CS Game Scale - Manual Style

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Game scale etc certain designers have tried to compress this idea into large scale battles.This seems to work fine if you dont get into the has to be 6 minutes etc timescale.If the designers worked on that most large games would be 500/1000 turns long.The game can be tweaked for all sorts of battles if we dont go down the it must be 6 min's per turn etc.We have to comprimise with what Talonsoft had in mind and what is now possible with good designers who can bring out the best in the game.IE all the new units etc etc.If we stuck by the origonal Talonsoft data we would be back at EF2.No offence Ed just my thoughts on the game.

No offense taken John.
I honesty think that the lack of respect for the game's scale is what brought about Extreme Assault and Variable Visibility, as well as the air bases, naval units, and some of the engineer capabilites that are completely out of "scale".

Here is something from the game folders. If you hit the link to "Help" and then "Game Parameters" you will find:

Parameter Data

Minutes per Turn: 6 Meters per Hex: 250

Maximum Units per Hex: 6 Maximum Strength Points per Hex:24
Maximum Strength Points per Road: 12 (more than this number of SPs in the hex negates any road/railroad/path in the hex)

Minimum Non-Wreck Strength Points per Hex that Block LOS: 13
Minimum Wreck Strength Points per Hex that Block LOS: 6

COMBAT RESULTS TABLE

A B C D E F G
1 6 0 0 0 0 0
1 5 0 0 0 0 5
1 4 0 0 0 5 5
1 3 0 0 0 5 10
1 2 0 0 5 10 10
2 3 0 0 5 10 20
1 1 0 0 10 15 20
3 2 0 0 10 20 25
2 1 0 0 15 25 25
3 1 0 5 15 25 30
4 1 0 10 20 30 30
5 1 5 15 20 35 20
10 1 10 25 25 25 15
15 1 35 25 25 10 5
20 1 60 25 15 0 0
25 1 75 25 0 0 0
30 1 90 10 0 0 0

Column A: net attack strength*
Column B: net defense strength*
Column C: % chance of inflicting a loss of 3 SPs
Column D: % chance of inflicting a loss of 2 SPs
Column E: % chance of inflicting a loss of 1 SP
Column F: % chance of causing Disruption
Column G: % chance of causing a Morale Check

When a unit attacks, the program actually conducts a number of attacks equal to the unit's SPs, then takes each individual result and determines the net result vs. the defender.


* Attack-vs.-defense strengths between those listed above are calculated individually by the program on a pro-rated basis, based on the result probabilities of the two CRT lines the attack falls between. For example, a net attack strength of 11 vs. a net defense strength of 4 has slightly lower result probabilities than an attack of 3 vs. a defense of 1, but higher probabilities than an attack of 2 vs. a defense of 1.

TERRAIN COMBAT MODIFIERS
The amount of the otherwise-applicable attack strength that is allowed to 'hit' atarget occupying such terrain. If two or more apply, they all have an effect; e.g.,a unit attacking a target in a forest hex behind a hedge would use .72 (.8 x .9) or72% of its 'normal' attack strength.

<snipped the rest of Parameter content to not bore members with the numbers. They can access the help menu when playing a scenario?>

_________________________________

The above is how the game defines itself.
All the numbers, in the Parameters area, have meaning?
They are based on the established game scale.
This scale was losely set to the original PanzerBlitz and PanzerLeader Avalon Hill board game.

If you look at Squad Battles, by Tiller, the scale is set on 5 minutes per turn and 40 meters per hex. That scale is battle done by squads which would be 2 strength points of infantry and one tank strength point in CS?
The size of the hex in CS is roughly six times the hex in Squad Battles. So, my previous mentioned thought would be for CS as six times that of Squad Battles, thus my 20 to 30 minutes per turn.

If designers want to make Operation level scenarios the next set above CS in scale would be Operational Campaigns by John Tiller?
Though, they can be modeled using the CS scenario editor, the "over a scale of time" designer should use OpC as their game platform.

Can it be done in CS? Yes. Does it work as an Operation Model? No. Not if game parameters have meaning.
Can a game designed for Operational combat work in CS? Yes. Does it model a battle in the game Parameters? No. It is an abstract of what CS was intended.
I now can see why I have difficulty with most Huib, and some of the the von Earlmann and Don Fox designs. A lot of players liked them and I just scratched my head over them.

I think we should look to the future within the game's scale.
All scenarios should be considered within the games parameters. And, no, I do not agree that we would be back to "EF2". Hell, what's wrong with EFII? :chin:

Heck! There are plenty of battles that can be modeled within the scale that would be most fun and balanced PBEM. We also will not be confused by the mish mash of garbage add ons, like extreme assault and variable visibility, etc. to CS that make it less CS and more "some other game"?

I've often heard new players say that they loved the board game Squad Leader and wanted to make scenarios that model Squad Leader scenarios. Fine by me. They can put single strength point armor and 2 strength point infantry on a map and have at it.
If they do not remember the scale they have to stretch their scenario theme? They would be better served to buy Squad Battles and design away.
Just my thoughts on the subject.

As I said, everyone is free to make a scenario as they want, within what can be made? I hesitate to have the developers/new Matrix team change the game's scale to satisfy the few that want a different game. That is all. :)



RR