View Full Version : MEA CULPA - Minor modification of the concept.

July 30th, 2005, 05:17 AM

Yesterday I started the preliminary tests on the various campaign mechanism/techniques and soon I discovered that the "step evolution method" can't be adopted without the risk of abusing the spirit of the game.
There is not actual "fixed" way to assign additional core force units after scenario 1; this may only be achieved by providing the purchasing points to the player in order to buy the requested material.

Since we wish to make a campaign for the 1st CAV DIV and not for a imaginary open core force containing flame tanks etc... we should take actions.

This is why I tried yesterday to modify the concept as following:

The core force will be fully given from scenario 1
This should include all the choices we have made by voting and should have the size of a reinforced(slightly modified) US CAV coy.
The Airlift for the CAV coy would be assigned to each scenario as AUX/FIX reinforcement; this mean that you decide if you wish to use it (or not) in any particular mission; this also gives you more options when designing scenarios.

The "step evolution" will be renamed to "multiple choice support assets".

The technique of choosing some elements of the fighting force will continue to be present as an overall campaign tool but it will function in a different way.
The player at the end of each ToO will play the 1-turn mission in order to choose the composition of the AUX support assets that he will have under his command for the following several missions of the next ToO.

For example the player may choose to have for a specific ToO, either

Group A
1. Battery of 105 mm 4x
2. Battery of 155 mm 2x
3. mix Hvy Battery
4. Airstrike element 2x


Group B
1. AirCav Spt 6x
2. Air Strike elements 6x
3. Battery of 105 mm 2x

Whether the player choose the group A or group B means that the player will have in all primary missions of all chapters of that specific ToO these units as support element for his operations.
For the secondary missions he may have available a smaller part of these aux support forces.
In early ToOs (smaller battles), the groups will contain less support units (for example only a couple of 105mm batteries) but in more advanced ToOs these groups may contain several units (like the above example; also infantry units).
The quantity multiple choices could be up to 3 choices and the groups should contain units that will dictate unique combat doctrines (indirect artillery barrage or direct air assault - air strikes/ helis attacks).

Keeping in mind the results of the Poll, I suggest that the core force will include the following units (scope to match 3x Air Cav platoons):

1. 3x AirCAv Platoon(M)
2. 6x Patrol
3. 6x Mg section
4. 3x Snipers
5. (2-3)x Pioneer (bunker-busting unit)
6. 3x Forward Obs
7. (3-6)x AirCav Spt (3x UH-1B gunship)- ( organic element of one AirCav Platoon is 8 gunship, so for 3x AirCav platoon we may use up to 24 gunships; although some of them may be used as AUX for gameplay reasons )
8. (3-9)x Scout Helo sec (2x OH-13)- the number of scout helos for 3 Cav platoons can go up to 24 Scout helos, but for gameplay reasons we may use less as core force.
9. 3x AirCav Lift (5x UH-10 Huey); as Aux/Fix units we may use these for the trasportation of the "Aero Rifle Platoon (Doughboys)".
10. Light mortar ? (under discussion - do you want some as organic?)
11. 1x Hvy Helos section as AUX/Fix for transportation.


p.s I am terribly sorry for the inconvenience, but this is a hybrid campaign http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif.

July 30th, 2005, 09:50 AM

As the new modification of the concept matures in my head, I just came up with a new idea:

The relation between the "multiple choice support assets" and the "adjustable difficulty".

Since there would be 3 levels of adjustable difficulty, we may adapt the "quality & quantity" of the "multiple choice support assets" to each different level.

For instance, the number of support assets for the easy clone could be 150% of the normal, for the normal 100% and
for the difficult clone could be only 50% of the normal.
This will raise the challenge for "tough" players.


August 1st, 2005, 08:00 AM
Pyros said:
The player at the end of each ToO will play the 1-turn mission...

Regarding the 1-turn mission, I guess we'll need a map for this also - how about using a map of the Divisional base (or a part of the Divisional base)... for reasons of "atmosphere" as opposed to unedited maps...?

Also, on the question of players "abusing" the campaign by using unhistorical core forces, tactics etc I don't think we should worry much about it. If a player is set on playing it acording to his own rules he will. It takes five seconds to change the choice of core from FIXED to OPEN and assign whatever build points desired.

August 1st, 2005, 09:12 AM
Hi Ulf,

Excellent suggestion to use a map (30x30) of a divisional base for the 1-turn mission. Maybe we could also slightly change these maps according to the different ToOs?


August 2nd, 2005, 01:07 PM
I'll take the Div base map.. that sounds jsut hte right size for me.

August 2nd, 2005, 02:51 PM

If you like you may design several of them just to have diversity in the different ToOs! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif