CS Game Scale - Manual Style

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Manual Page 13
Welcome to the Campaign Series!
The Campaign Series is a tactical-level game portraying some of the significant battles from 1936 to 1945 in the European and Pacific Theaters of Operation. Choose to fight as the Axis or Allies in over 300 historical scenarios. The choice is yours. Pit your skills against the computer or a human opponent in any of the many historical scenarios, or try your hand in full-fledged campaigns consisting of linked scenarios, where each battle counts. You can also go head-to-head against fellow gamers at home via the Internet in games with up to 16 players!
Each scenario is played on a unique map with five “view modes.” Most scenario maps are based on historically-accurate 1940-era 1:50,000 scale maps actually used by Axis and Allied commanders during the war. Each “hex” represents 250 meters; with 4 hexes to a kilometer or 6 hexes to a mile. Turns are equivalent to approximately 6 minutes of real time.
Each scenario has a variable number of Game Turns, in which you and your opponent attempt to capture or defend Objectives and smash more enemy troops then you lose. Every conceivable type of battle action is represented in the scenario selection: meeting engagements, armored breakthroughs, trench defenses, exploitation, reconnaissance, battles of attrition, mobile defenses, and much more.
4.22 The Unit Handbook
Range Display – If you click on the “Range Display” (“R”) button in the lower right portion of a selected unit display, a “Range Dialog” graph is displayed. This Range Dialog illustrates the Hard Target Attack Strengths (shown by the red line) and the “Soft Target” Attack Strengths (shown by the blue line) of the unit currently being investigated in the Unit Handbook. (does the display show range as 250 m or "miles" if scale is not adhered to?)
4.23 Organizations
Each unit in the Campaign Series is part of an organization. The individual units are platoons. (do they represent larger units if scale is not considered?)

What is the game scale?
A. The game scale is six minutes per turn and 250 meters per hex. Each Strength Point (SP) of an infantry platoon represents a half squad (thus, 6 SPs represent a platoon of three squads). Each SP of a Machine Gun platoon represents one MG “team” (and, thus, one MG); each SP of a gun (i.e., gun, mortar, or howitzer) battery represents one gun and its attendant crew; each SP of a vehicular platoon (regardless of type) represents one vehicle and its crew. Crews and guns are considered the same units for game play purposes.


What does the range graph obtainable when unit data is accessed via F2 actually represent?
A. This graphically represents the unit’s Hard (red) and Soft (blue) Attack Factors at various ranges. The number shown along the “y” (vertical) axis (when presented on that same map, which is scaled to 250m, the max range of the unit is clearly defined).

Talonsoft TIP #1 - SCALE: Keep in mind that each hex in the game represents an area approximately 250m from side to side or top to bottom (thus, one kilometer would be 4 hexes in length).

Talonsoft TIP #3 - MINIMUM ORG SIZE: It cannot be emphasized enough that the minimum organization in your scenario’s Order of Battle should be a battalion (as this is the lowest-level unit that contains an “inherent” HQ). If you “import” lone platoons or companies into a side’s OOB, be sure you then put them “inside” a battalion or higher-level org that has an HQ. In other words, don’t simply import a lot of platoons or companies without adding them “into” an org with an HQ.
Example: Determine the “size” of the encounter you want to depict, and find the battalion or higher-level orgs (from within the list of organizations) that best match the type of units involved. As necessary, supplement that org with specialized platoons and/or companies, but be sure to put those companies “inside” that org.

Scenario Design Tip #15: On a clear day in most theatres, maximum visibility is best around 10 to 12 hexes. It is more difficult to spot a few vehicles at 3000 metres (3 kilometres or 1.86 miles) than you’d think. Rarely do you come across flat, pool–table-like battlefields in the European or Pacific Theatres. The exceptions to this would be North Africa and the Russian Steppes.
The Length value is the number of turns you want the scenario to run. The default turn length is 10.

Weather Condition Visibility*
Clear = 20
Overcast = 18-19
Slight Haze = 15-17
Light Rain† = 10-14
Squalls = 8-9
Light Fog = 6-7
Heavy Rain† = 5
Fog = 4
Thick Fog/Night = 3
Very Thick Fog/Night = 2
Night = 1
* In hexes (which are those 250 m hexes, right?)
† Snow if Ground Conditions are snow

Implication of scale when 250m per hex?

I'll let the game manual speak for itself. I am not going to allow my self to be drawn into the taunting member's argument where I will be censured by the club leadership for "causing a disruption". My intent is not to disrupt, it is to simply show the facts (those contained in the game manual and not made up by others along the way).

If any game designer, past or present, wants to model a battle that was an operation of many days or multiple hours, I am perfectly fine with it. It is only a game?
Feel free to express yourselves in that way.
Just keep the schoolyard taunting and name calling to yourselves?

Like the manual warns:

EPILEPSY WARNING PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE BEFORE PLAYING THIS GAME OR BEFORE ALLOWING YOUR CHILDREN TO PLAY.Certain individuals may experience epileptic seizures or loss of consciousness when subjected to strong, flashing lights for long periods of time. Such individuals may therefore experience a seizure while operating computer or video games. This can also affect individuals who have no prior medical record of epilepsy or have never previously experienced a seizure.If you or any family member has ever experienced epilepsy symptoms (seizures or loss of consciousness) after exposure to flashing lights, please consult your doctor before playing this game.Parental guidance is always suggested when children are using a computer and video games. Should you or your child experience dizziness, poor eyesight, eye or muscle twitching, loss of consciousness, feelings of disorientation or any type of involuntary movements or cramps while playing this game, turn it off immediately and consult your doctor before playing again.PRECAUTIONS DURING USE:- Do not sit too close to the monitor. Sit as far as comfortably possible.- Use as small a monitor as possible.- Do not play when tired or short on sleep.- Take care that there is sufficient lighting in the room.- Be sure to take a break of 10-15 minutes every hour.
©

Be safe. Enjoy your gaming experience! :smoke:

RR

[Herr Straße Laufer]

I'll let the game manual speak for itself. I am not going to allow my self to be drawn into the taunting member's argument where I will be censured by the club leadership for "causing a disruption". My intent is not to disrupt, it is to simply show the facts (those contained in the game manual and not made up by others along the way).

If any game designer, past or present, wants to model a battle that was an operation of many days or multiple hours, I am perfectly fine with it. It is only a game?
Feel free to express yourselves in that way.
Just keep the schoolyard taunting and name calling to yourselves?

The scale of the game is the scale of the game.

:chin: :kill:

RR

[Mike Abberton]

I think you can also explain the difference in scenario length versus engagement length in history (or at least part of it) as "skipping over the boring parts" rather than a floating game scale.

Therefore when modeling a 6 hour engagement in something like 15 turns (i.e. 90 minutes of combat time), you're skipping over 4.5 hours of reconsolidating forces after capturing each objective, calling and waiting for more orders, waiting for the ammo trucks, waiting for someone to bring you your pack that you left behind (rather than sprinting into combat with a full pack), catching your breath, etc. You don't need 24 minute turns to do that (6 hours/15 turns).

Does that explanation require some abstraction, too. Sure. But with this method, it keeps the hex scale consistent with travel speeds (even if infantry are all marathoners). I think the big problem with this explanantion for scenario designers who want to design huge scenarios is that this model breaks down when you have multiple independent forces on the map working semi-independently over long periods of time. You end up with groups of units who are accumulating "downtime" at different rates.

Does all that make the 6-minute game scale "wrong". No, it means you're designing out of the game's "sweet spot". Can you do that and "tweak" the game scale to compensate? Of course you can. But just because it is possible to design a 1,000-turn scenario with 4 divisions worth of troops on each side, and a 500x500 hex map, doesn't mean the game was designed to model that.

Based on the manual, I would say that game was designed for 6-minute turns and relatively small (say regimental size plus support)/short (say up to 25-30 turns) scenarios. The fact that scenario designers (who may or may not have had anything to do with coding the basic game engine) chose to deviate from the sweet spot from day 1 doesn't change the basic design concept at all.

Anyway that was my one rambling comment on the whole game scale debate. In the end, I agree with the saner people on the thread who have said "design and/or play what you enjoy, and let the other drown in the details".

Mike

[Glint]

Anyway that was my one rambling comment on the whole game scale debate. In the end, I agree with the saner people on the thread who have said "design and/or play what you enjoy, and let the other drown in the details".

Mike

Couldn't agree with you more with that comment Mike !

regards
Peter

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Anyway that was my one rambling comment on the whole game scale debate. In the end, I agree with the saner people on the thread who have said "design and/or play what you enjoy, and let the other drown in the details".

Mike

Couldn't agree with you more with that comment Mike !

regards
Peter

On this we agree.
And, that's a lot of agreement in one day, eh? :smoke:

And, I also agree with everything that Mike said in his post. :)



RR

[Glint]

Yeah Ed - I guess we can have a drink in the virtual bar now buddy!


Peter

[Von Luck]

:stir::stir::stir::stir: lol flashing lights etc the last part was classic Ed.

[Mr. Guberman]

indeed, the manual says just what you posted.

so?

[Herr Straße Laufer]

indeed, the manual says just what you posted.

so?

You seem to just want to pick fights and taunt?

This is what I see:

I think you can also explain the difference in scenario length versus engagement length in history (or at least part of it) as "skipping over the boring parts" rather than a floating game scale.

Therefore when modeling a 6 hour engagement in something like 15 turns (i.e. 90 minutes of combat time), you're skipping over 4.5 hours of reconsolidating forces after capturing each objective, calling and waiting for more orders, waiting for the ammo trucks, waiting for someone to bring you your pack that you left behind (rather than sprinting into combat with a full pack), catching your breath, etc. You don't need 24 minute turns to do that (6 hours/15 turns).

Does that explanation require some abstraction, too. Sure. But with this method, it keeps the hex scale consistent with travel speeds (even if infantry are all marathoners). I think the big problem with this explanantion for scenario designers who want to design huge scenarios is that this model breaks down when you have multiple independent forces on the map working semi-independently over long periods of time. You end up with groups of units who are accumulating "downtime" at different rates.

Does all that make the 6-minute game scale "wrong". No, it means you're designing out of the game's "sweet spot". Can you do that and "tweak" the game scale to compensate? Of course you can. But just because it is possible to design a 1,000-turn scenario with 4 divisions worth of troops on each side, and a 500x500 hex map, doesn't mean the game was designed to model that.

Based on the manual, I would say that game was designed for 6-minute turns and relatively small (say regimental size plus support)/short (say up to 25-30 turns) scenarios. The fact that scenario designers (who may or may not have had anything to do with coding the basic game engine) chose to deviate from the sweet spot from day 1 doesn't change the basic design concept at all.

Anyway that was my one rambling comment on the whole game scale debate. In the end, I agree with the saner people on the thread who have said "design and/or play what you enjoy, and let the other drown in the details".
Mike

I agreed with Mike, especially the bolded part.

Maybe you can try your hand at a scenario design using the parameters set in the game manual?
I won't try to force you to do it. Or, try to do what you are doing, in constantly harping on those who think other than you. I accept that you and others want to model scenarios based on an operational concept. If they are good and balanced, I could care less if they have dimensions that are not based on the scale that is CS.

Believe me. I can take the "in your face" posting by some members. I'd even like to scrap over it a bit. But, the powers that be set rules that govern the forums, and after the last go around I am not going to "get into it" and lose my membership over it.
You and Huib simply are not worth it. :smoke:
And, Peter has his own agenda (whatever that might be, but I shouldn't say so until he and I have that virtual drink). ;)

Ed

[Glint]

Peter has no agenda !

Peter