Forums

Hi Gents: :smoke:

Quick update...

My Rising Sun scenario... Terror on Tarakan... will emerge from H2H testing in a few days! :eek1:

It has scored an average 8.72 with 9 test reports filed and one last game underway!

Many thanks to all play testers!

Read the test reports here.

As soon as the final test report is filed, I'll upload it to the Blitz database and make it available to all players.

The map was made from geodata and my own experiences...having been there in '73 for a lark.
Make it happen, the good scen...
...cheers and all the best...map and all...

...scens are easy to make, when you do not have to do the complete job...but that is OK...

(02-27-2010, 03:00 PM)Mr. Guberman Wrote: [ -> ]The map was made from geodata and my own experiences...having been there in '73 for a lark.
Make it happen, the good scen...
...cheers and all the best...map and all...

...scens are easy to make, when you do not have to do the complete job...but that is OK...

Hi Curt:

Thanks for your contribution of an excellent map! :)

As you will note, Terror on Tarakan uses a modified map of yours. :bow:

I also wish to thank the following play testers who contributed greatly to the creation of Terror on Tarakan:

Ed
Scud
Relayer
billki
Cole
Cam
Antoni

(Hopefully I did not leave anyone out!) :bow:

Also want to thank Jason and other developers at both Talonsoft and Matrix for the Australian and Japanese detailed OOBs.

Finally, I wish to thank countless authors from (at least) a dozen different historical sources - narratives, diaries, histories, etc. that provided the source material for my research into the battle.

So... maybe all scenario design work is a form of teamwork and leverages the assets of the greater CS community? :chin:

And yes, I agree that having a ready-made map aids in scenario design... but IMHO "good" and balanced scenarios are difficult to create and involve teamwork between the designer, play testers, and the greater CS community.

For example, my RS scenario Terror on Tarakan, went through two months of research before the first OOB was compiled. It then went through several rounds against the AI... in which some of the basic game play mechanics were adjusted. I then play tested it with Ed and a few other regular opponents... about a total of a dozen play tests... again adjusting OOBs... adjusting start locations... air support was in the early designs and then removed... naval gunfire was suggested and rejected... etc.

All of the above was done PRIOR to Terror on Tarakan being uploaded into H2H for wider play testing with the CS community. It then went through another 9+ test rounds in H2H

I also work full time, have a family, and other real life stuff... so I don't have hours upon hours to work on new designs. I do this because I want to see "good" and balanced H2H CS scenarios for players. I believe that new additions and scenarios are the "life blood" that will keep CS players interested and the game platform moving forward for years.

So... yes Curtis, I agree with you that "scens are easy to make..." but "good" and well balanced ones are not.

(02-27-2010, 09:43 PM)mwest Wrote: [ -> ]So... yes Curtis, I agree with you that "scens are easy to make..." but "good" and well balanced ones are not.

That is soooo true!

(02-27-2010, 10:49 PM)Foul. Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-27-2010, 09:43 PM)mwest Wrote: [ -> ]So... yes Curtis, I agree with you that "scens are easy to make..." but "good" and well balanced ones are not.

That is soooo true!

I'd say the life blood of the game is in new scenarios that are balanced and fun to play. PBEM kept this game alive.
New campaigns and an updated AI would also help.

Since we are a club that uses ladders, and thus is driven by PBEM, the first part above is the most important to our community?

There are those who are well into the "historically accurate" scenario design. Nothing against those who painstakingly struggle to get each piece of terrain in it's precise spot on the hex grid. No disrespect to those who tediously search for where "Wally" and his units should be on the map.
But, even if you can walk down the lane on a real battlefield and use the scenario map to find your way, if the scenario is not fun and balanced how many "hits" or plays are you going to get?

If the scenario is hypothetical but plays with historically accurate units, is one that recreates the feel of the battle at that particular time, and is one that is balanced and fun to play, who cares if a palm tree is out of place or "Wally" showed up two turns early? ;)

I just think that the hypothetical and historically based scenarios have their place in PBEM. Especially when they are fun and balanced.

Also remember that plans, as well historic battle recreations, do not survive first contact?

I laud Mike for making the effort, and spending the time, to give us balanced and fun scenarios. Rising Sun is often overlooked and under appreciated due to it's limited amount of scenarios and "upgrades" from the early Talonsoft crew. I hope that Mike and the Matrix team will continue to aid in adding to RS.



HSL

Cheers to all...
...I am one of the historical cats. I have no problem with someone else making a better "scenario for play". What I enjoy...and deride, at the same time...is an historically astute body being led to believe that a "balanced scenario" is history. To some extent, that causes me great grief...I would hate to see T-34's added to Tarakan...to "balance it".
All of you guys are great...but there is too much of a teacher in me, in me, to swallow that.
However...all of my scens are open to hacking and modding...and I do love that.

Will work on some more maps and OOBs...
Cheers
Curt

...when plans hit the window?...Ed...I thought you were referencing...? Been there when the bullets did not have a window to hit...yet...miss. 6 or 7 times...yeet.

Agreed. Let us call historical scens "historical". Seems small....but it is actually very salient.

Thanx
Curt

Just want to say thanks to all for working this one up. I have been reading about this rather tragic 'sideshow' battle, fought at the whim of High Commands for no purpose but their own politics, over the past year. Am looking forward to playing this one when released.

(02-27-2010, 11:39 PM)Herr Straßen Läufer Wrote: [ -> ]But, even if you can walk down the lane on a real battlefield and use the scenario map to find your way, if the scenario is not fun and balanced how many "hits" or plays are you going to get?

I agree. My "philosophy" in scenario design is to make it fun and balanced first... while trying to capture both the "feel" and nature of the battle. :smoke:

My approach is to come at it from a player's perspective... Is it an interesting battle?... Do both sides have a reasonable chance at some level of victory?... What kind of "shelf life" and "repeatability" does it have?

I enjoy historically accurate CS scenarios and admire those designers who strive for strictly historical accuracy... but if the actual battle was one-sided... with one force having no chance at any level of victory... why design such a scenario?... and why would players invest their limited gaming time in such a scenario knowing that no matter what tactics were adopted... the outcome would be the same? :chin:

For me, the excitement of game play comes from the knowledge that the tactics I adopt and the moves I make on the pixel battlefield, will directly influence the final outcome... and that victory is a contest determined in the closing turns... not "prebaked" into the scenario design.

(02-28-2010, 10:40 PM)mwest Wrote: [ -> ]I enjoy historically accurate CS scenarios and admire those designers who strive for strictly historical accuracy... but if the actual battle was one-sided... with one force having no chance at any level of victory... why design such a scenario?... and why would players invest their limited gaming time in such a scenario knowing that no matter what tactics were adopted... the outcome would be the same?

In a word, education. Nothing like generaling an army through the same situation, albeit within gaming limitations. Especially when reading a book on the battle at the same time.