Scenario Design

[TheBigRedOne]

One of the things that I've noticed about the last several years in the SB community is the huge explosion of graphics mods, which are sorely needed and appreciated, but also the complete dearth of individuals trying their hand at crafting new scenarios. There's a group of folks, mostly guys who work with the Tiller design team, that have been active, but even they've slowed down in the last few years. Real life being what it is. While looking over TFE4 for potential edits, I re-visited this post written by Frank "Echo 4" Harmon, discussing design tips and tricks. I thought I'd throw it out here for discussion. It was written quite a long while ago, so it may come across as a bit dated, but there is still some things that a potential designer can ponder if he opts to try his hand at crafting scenarios...

---
Scenario Design Tips and Site Troubleshooting

This first part of this page is a compilation of numerous e-mails that have been sent back and forth between the members of this crew relating to how one may navigate around certain issues when designing SB scenarios. It is by no means a complete “handbook” to scenarios creation, but it does cover a few things that current and potential SB designers seemed to get stumped on. It also offers alternatives to situations that may not be covered by the rules and has been posted here to assist all scenario designers out there who may find themselves staring at a brick wall when trying to figure out just how to make something happen.

To those few, this should help you cover a few gray areas with the Squad Battles games and these methods have all been used to full effect by the designers of this crew. We hope they will be of service to you as well.


Ammunition resupply

The topic of ammo resupply is brought up rather frequently by current and potential SB designers who have a flair for larger squad battles scenarios. This issue seems problematic due to the fact that efficiency degrades to a point that full strength squads are unable to inflict damage upon the enemy due to low weapons status after a few turns of heavy combat. More so problematic is; although units do not run out of ammunition in SB, resupplying them does not happen either…until now.

The solution is simple. Add extra weapons to your OOB and bring them on as reinforcements. How you manage to get these weapons to your troops, rearming before you get waylaid and keeping them out of enemy hands is half the battle. As far as your old weapons are concerned…..toss them aside, I doubt the enemy will want to pick up MG42 LMG’s at 25% efficiency.

Making elite units as effective as they should be

Add more leaders.

I know the USMC intimately, so I’ll have to use the Corps for my example.The way to make elite units seem more elite with the existing rules is to add a wealth of leaders for very experienced units. It will not create a modifier for fire per say…but it will keep them at high levels of effectiveness by having them recover from states of disruption, being pinned and demoralized which in turn will do the same thing to an extent. Honestly, probably not as much as many would enjoy, but a bit none the less.

For instance a marine rifle platoon has at least 4 men capable of leading the platoon. The Plt. Commander (2nd or 1st Lt.), the Platoon Sgt. (SSgt.), the Platoon Guide (Most Senior Buck Sgt.) and then the first Squad Leader (Cpl.). This is why marines historically tended to stay effective while taking high casualties. What are these men doing if the Plt. Commander is not dead? Leading in other aspects.

Offering tactical alternatives

Many of the scenarios are set up so that there are few tactical choices to be made. There are not enough turns to maneuver very far, especially if there are any hills to be climbed. -Anonymous SB Designer

Adding more turns and slowly bringing on reinforcements will give that chance to feel out the enemy defenses. The only units that should be on the map (or in close proximity to the enemy) at the beginning of any maneuver type-meeting engagement battle should be recon units if it is your desire to allow multiple tactical approaches to victory. If you feel that you still do no have enough time to feel out the enemy defenses, bring your reinforcements on slower or add more turns, or both.

Making the map larger obviously allows more room for maneuver, slower movement to contact and also offers more tactical alternatives via terrain options. Also try to avoid putting recon units in prime positions at the beginning of a scenario. Let the player choose where he puts his recon. This is often the difference between victory and defeat.

Morale Issues

Making the Germans an actual threat in Eagles Strike

Due to an advantage in firepower (M1 Garands vs. Karabiner 98k’s) and manpower (9 man squads vs. 12 man squads) the Germans have a hell of a time with the Yankees in Eagles Strike as they also did historically. However, it seems a little more so in SB than it was in reality.

This can be remedied somewhat by delegating proper morale to American and German units.

I don’t hate the US Army, so don’t get that impression. The Army is just huge and it has a lot of variation. Now add the facts that they drafted indiscriminately, most units that landed at Normandy had not yet seen action, entirely new divisions were formed that had no lineage or history to support a feeling of ’elan and finally; boot camp was over by the time you got there.

The only US Army units in the ETO-WWII that should be given A morale are select companies from nostalgically tough airborne units like 2/501 PIR/101st Airborne Div, Rangers and a few others. Even these units should have a smattering of B’s and an occasional C (to simulate replacements).

The majority of US Paras should be B (40%) C (50%) D (10%) morale.

Select Armored Inf. Bn’s the same as Regular Paras (51st AIB, 4th Armd. Div for example)

The average “Citizen Soldier” should have D morale with a smattering of E’s.

Units that had been transferred from Italy, should have around C-D with their “creme de la creme” at B.

This is due to the fact that many US units were virgin to combat and units that established a reputation as reliable were used time and time again. Meanwhile other units may have seen a only a few weeks of action by wars end. Also one must consider how much action their German counter parts had seen in comparison to be called the same and how they would balance in confrontation with each other.

Speaking of I would rate Germans combating Americans as the following:

Select Fallschrimjager, fanatical Waffen SS (LSSAH, DR, HJ) and Elite Heer – A.

Other Waffen SS and Veteran Heer at B.

Regular FJ, experienced Luftwaffe Field Div and veteran Volksgrenadier at C.

Regular Volksgrenadier and the remainder at D.

Volkssturm should be E – F.

This may get Yankees pounding their chests saying “no way buddy-boy” but this is pretty much along the lines of reality if you take the red, white and blue tint from the picture and it also makes the game a bit more playable. Also to maintain playability there should not be as much variation as with German units as US forces in morale (reflecting German discipline) and the Wehrmacht should have at least 2 leaders per platoon.

Korea and Vietnam – Bogies and Friendlies

NVA_& Chinese

These people were fanatics. They should have A-B morale on average. Green units at C and no lower than that. Forget training lowering their morale..these people didn’t need it…they had something better…sheer determination and an extreme disregard for personal safety.

Sorry people, but Charlie (Viet Cong) was not the bush slithering superman Hollywood has portrayed him as being. Sure he knew the land and could be effective, but when the crap got thick, Victor Charles got the hell out of Dodge and headed back to his hooch. VC should stay at C-D.

I wrote a complete article on US Army and Marines in Vietnam that is available from me at request.

US Army in Korea

Again, I don’t have issues with the US Army, but the US 8th Army in the opening days of Korea was not one of the brighter moments in US Military History. The Army continued to perform average at absolute best until 1951 when it miraculously did a 180 degree turn. I would give regular US Army a morale rating of D for the average in 1950. After 1951, I would give them the standard C-B. Rangers and select Para’s should remain at A-B-C for the duration of the war.

US Marines in Korea

The 1st Marine Division is traditionally the most experienced and most decorated unit in the USMC. It is also one of the most decorated units in the American Armed Forces. This was the only Marine Division in the entirety of the Korean War. This is probably due to the fact that over 50% of all NCO’s and Officers were combat veterans from WWII. The Chosin Campaign during the winter of 50′ says it all. A (50%) B (40%) C (10%).

Eastern Front Armor Issues

Making Russian Armor fight the way it did historically vs. German armor can be a challenge. Decrease the effectiveness of Russian Armor to around 70% from the start and give them C morale at the absolute highest. This reflects below average accuracy and poor tactical doctrine. It also allows you to put a gaggle of Red tanks in a scenario vs. German armor crews with high morale.

Alternate Scoring Conditions

This method does away with the traditional points method. Set up a series of objectives that are obtainable and assign them a point value of 1. Next, decide which objectives should be taken to obtain certain levels of victory. For example I make a scenario with the Waffen SS as the first side and the RKKA hold 3 Objectives. Next I decide that the following should dictate victory instead of the traditional points method.

Waffen SS takes 3 Objectives = Major Victory

Waffen SS takes 2 Objectives = Minor Victory

Waffen SS takes 1 Objective = Draw

Waffen SS takes 0 Objectives = Minor Defeat

Waffen SS takes 0 Objectives and suffers over 100 points in losses = Major Defeat

This method takes into consideration point loss only to an extent and only if the Waffen SS suffers a defeat. It truly makes no sense with units such as the WfSS that were fanatical in their approach and traditionally took high casualties to obtain all or the majority of their tactical objectives and still suffer a defeat due to casualties.

This method also does away with 10 extra playtests to tweak the points to their proper levels.

This should help you cover a few gray areas with the Squad Battles games and these methods have all been used to full effect by the designers of this crew. We all hope they will be of service to you.

[Stejones82]

I do have an interest in designing some scenarios. But strangely, having played SqB pretty heavily for 18 months now, I still feel I need more experience in the game to do so effectively.

1. What about a "tournament" sponsored by the Blitz in scenario design? Perhaps give a 2-3 page written description of a particular encounter including suggested OOB and submaps and encourage novice scenario designers to give a go. Results judged by either a panel of experts or by the people of the forum.

2. I know I would like this one - a tutorial in scenario design. One designer begins a thread or email tree showing his approach and design steps. For example: "I am Romeo Poppa and I am going to build a scenario in Red Victory based upon a real/hypothetical engagement at _____ on 12 Sep, 1943. First thing I do is: xxxx" and so on allowing budding designers to get their feet wet under the tutelage of an experienced hand.

3. See if an experienced designer would be willing to serve as mentor for a novice designer. That way I could send partial efforts and ask questions, receive tips,etc.

4. Is there a listing of good source work for the building of historical scenarios? For instance, I would like to build some scenarios for Eagles Strike. Are there 3 or 4 good books/web sites that would give OOB info, terrain, tactics and other things of interest to a designer?

Cheers!

[Jeff Conner]

Steve

I'd be happy to help you out. Let me know what you think you want to cover in your scenario and if I have any material on that battle, I will share it with you. Also remember that you are limited by the maps that come with the game. Look over the full data maps (the ones with large file sizes) and see if there is something that resembles what you want to recreate (you can use the submap editor to view the maps). Once you have a topic and a map, you need an OOB. There are several canned ones included in the game. It's much easier to use of these and modify it than it is to build one from scratch. You will need to match the size of your OOB with the size of the map. Too many units on a small map leaves little room for maneuver. Send me an email with any questions and I'll try to help you out.

Jeff

[TheBigRedOne]

I do have an interest in designing some scenarios. But strangely, having played SqB pretty heavily for 18 months now, I still feel I need more experience in the game to do so effectively.
2. I know I would like this one - a tutorial in scenario design. One designer begins a thread or email tree showing his approach and design steps. For example: "I am Romeo Poppa and I am going to build a scenario in Red Victory based upon a real/hypothetical engagement at _____ on 12 Sep, 1943. First thing I do is: xxxx" and so on allowing budding designers to get their feet wet under the tutelage of an experienced hand.

Mike Cox put this out with Dien Bien Phu. Take a look....

http://tfe4.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/...ch-dbp.pdf

---

Also, this was something I compiled a while ago and posted here:

====

A while ago I compiled some thoughts from three of HPS's main SB scenario designers. An edited version of this was released on JZtemple's Fan Site, but with the release of Dien Bien Phu, I can post the full version.

I posed the question regarding how these guys go about the design process. Obviously it could fill several volumes of text, but I just wanted to get a glimpse of how these guys go about their work.

For those of you purchasing DBP, you'll find a PDF file in the folder that describes how to design a scenario from scratch, written by Mike Cox, the designer for DBP. I have included this file as an attachment for those of you who might not fancy a fight in the muddy fields on Dien Bien Phu, but would still be interested in a step-by-step account of how to go about making a rudimentary scenario. Thanks to Mike and Rich Hamilton for allowing me to post this document.

Enjoy.

A
---
Mike Cox (SAW, DBP, variety of after-release scenarios)

I get inspiration from reading detailed accounts of the battles as well as other games. Whenever I read I have Post It's handy to flag passages with scenario material. Sometimes seeing a scenario for another game leads to further research on a particular fight. The main thing is that the fight has to be a contest and not a walkover. Is the turning point of the battle able to be modeled in SB?

The first question I ask - is there a suitable map available to use for a submap? (Or do I have to get one done?)

I tend to like shorter scenarios - 1 hour or so. Though if the action is 2 hours, then 2 hours it is. I tend to discount mopping up, but try to gather at what point the action turned.

I love gadgets. Mention of an obscure tank makes me want to work it in. (And I am still trying to get a Japanese tank or old FT-17 into a DBP scenario.)

For OOB's I try to build up standard ones then copy/paste them in. Once in the oob, I tweak them to meet the description. (DBP as an example - the oob's I inherited pretty much had AAT-52 for the French MG as standard issue. My reading has the them often using older equipment, so change those to Brownings or Vickers. For example.)

The other thing I like is a bit of randomness - say with reinforcements. Historically, the tanks saved the day by coming at 1345h. What if they were 10 minutes late? Early? Though I have not used it much I think the alt arrival hexes are a big boon.

Joao Lima (SCW, AoTR post-release)

- The process is quite straightforward, I usually do: idea-research-map-oob-build-test

- Ideas may come from the most amazing sources. In SCW ideas came from interviews, tv documentaries (amazingly on a British channel), books, websites... The tricky thing is not finding what sounds like an excellent idea, the trick is in actually move from the idea to completing enough research to provide an accurate and realistic scenario. The other issue is that sometimes things just do not fit. I had a couple ideas for SCW that would work brilliantly in ASL (because of the multi-hex, multi-level buildings) but when done in SB just did not work. Sometimes a great idea also needs to be slightly stretched when you realize that the research showed things not be quite as you thought, and then, presto, an hypothetical scenario is born...

- OOB's are a very mixed bag. For WW2, for example, you have a wealth of information easily available, however sometimes that information is just too high level yo allow you to transport it to SB. However , don't let the OOB constrict you too much, this where balance sometimes get's in, and even if historical , an OOB might be slightly tweaked to allow a proper balance. Where to find them is too big an answer, but usually specialized internet forums are a place to start. BUT, BIG LESSON, ALWAYS CROSS YOUR INFORMATION WITH ANOTHER RELIABLE SOURCE!!!

- Time for a scenario is highly variable, but I can put together the skeleton in a couple of days, preliminary tuning takes another couple of days, and then, to fine tune, who knows? ;-)

- I started to plan new scenarios focused on too big scenarios, with far too many units , and gigantic maps. It took me a while to understand that what's need is a map roughly the size of my screen , and units that are the size of a reinforced company. For variety a couple of tiny and a couple of big ones.
But the basic principle is a balance between historical and fun. It's a game after all, if you fail to captivate the interest of the players, then it does not matter how historical your scenarios are, nobody will play them.

Ozgur Budak (RV, SAW, WW, A@W, many post-release scenarios)

One thing I find useful is writing down the outline of the planned scenario. A small text containing date, hour, weather, OOBs (co/btn/div/corps) for both sides, info on the topography (if possible copying the map), a summary of the action including reinforcements and key events. I frequently come back to this outline text during the design process. The text provides the framework of the scenario with all needed and accesible data so I dont get lost. Best time for writing down such a text is after reading the various sources and deciding what to focus. Sometimes I am creating several of those texts so I dont get confused about the planned scenarios that awaits. Planning and classifying is especially important when you have to design dozens of scenarios.

[Stejones82]

Ahh - good stuff! Thanks!

[Jeff Conner]

I tend to follow Mike's plan. I get ideas for what I think would make a good scenario while reading. I like to try and stretch the engine a bit and see what I can create with the tools I have. Hence there are things like Cargo guns and Obstacle vehicles. I think most people work in pretty much the same order, idea, research, map, OOB, scenario. You could switch the OOB and map around, but there are sometimes constraints placed on the scenario by what maps are available and you may have wasted a lot of time as the scenario you thought was going to be a company is now going to be a platoon because only a small portion of the map will work.

I tend to favor playability over history. If I think a change from the historical will make a better scenario, I'll do it. The vast majority of people will never know anyway. This is one of the reasons that I like making hypothetical scenarios. Then you don't have to worry about historical details as you can make it up as you go. And there is a lack of good historical information on many things and as Joao pointed out, when there is, they often don't match.

If anyone is interested in giving scenario design a try, I am more than willing to help. Like many things in life, once you do it a time or two, it becomes pretty easy.

Jeff