look best. Plus, it should take some time to take a city, so more than two would make it look a little easy.

I do agree that shrinking the hex value is better. 10 kilometers per hex balances things out. A three-move infantry regiment can make 60km in a day.

The type of scenario that I am hoping make uses a slightly different level of immersion. Between strategic and tactical, with elements of both. Depth of time, space and resources provide more flexibility to use the pre-provided units that scenarios offer. Not everyone's cup of tea to be sure. The real possibility of jaw-dropping incursions by the supposed "defender" somewhere inside an area too vast to completely cover are not for everyone. But players have the above-mention time, space and resources to react and counter.

The key is ensuring that new units can only come into play in specific areas near the respective map edges. Everything hinges on that. Players may buy new units at any time they have the prestige and slot(s), but they can not be deployed from captured VLs.

I appreciate any input from designers out there on any mechaincs that may be used to bring about these circumstances.

Thanks for reading.

[McGuba]

Hi,

I think most of the stuff is achievable. But you need to tinker with the game files a bit. For example in terms of game mechanics, by default there is only one type of road in the game, the two different looking roads (hard and dirt) that you can see in the editor are only for visuals. They are there for a better visualization of the continental and the desert type maps, but the road itself has the same characteristics wheter or not it is paved. By default there are three terrain features: major river, river, railroad and road - you can check these (in this order) in the editor if you go to the Terrain Features in the Edit menu. So there is no dirt road and hard road type.

However, it might be possible to add a new road type if you edit the terrain.pzdat file in the Data folder and add "dirt road" or something like that at the end of the other terrain features. And then of course the movement.pzdat and strings.pzdat files will need similar referencies. And then you will need a new icon added to the end of the terrain_features.png file in the Graphics/Editor folder. As far as I know no one has tried it but it may work.

Do I have to have a city hex for a rail station?

Without editing the game files, yes, you need a "city" or a "port" terrain type to embark and disembark train transports.

Does the "station" I place have any meaning other than visual?

All the "Tiles - ..." in the editor will only change the in-game graphics. The tiles are just masks thrown over the actual terrain types for a better visual representation. In the editor you can switch between the tiles and terrain types view by pressing the "Space" or in the menu "View" -> "Hide/Show All Tiles" and then you will see what I mean. In the game the human player only sees the tiles (any graphics thrown over the actual terrain types) whereas the game and the AI is only interested in the terrain types - that is the important one for the game mechanics.

By "flipping" every VL's flag to white every turn, I can prevent production and placement, but is there an easier way to corral where units may be placed?

I think the easiest to do is to use another terrain type with similar characteristics to the city terrain type (e.g. jungle) and then put a city tile on top of it to make it look like a city and then add a flag to it. However, in that case you might want to modify the stock "jungle" terrain type so that you can embark trains in it as well as in normal cities. But it can be done easily in the afformentioned terrain.pzdat file.

Can capturing a hex or area negate future scripted reinforcements from that hex/area?

Yes, if you add an AI zone to that area and then the new scripted units have to be set to only appear if that area is owned by one or another side.

Can a non-VL city be made into a reinforcement placement hex? If so, can bombing it white turn off reinforcements?

By default, all city terrain types have the "gndsup" trait, allowing its owner to purchase new units one turn after its capture. Bombing a city to neutral means it no longer belongs to any side so neither can purchase new units there.

Can I make a "rough field" that will not re-supply combat aircraft, but accept transports? That would be a godsend. Maybe a "perma-white" airfield.

It might be possible if you add the "airemb" trait to a terrain type.

What is the maximum number of hexes reasonably possible? I am not trying to break a record, but it seems like I could use some more room.

I do not know, but it is quite large. My Battlefield: Europe map has 170x110 hexes with near 3000 units and hundreds of scripts and it works fine. However, on large maps you might need to use the /nocache switch with the Panzer.exe file, otherwise the game might crash.

Is there a specific equipment mod that the majority of H2H players use? That makes crucial differences in design.

Not that I know of. I think most multiplayer games use the vanilla equipment file, which is quite lame as it is full of unhistorical and inconsistent things. There are several mods out there with better e-files.

[AnalogGamer]

Thanks so much for that reply.

Looks like I have some editing to do. But it also looks like every major feature that I wish put in is possible.

170x100 with 3,000 units. Gimme. I was freaking out about pushing past 100x60. I am using regimental counters to create divisions in order to keep total numbers down to a couple of hundred. Mind if I dissect it for mechanical reasons? Just a little non-invasive probe.

The fact that roads act the same is not a deal-breaker for me. The visual is enough unless I learn a lot more a lot sooner than I suspect.

I really appreciate the input.

This is going to be fun, instead of the effort in futility I thought it would be. No one may ever play it, but it will work at least.

[McGuba]

Yes, just try to keep the max unit number reasonably low, if possible. In my mod the Axis side has usually 200-250 units and the Allies around 2-4 times more at any given time. The 3000 or so units are for the entire 99 turns and not all of them are on the map at the same time as they appear continuously - but they also get destroyed continuously. The game is fine with a few hundred units at the same time on the map - the real limitation I guess is how many units a human player can realistically handle. For some players anything over 30 is too many, though...

By the way, when making my mod initially I was also worried that I would reach the limits of the game engine so I just slowly added more and more stuff, but had no major issue, even though in the end I added lots of new units, sounds, graphics, terrain features, scripts, messages, etc. However, after the game reaches 1 Gb memory usage the /nocache has to be added to the panzer.exe to avoid memory overflow and crash to desktop problems.

[Yrfin]

For some players anything over 30 is too many, though...

I think It not about game engine's limitation.
I think PzC idea was build about 30-50 units in action can be handled by player in "manual" mode.

Becoz PzC don't have mechanics for action like: "Move X units from point A to B for Y turn".

[Intenso82]

In addition to what McGuba said,

I think in the PZC there are no special restrictions on the size of the map.
In my mod, a map of 193x186 hexes and this is hardly the limit.

But I think that the size of the resources in memory is more important.
No matter what size of the map, it does not greatly affect the memory.
But it affects how much you use different graphic tiles. They are all loaded into memory.
Also probably affects the number of units in the equipment. And how many different units you use in the scenario.
Each unit, it's graphics, a info picture, animation, a sound that goes into memory.
If it is less than 1 GB all ok, if the size is more help the parameter "nocache"

As for the large number of units on the map.
Of course this affects the speed of the AI.
3000 units, AI can move for a long time

But as far as I understand, you plan only for multiplayer.

[Yrfin]

As for the large number of units on the map.
Of course this affects the speed of the AI.
3000 units, AI can move for a long time

And when player must to be sit down and watch this 3000 AI movements...
Oh NO !

[AnalogGamer]

As for the large number of units on the map.
Of course this affects the speed of the AI.
3000 units, AI can move for a long time

And when player must to be sit down and watch this 3000 AI movements...
Oh NO !

LOL I can only imagine! Not on my watch.

Thanks for the help folks. I am feeling less daunted by taking on yet another engine, as "mature" as it may be.

Yes, this is for H2H email play only. Eat the elephant one bite at a time. Just getting the map and scenario to work for people will be challenge enough to start. I know how truly moronic some AIs can be, and don't feel like scripting my life away just yet. I am a map-maker and mission designer, but the mechanics are difficult for me.

I wish to do my utmost to make this a scenario/static campaign rather than a full-up mod, but I understand the technical distinction. If I can make it all work with the tools and equipment at hand with minimal changes, I will be happy. I need a "village" for more Railway stations, and airfields that take transports but will not refuel/re-arm anyone's combat aircraft. The rest looks like it exists as far as limiting reinforcement zones etc. I have no doubt a "garrison" unit will be easily found.

The plan is to have a steady stream of units to replace a steady stream of losses. So, not everyone on the field at once. Two turns a day and almost three months so 160+. My Map may achieve my vision after seeing what you fine people have already done.

Regimental markers. 4-6 regiments per Division. Starting German OOB will be close to... Three or four Panzer(2xtank,2xgren/pio,1-2xsp art), two or three Motorized/Grenadier, six+ Infantry, a full-up Fallshirm with 4x paras and 2x 75mm(with move and range heroes but ammo reduction), plus some attachments(railway guns/armored trains etc) and garrisons. Decent navy. Decent air. 16-20+ each of rail,sea and air transport. No uber-units(goodies are balanced by a hit somewhere), no overstrength. What would Erhard Raus and Hustling Heinz want?

Russians will have fortifications, and less-than-German units(in both quantity and quality) to start... with production in full swing at the rear. The strongpoints and forts slow the pace, but only have to be cracked once. In Combat Mission I was sometimes known as a "realistically sadistic" map maker/designer. The terrain is a big part of my design. I will do what it takes to encourage train/transport use, and still make everything look like it belongs. Fictional not fantasy. I am free from Google Earth, and that makes it a unique experience. Roughly, I dropped the Rockies in the middle of Russia and moved the Med about a thousand miles East. I am used to 3x6 km(but very fine detail at 1-meter level). Kid in a candy store.

Both players get enough prestige and open slots to customize at start, without compromising the mission design. Enough of a per-turn stipend to keep favored units alive if they get into trouble, or save up for something special.

Both sides get scripted reinforcements. This includes naval units, so it is not just an early-game thing. Both sides will have to stay on their toes at all times everywhere.

Field exercise at the Army Group Commander level. Attack in '43 instead of '41. Road/rail hubs, ports and airfields. Everything else is in the way. Strategic thinking and tactical prowess required. Stronger player should take Soviet, and could win. The unique design for train/transport use could lead to re-playability as people learn different ways to leap about and reinforce.

You have all added weeks to my map before I can start tweaking the OOBs. I am truly grateful. This will be fun.

Thanks again for your attention, and may your rounds never fall short.