Scenario: Brigade Nord: Delaying Actions 2 (Delay at Overbygd)

[Imp]

I haven't got to far with these as RL is hectic at the moment but my first impressions are good looking forward to this series.

Just one thing if possible can you also release it with units names as standard if its easy enough.
I know many people like the renaming but I find it far quicker to play if units names are standard

[shahadi]

Originally Posted by Imp

Just one thing if possible can you also release it with units names as standard if its easy enough.
I know many people like the renaming but I find it far quicker to play if units names are standard

Yeah, I find it easier gameplay as well to use the default unit names, however I do rename the command units as well.

Sometimes it can get confusing very fast. For instance, the Russian BTR Rifle Co formations have the following unit designations:
BC0 3/2 Hq
BC1 Isla-1 SAM
BC2 3/2 Hq

Also, formations F, K, & P are listed as platoons when it appears they ought to have company designations

And, some of the leader units are led by Sgts with sub units led by Ltgs

Finally, Player 1 units are not in contiguous order, not a big thing I suppose, but you'd find it makes for better design to have your units in order by player.

Oh, I would give the SU-27's targets especially since they are the SEAD element on an northeast Air Entry in pre-bombardment.
And, there's an SU-27M at RC11 and an Mig-29SM at RC18, I'm not sure they will ever enter the fight without targets. Gotta check on this myself.

With a two battalion-sized Russian TF, I'd purchase at least 2 strike elements assigned CAS and maybe an additional element assigned interdiction in addition to the SEAD.

Nevertheless, I should have fun!

[Grant1pa]

Imp and Shahadi, Thanks for the feedback.

Sorry about renaming the units. I've always done that in my scenarios to help me keep to the "script" I make during the initial design. When I design these, I do a lot of research on the TO&Es', terrain, weather, historical basis (or hypothetical basis), and then hard copy map the attack, defense positions, etc. It's exceedingly time consuming, but it helps me work around the quirks with the AI the game gives the OPFOR in advancing units, deploying dismounts early, etc.

Bad habit I guess to carry the designations over into the actual computer scenario. I can easily change that in future designs and I do understand how it can impact on game flow for someone who didn't design the battle.

I design the Russian Air support's targeting dependent upon the scenario. In the first one I presented (Bardufoss), a Spets FAC was there to target. In the last two, the FAC gets there late and targeting was to arise from the unit level. I'll work on that concept to find the balance between what's reasonable for the conditions on the ground combined with expectations on what's reasonable on the operational (prior intel) level.

The unit leaders were an error. Sorry. Working 10 hour watches and then trying to decompress with scenario building creates errors. I'll work that out better as I progress in the series, and then when I complete the 12, I'll go back on the three I've posted to date and resubmit them as the proofed scenarios.

I truly appreciate your feedback. I've been playing this game since the first month it came out with SSI. But merely designing games for yourself is a poor system at best. I'll get better. Thanks mates!

Grant1