View Full Version : For the Treadheads among us.
http://www.steelbeasts.com/fuldagap/frame.htm
It links to a Steel Beasts ( best tank sim ever IMO although M1 TP will never lose its place in my heart.. Ah for the joys of a 386 SX and terrain which had only one shade of green ;) ) campaign. They are writing a novel on the campaign as it progresses. It is quite interesting and since a lot of the guys involved are ex-tankers and they're really observing proper chain of command and comms limits it seems to be turning out quite well.
Anyways, I thought some people here might find it interesting...
The Purist
28 Dec 04, 22:16
Fionn,
For me, a campaign designed and run for the CM series would be just what the doctor ordered. The biggest problem I have with the QBs are they do not 'mean' anything. Fight like hell for 20 30 turns, 2-5000 points and what does it get you,... a win.
It would be great if we all took on the roll of, say, a battalion commander on a particular front during a particular campaign and fought a series of battles that actually effected the 'big picture'. The teams would have so many divisions from the historical OoB that would be divided among the player. These battalions would have a fixed at start 'base structure' with various 'add on' units based, again, on historical availability,...i.e. a Tiger unit could support battalion X while battalion Y had to make do with a few Marders.
Now that's would be wargaming.
Hey guys, try this out:
http://www.cmmc2.org/
It's very involved, but I think it's kinda along the lines of what The Purist is looking for ...
Fionn,
It would be great if we all took on the roll of, say, a battalion commander on a particular front during a particular campaign and fought a series of battles that actually effected the 'big picture'. The teams would have so many divisions from the historical OoB that would be divided among the player. These battalions would have a fixed at start 'base structure' with various 'add on' units based, again, on historical availability,...i.e. a Tiger unit could support battalion X while battalion Y had to make do with a few Marders.
:whist: :whist:
:hush:
ER_Chaser
29 Dec 04, 00:29
Hey guys, try this out:
http://www.cmmc2.org/
It's very involved, but I think it's kinda along the lines of what The Purist is looking for ...
I believe I send the admin there several emails to express my interests to join the fight, buddy. But I got no answer from them. You have any idea why? Thanks..
The Purist
29 Dec 04, 01:25
:whist: :whist:
:hush:
Me confused,...no read smilie simbulz.
Ok,...I visited the website, but, sadly, they are playing on the eastern front. :bored:
It's not that the eastern front is necessarily a 'bad' front, it's just it is very large and, inevitably, your gonna end up at Kursk <YAAAWWWWWNNN>. If not, you'll be blasting away with Tigers and Panthers and Bears in some circus or another.
I'll drop them an email and see if they if they are really using historical situations.
I have run a few large scale campaings for table top gamers in the past. If anyone is interested in seting up our own campaign I would love to help run it. I just need to figure out how to make this stupid machine do wat i want it to do!!
Just off the top of my head from what we had done before was have 2 divisonal officers (one axis and one allied) than 6 manover birgade officers. (3 each) one of the birgade officers can also be division. We would use a semi generic map to manuver and for strategic movement and recon than when forces ended up in the same "hex" there would be a fight at birgade level (or smaller as the case was) these battles would initialy be recon forces or than each division would decide if it wanted to press the attack, pull back, try to hold the opponent, etc. The division commander was the one who told the birgades where to go and handed out division support assests where needed. the birgade would send out the battalions and birgade support etc, etc.
If we had enough players we can take it down to battalion or company level but that would take alot of people just to field 1 division.
So any way if you guys are interested and we can get 4 or more players interested in this we might just be able to pull it off....
I know i am new here and can't spell worth a damn but I do have a fairly extensive back ground with wargameing...
Zak Winship
If any of you guys can actually put something like this together and make it work that would be very cool I would love to follow your progress.
Unfortunately I do not have the time nor the experience with multi-player wargaming to really lend a hand at this time. :OHNO:
Good luck gentlemen!
I am going to start working on some rules and such for a campaign. Give me some dates you all like for it to be set in I will start small thinking 1 division each what do you think about Crete.... I think it would be a good starting place because of the island and forces involved it would be mostly infantry or if people want North Africa it would be more of a combined arms effort. I am thinking about how to set up the strategic game for now. I am hoping to have something I can post tonight for comments.
Unfortunately I do not have the time nor the experience with multi-player wargaming to really lend a hand at this time. :OHNO:
Good luck gentlemen!
We are going to need small unit commanders also it shouldn't be to much of a time commitment other than the GM and maybe the Overall commanders....
The Purist
29 Dec 04, 13:13
One thing I think you should try to do is base it on an actual historical encounter. Either of the three CM games is fine but keep in mind the scale of the Russian front and the lack of objective records (from either side) makes a divisional scale actions a bit iffy. I'm not saying it cannot be done, it just requires caution. We should also try to limit the size of the actions to battalion level. While the games can support very large infantry battles they can seldom put more than a battalion of tanks on a battlefield, especially the more expensive later war models.
Further, how will you handle a situation where one side hits a battalion with a regiment supported by artillery, tanks and other assets? If the game cannot set up the large battle you will have to split the large battles into smaller ones.
Using the above example, you would have to reduce the 'large' map into three small maps and divide the defending and attacker into three parts, attacking battalions and their support vs defending companies and their support. Otherwise, you condemn the attacker to constantly attack at 1:1 odds.
My preferences run from CMAK-CMBO-CMBB. There are just so many well recorded brigade/divisional level actions in the official histories and mass market texts that we may want to try it out first with a West Front/Africa playtest round or two in order iron out the rules and sequence of play.
I think the first question to be answered concerns the 'orders of battle'. In my opinion players should play with the game designed infantry OoB and be given the historical limits for armour, ie a panzer reg't consisted of one batt'n of Mk IVs and one batt'n of Mk Vs and rarely at full strength. Attached units should also be assigned based on what was actually available to the divisions and "logical" corps level attachments.
It's a very, very complicated process.
[QUOTE]We should also try to limit the size of the actions to battalion level. While the games can support very large infantry battles they can seldom put more than a battalion of tanks on a battlefield, especially the more expensive later war models. That will be up to the divison or overall commander what he wants to commite to the battle.
Further, how will you handle a situation where one side hits a battalion with a regiment supported by artillery, tanks and other assets? If the game cannot set up the large battle you will have to split the large battles into smaller ones.
My thought is the scenario will be set up by the GM they will select the terain and the oob depending on what forces are availible to be commited and than the player will set up on there end of the map so if a regiment is attacking they will get a **** lot more stuff than a defending battalion in one game I played a few years ago we had a recon company get hit by a us armor battalion we thought we had found a recon company but bit off more than we could chew and had to retreat after taking some heavy losses. I beleve, corect me if I am wrong there can be an exit point on the map in the cm games to retreat to. Maybe we can limit stacking on strategic map to regimental/birgade size formations if to many forces are there we can break it down into 2 smaller battles for smaller games and split the forces. I did just set up a game with a regiment of german infantry and armor it was a lot of units on the map and had to make it a huge map or everything was on top of itself i put them up against a batalion of us infantry and ran 1 turn other than the 5 min. i had to wait for the little blue line to finish where it tells you the kind of battle it seemed to work fine.
Using the above example, you would have to reduce the 'large' map into three small maps and divide the defending and attacker into three parts, attacking battalions and their support vs defending companies and their support. Otherwise, you condemn the attacker to constantly attack at 1:1 odds.
That is why I think the smallest unit command should be birgade/regiment.
My preferences run from CMAK-CMBO-CMBB. There are just so many well recorded brigade/divisional level actions in the official histories and mass market texts that we may want to try it out first with a West Front/Africa playtest round or two in order iron out the rules and sequence of play.
I think north africa using cmak would be best at this time to try a small campaign. I beleve we can iron out alot of the rules with feedback from players than run a larger game. There will be an overall strategic game that will be going on and when forces actualy meet that is where we start playing out battles in cm.
I think the first question to be answered concerns the 'orders of battle'. In my opinion players should play with the game designed infantry OoB and be given the historical limits for armour, ie a panzer reg't consisted of one batt'n of Mk IVs and one batt'n of Mk Vs and rarely at full strength. Attached units should also be assigned based on what was actually available to the divisions and "logical" corps level attachments. YES!! My thought was nothing above divisonal level will be included and you will be limited by what the division commander has to alocate to you or what they can get to you as the case may be.
It's a very, very complicated process.That is why I love doing this LOL
I have some basic rules done for the strategic game will post as soon as i get them typed up, ATM they are on a napkin from lunch
Zak Winship
ok here are the rules I came up with for the strategic game they are very simple at this time I think as it is played we can iron out any problems.
For the first campain I would like to just use a german and british division and make up a random strategic map in north africa and let them go to it. This would be a short game with say 5 turns and 3 victory locations whoever controls them at the end of the fith turn wins.
forgot to post the rules sorry.
here they are they are also in a .doc file on this post.
Strategic Rules for comment
This is what I have for now. We will have a hex map of the area. there will be different terain types ie. clear, road, water, woods, village, urban, and anything else we come up with.
Movement on the strategic map will cost movement points and supply points.
Leg Infantry - 2 hexes per turn - 5 supply points per company
Mec/Armor/Motrized - 6 hexes per turn - 10 supply per company
Support - 4 hexes per turn - 8 supply points per company
Recon - 8 hexes per turn - 10 supply points per company
(movement will be tweeked for terain type and unit type)
Supply will be traced back to supply points on map units out of supply will only be able to move 1 hex per turn and not move into known enemy hexes unless they are moving tword there supply point. ie: recon company gets enveloped by advancing units it can try to fight it's way back twords its own lines. They will take ammo and fitness losses in scenario set up.
Each side will have supply points on the map they must hold these points to get more supply points every turn. There will be special supply points both hidden and open on map if these points are taken they will give the side holding them bonus points for the next turn, (must have a unit present in hex).
At the end of a turn battle results will be taken out of your current supply for refiting losses at this rate:
1 point per man lost
10 points per vehical
5 points per morter
5 points for guns
10 points for airplane
5 points for pillboxes
These corospond to the unit losses in victory conditions at end of scenario.
(This part about refit is very simplified in a large battle I don't want to have to calculate what individual casualties are in the game as far as this tank company lost 1 Mk 3 and one Tiger and keep track of oob. Using this we can say you are out for one turn to refit and than you are back in action, or if it a total loss the units are removed from your oob. PLEASE make comments to improve this part if you can come up with a better system or how to make this more relistic and not a huge burden on the GM)
Strategic support
Overall commanders can use supplie points to interupt oponents supplie, get ariel reconasence, or bring in air units as support. It cost 5 supplie points to bring in one air sortie they can either attack a hex, recon a hex, or defend a hex.
Air attacks cause disruption in supply if attacking a supply point for every aircraft that gets to the target the GM will role 1d6
1-6 -25 supply from that point
7-12 -50 points
13-16 -75 points
16-18 -100 points
Recon will find units in a hex. As above the number of planes that get through will role 1d6 for results.
1 units are miss identified by the GM discresion (Very bad!! oh that isn't a Tiger batalion it is just a pltn of Infantry)
2-3 some of the composition is found (about 25% of the units are identified)
4-5 most of the units are identified (about 75%)
6 and above all units are identified
(this 1-6 can be brought up by sending multple planes you will be guarnteed beter results)
On both of these "attacks" you will not be informed of the results of the die role. I think this will keep some of the Fog Of War at a high level just like it was in real life.
To defend a hex you can alocate planes if the hex is attacked each player will get 1d6 per plane involved you will role the dice as in risk the higher number will cause a plane sortie to "die", Defender wins ties. ie: attacker has 3 planes defender has 2 planes attacker roles 3d6 with a 6 3 2 defender roles 2d6 with 6 2. Attacker loses 1 plane 6 and 6 (tie to defender) and defender loses 1 plane 3 beats 2. now they are at 2 and 1 planes. role again attacker gets 4 3 defender gets 3. the attacker's 4 beats the defenders 3 so the attacker has destroyed the defending air sorties and attacks the hex with 2 aircraft.
LOL!
Well, way back when CMBO was new I was actually the originator and namer of the whole CMMC ( Combat Mission Meta Campaign) concept. So, I'm intimately familiar with the cmmc.
VERY complicated but about the most realistic thing out there IMO... The current CMMC2 is up and running ( albeit slowly). I was involved in that myself when it was starting and had a fair old part to play in the formulation of the overall Soviet operational plan ( as well as their firestrike plan... which I'm glad to say seems to have gone well so far). I had to drop out due to time constraints etc but I'm thinking of dipping a toe back in.
Purist,
The scenario is an operation in winter 1942 north of Stalingrad. VERY interesting operationally and rigidly historical. Not AT ALL what you would expect. Research was carried out using actual German ( and where possible real captured Soviet) documents as well as some insights from Glantz. IOW this is "it" as far as realism goes. As a dry run for CMMC I one of the researchers involved got copies of Krafft's actual AAR and deployments for Arnhem during Market Garden ( including hand-drawn fields of fire etc etc etc).
The Purist
29 Dec 04, 15:30
Excellent to hear, Fionn. Like I said, it is not that the information on the east front is not out there, its just that one must use caution in how it is interpreted. CMMC looks very intersting and I would not mind giving it a go, time permitting.
How active are the players? Right now, in the CMAK Joust I get about one file per day and immediately send one back out. That means we are doing less than one minute of action per day. Not a workable plan for a 'Meta Campaign'.
The Purist
29 Dec 04, 15:58
We will have a hex map of the area.
Will this be on-line?
there will be different terain types ie. clear, road, water, woods, village, urban, and anything else we come up with.
Why not use a map of the actual campaign, there must be dozens out there.
Movement on the strategic map will cost movement points and supply points.
Leg Infantry - 2 hexes per turn - 5 supply points per company
Mec/Armor/Motrized - 6 hexes per turn - 10 supply per company
Support - 4 hexes per turn - 8 supply points per company
Recon - 8 hexes per turn - 10 supply points per company.
What methodology is this based on? Do mechanized units really only consume twice the resources of a similar sized leg unit?
Supply will be traced...snip.
Hang on, Zwinship. No need to hammer it all out now. You first need a method for player to view a strategic map of some sort so they can plan, etc. Relying on an exchange of texted files won't work, I'm afriad. Supply rules, while absolutely necessary, need to be handled very, very carefully and most certainly cannot be converted into tanks, guns and men. Replacement would need to be 'provided' based on, at least, an abstract nod to history, or, if the time frame is small enough, on actual resources available.
Supply example- base it on reg't/brigade equivalents and units consume a supply point/block just to exist. Another point/block to fight for mech units.
Now your problem is how much supplies made it to the axis this turn (week/month).
Replacements - A replacement point should refit a unit, size optional. Up to the commander to expend a repl pt on a unit depleted 40% or wait until its 80%, if it survives.
Which leads to another point,...at what point does a unit 'shatter.' That is, it falls apart. No cadre to be rebuilt, no equipment to salvage. Do you implement a 'step' system? How are infantry losses recorded?
Game design such as this takes months/years to nail down. Are you sure you have the time/technical resources to proceed. I, for one, am not sure I have. Great fun to talk about but until I win a few million in a lottery and learn about web-sites,...just a flight of fancy. :)
I was trying to keep it as simple as posible in the supply that is going to be the hardest part of the game and can make or break it. As far as the numbers i did just pull them out of my ass.... based on my experience in the army suppling my infantry battalion vs the mech. artilary battalion i was with.
I understand if we want to do something like the CMMC it will be alot biger than what we can slap together here in a few days.
I would love to get in on the cmmc 2 game it would be amazing to be involved in!! I was trying to throw up something that would be much easyer to play and keep everything orgonized my thought was to put a map together and overlay a hex grid on it in photo shop than past "counters" on it for each side.
Is there a copy of the "rules" from cmmc out there we could adapt to a smaller campain game?
I did get the name right didn't I? "cmmc"
ER_Chaser
29 Dec 04, 17:04
LOL!
Well, way back when CMBO was new I was actually the originator and namer of the whole CMMC ( Combat Mission Meta Campaign) concept. So, I'm intimately familiar with the cmmc.
VERY complicated but about the most realistic thing out there IMO... The current CMMC2 is up and running ( albeit slowly). I was involved in that myself when it was starting and had a fair old part to play in the formulation of the overall Soviet operational plan ( as well as their firestrike plan... which I'm glad to say seems to have gone well so far). I had to drop out due to time constraints etc but I'm thinking of dipping a toe back in.
Purist,
The scenario is an operation in winter 1942 north of Stalingrad. VERY interesting operationally and rigidly historical. Not AT ALL what you would expect. Research was carried out using actual German ( and where possible real captured Soviet) documents as well as some insights from Glantz. IOW this is "it" as far as realism goes. As a dry run for CMMC I one of the researchers involved got copies of Krafft's actual AAR and deployments for Arnhem during Market Garden ( including hand-drawn fields of fire etc etc etc).
Fionn, then I must have emailed you about CMMC .... :) But is there any chance that I can join that game at any time? What happened to my emails ... no reply? :p ... :cry:
KG_AGCent
29 Dec 04, 17:44
Fionn,
For me, a campaign designed and run for the CM series would be just what the doctor ordered. The biggest problem I have with the QBs are they do not 'mean' anything. Fight like hell for 20 30 turns, 2-5000 points and what does it get you,... a win.
It would be great if we all took on the roll of, say, a battalion commander on a particular front during a particular campaign and fought a series of battles that actually effected the 'big picture'. The teams would have so many divisions from the historical OoB that would be divided among the player. These battalions would have a fixed at start 'base structure' with various 'add on' units based, again, on historical availability,...i.e. a Tiger unit could support battalion X while battalion Y had to make do with a few Marders.
Now that's would be wargaming.
We do these types of games all the time. Anywhere from 5000 - 10000 points with 2-4 players per side. It makes for great fun. Let me know if you want to join in the fun! :salute:
ER_Chaser
29 Dec 04, 17:50
We do these types of games all the time. Anywhere from 5000 - 10000 points with 2-4 players per side. It makes for great fun. Let me know if you want to join in the fun! :salute:
KG, can you be a bit more detailed on what you guys are doing? May I join? :)
We do these types of games all the time. Anywhere from 5000 - 10000 points with 2-4 players per side. It makes for great fun. Let me know if you want to join in the fun! :salute:
me to!! This is what I was trying to design just with a few more players earlier.
If you guys have the rules and such all done that saves me a lot of work!!
KG_AGCent
29 Dec 04, 18:56
KG, can you be a bit more detailed on what you guys are doing? May I join? :) I will have our CM division Commander contact you via this forum with more specifics. You may, however, peruse our outlines Here. (http://www.kampfgruppe-cm.com/kgmultiplayerrules.htm)
I believe we have about 3 of these games going at the present one of which is multi-mapped and phased, so its a fairly sophisicated system but nothing as in-depth or as cumbersome (imho) as CMMC. They are made to be less an exercise in logisitcs management as an exercise in teamwork and communication.
Wolfleader
29 Dec 04, 20:48
Fionn,
For me, a campaign designed and run for the CM series would be just what the doctor ordered. The biggest problem I have with the QBs are they do not 'mean' anything. Fight like hell for 20 30 turns, 2-5000 points and what does it get you,... a win.
It would be great if we all took on the roll of, say, a battalion commander on a particular front during a particular campaign and fought a series of battles that actually effected the 'big picture'. The teams would have so many divisions from the historical OoB that would be divided among the player. These battalions would have a fixed at start 'base structure' with various 'add on' units based, again, on historical availability,...i.e. a Tiger unit could support battalion X while battalion Y had to make do with a few Marders.
Now that's would be wargaming.
I'm actually considering doing something like this;
taking a map of Russia or North Africa, posting it on the wall near my PC and marking lines on it to indicate my army's progress as I play through a series of battles.
I would use the battle editor to create my own personal battalion that I would play throughout my campaign. I would then use the map generator to create a map.
I would then play the quick battle and load the map but not purchase anything significant (buy perhaps a lone sniper so the game doesn't complain about my not purchasing anything.) and import my personal force.
After playing the map, I would then mark my progress on the wall map, use the battle generator to adjust my forces depending on casualties they may have suffered and tweak their ammo loadout depending on how well I did in the last battle (few ammo if I did poorly or lost a battle) then use the map generator to create another new map to play in.
The next battle would depend on how I did in the previous one I played. For instance if I lost the previous battle then I would be playing on defence, if I won then I would be playing an assault, etc...
ER_Chaser
29 Dec 04, 23:10
I will have our CM division Commander contact you via this forum with more specifics. You may, however, peruse our outlines Here. (http://www.kampfgruppe-cm.com/kgmultiplayerrules.htm)
I believe we have about 3 of these games going at the present one of which is multi-mapped and phased, so its a fairly sophisicated system but nothing as in-depth or as cumbersome (imho) as CMMC. They are made to be less an exercise in logisitcs management as an exercise in teamwork and communication.
I just check.. .that limited communication pack sounds really cool :) ... THanks a lot! .. now I am waiting :)
Actually I'm in one of the multiplayer CMBB games AgCent is talking about. We're not running that one with Comm issues as we split the map into sections and divided up the units.
The best part is chatting with your teammates discussing tactics and "what do you think about..?" questions.
Fun stuff.
And as you're all finding out in trying to create a better "CM Campaign Mode" it's not just a simpe matter of saying "lets do it" and dividing up the divisions. There are a million and one little time consuming issues that someone has to work out even before you get to making decent maps (random maps are no go's in this situation) that make sence and selecting units. Coordinating everything that has been discussed above and keeping track of it is a big headache, especially when you run it open to the public.
As for other CM "type" campaigns being developed :hush:
ER_Chaser
29 Dec 04, 23:16
Actually I'm in one of the multiplayer CMBB games AgCent is talking about. We're not running that one with Comm issues as we split the map into sections and divided up the units.
The best part is chatting with your teammates discussing tactics and "what do you think about..?" questions.
Fun stuff.
I thought the best part was to have a chance to have your teammates court-martialed :D ... :devil:
Tough to do that when "your" section is the one being overran by the enemy! :)
ER_Chaser
29 Dec 04, 23:54
Tough to do that when "your" section is the one being overran by the enemy! :)
Nah.. that is exactly because *MY* teammates(!!) did not cover me, they failed! :OHNO:
KG_AGCent
30 Dec 04, 13:27
I just check.. .that limited communication pack sounds really cool :) ... THanks a lot! .. now I am waiting :) As soon as another game kicks off (should be soon, as Cloghaun is finishing a major operation set in the Korsun Pocket) Anyone who posts on this thread as interested will be contacted to play.
So far ER_Chaser, Zwinship and I am assuming Palantir will want to play another. Anyone else, please speak up.
ER_Chaser
30 Dec 04, 13:27
thx a lot, boss ;)
Is there a copy of the "rules" from cmmc out there we could adapt to a smaller campain game? I did get the name right didn't I? "cmmc"
Aye, CMMC is correct. I would suggest contacting them and requesting the rules. My opinion is that you will find their rules far too complex to redux for your idea and would be better off creating afresh. Just their engineering rules manual is over 50 pages last I looked.
ER_Chaser,
Nope, you didn't email me. It wouldn't have been ethical to have a part in the GMing of it if I played a part on the Soviet side.. I'd advise you to re-email them or post on their public forum and I'm sure you'll get a response. I'm sure the GMs are snowed under email most days.
Be warned though, CMMC is VERY rule-bound and quite cumbersome. I know I quit reading some of the manuals when I felt they were just needlessly over-complicating things. I think that the sort of thing KG_AGCent is talking about is overly simplistic and that CMMC has become overly complex. I think that some intermediate campaign would be quite succesful. I don't have the time to create and run such a thing though so that's just pontification.
ER_Chaser
30 Dec 04, 17:09
Thanks, Fionn for the insights :)
Hmm... I might give it another try though. I will bear your warnings in mind. (I am a lazy guy, ya know.... :D)
KG_AGCent
30 Dec 04, 17:44
Aye, CMMC is correct. I would suggest contacting them and requesting the rules. My opinion is that you will find their rules far too complex to redux for your idea and would be better off creating afresh. Just their engineering rules manual is over 50 pages last I looked.
ER_Chaser,
Nope, you didn't email me. It wouldn't have been ethical to have a part in the GMing of it if I played a part on the Soviet side.. I'd advise you to re-email them or post on their public forum and I'm sure you'll get a response. I'm sure the GMs are snowed under email most days.
Be warned though, CMMC is VERY rule-bound and quite cumbersome. I know I quit reading some of the manuals when I felt they were just needlessly over-complicating things. I think that the sort of thing KG_AGCent is talking about is overly simplistic and that CMMC has become overly complex. I think that some intermediate campaign would be quite succesful. I don't have the time to create and run such a thing though so that's just pontification. I agree with Fionn in that what our published rules are describing is a game that is more simplistic than what has been bantied about here.
We are currently beta testing a more complex system that will involve multi-map settings, a strategic map, movement rules etc. And so far it looks promising, but it is still in the Beta phase.
Another option is RobO's campaign tool. It is available here:
http://www.roqc.cdgroup.org/
It is a fun spreadsheet that will take you on a campaigning adventure taking into account location, date, season, general front stances, etc. It could be played Multi-player with a little work but would be abstract in its unfolding.
ER_Chaser
30 Dec 04, 17:55
Very COOL, KG :) Thumbs up, man!
ER_Chaser
30 Dec 04, 18:22
LOL ... I figured that I might just send emails to the personal addresses, that is why I never got any replies.
Now I just submit an "application" (GOD, one needs to !apply!! for playing a game!! :D ... ) ... and made myself a russian name: Yuri Ivan Popov ... how does that sound, folks? LOL
Double Deuce
30 Dec 04, 23:52
Hi all. I am the Steel Panthers Section Leader here at WFHQ. I am currently running both a SPWAWH2H and SPMBT Multiplayer Campaign along the lines of what you are discussing here.
Several months ago I joined another group as a player that was setting up a Multiplayer Campaign using CMAK in North Africa. After a slow start the creator finally pulled the plug and asked if anyone would like to take over. Seeing as how I hated to see all his work go to waste AND since I have some experience running these things I volunteered taking his original idea and redesigning it along the format of my SP Campaigns.
Now, due to RL issues and the demands of running the other 2 campaigns I am struggling to keep this CMAK Campaign going.
All the foundation is there (Maps, Rules, Secure Commuication Forums, etc) and we have actually started the 1st Operational/Campaign turn. If one of you here in the WHQ CM crowd would like to pick it up and run with it I would be more then happy to help with the transition and help support it in any way. I just haven't the time to run the whole show by myself right now without proceeding at a smnails pace.
More can be found on my original Combat Campaign website here "Combat Mission Afrika Korps : The Fox Arrives" (http://www.combat-campaigns.com/cmaktfa/)
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.