Jump to content

TGIF: scenario list, discussion, and house rules


Volcano

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators
3 hours ago, Bond_Villian said:

How did Shlongberger go? I thought all my scenarios went in the bin when i stopped showing up ;)

 

It was fun. Just FYI, if you don't mind...

 

I made a few *tiny* experimental changes for next time we play it, based on feedback, for a "The Road to Chateau Schlongberger_FMU_4379x" version (I'm keeping the original of course). I figured you wouldn't mind (I think they are changes you might have made over time from additional feedback that I have collected).

 

  • Added a very minor 60 (defender)/40 (attacker) points for losses. This way the score can still turn out to be 500/500 when C is not taken, but if attacker does very well or very poorly then it would be just enough points to give a minor defeat/minor victory. Score different (60/40) is so that attacker can take more losses than defender. Losses in this was 26 (defender) to 22 (attacker), so that puts it right in line (means that defender's losses will be worth more points than attacker's losses) and was designed to where it should be roughly 500/500 score with that result.
  • Added APS to the CO tanks, so they are more likely to get in on the action. 
  • Added 10 more minutes.

It's perfect now, and I put my name in the briefing as the creator. 😛

Kidding, but it's only intended as an experiment to see if it fine tunes the fun now that we have played it many times. If it isn't good then I will change it back to the original version. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And talking about this week's mission, there is some small bug with the messages.

At first I thought I had read it wrong, but no, on the AAR you can see the message:

 

[21:34] Great leader, your pilots have been eliminated. Make the invaders pay for their crimes!

But the pilots arrived safely to the airbase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Thanks all for playing the Island Invasion 02. I have made quite a few small improvements for next time. 

  • Fixed the Spec Ops UAV issue CavGunner found
  • Added a message to remind Red to wait for the helicopters to refuel... so what happened this time doesn't happen again. 🤣
  • Added an ECW attack for Blue's SIGINT unit to execute, disabling Red's radios for 25 min (this can help them in their initial landings, or save it for later). Lot's of control logic is associated with that.
  • Added a Valkyries... uh, theme for TF Valkries, courtesy of JC's suggestion. 😄
  • Made 50% of the ASLAV-PCs have Lemur .50 cal instead of AGL, which is I think a suggestion I absorbed subliminally. 
  • Fixed Red's trigger ownership problem, where our triggers were changing ownership throughout the scenario. 
  • Made a change so that Red doesn't get all their tanks/IFVs unless/until both Port and Airfield is lost, and they still hold the compound, to make things more interesting (they get 6x tanks and 4x IFVs first, then their remaining 3x tanks and 2x IFVs later).
  • Some other small improvements.

That should mix things up a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
18 minutes ago, Colebrook said:

And talking about this week's mission, there is some small bug with the messages.

At first I thought I had read it wrong, but no, on the AAR you can see the message:

 

[21:34] Great leader, your pilots have been eliminated. Make the invaders pay for their crimes!

But the pilots arrived safely to the airbase.

 

Ah OK, I was wondering why you mentioned they were destroyed. I'll fix that too.

 

Edit:

OK, I think that is fixed now too. It's a little tricky, but it seems like it was checking the loss of the pilots the moment the pilots were spawned, so I delayed the check for about 3 minutes after spawn and let's see if that fixes it next time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2023 at 12:26 PM, Volcano said:

 

It was fun. Just FYI, if you don't mind...

 

I made a few *tiny* experimental changes for next time we play it, based on feedback, for a "The Road to Chateau Schlongberger_FMU_4379x" version (I'm keeping the original of course). I figured you wouldn't mind (I think they are changes you might have made over time from additional feedback that I have collected).

 

  • Added a very minor 60 (defender)/40 (attacker) points for losses. This way the score can still turn out to be 500/500 when C is not taken, but if attacker does very well or very poorly then it would be just enough points to give a minor defeat/minor victory. Score different (60/40) is so that attacker can take more losses than defender. Losses in this was 26 (defender) to 22 (attacker), so that puts it right in line (means that defender's losses will be worth more points than attacker's losses) and was designed to where it should be roughly 500/500 score with that result.
  • Added APS to the CO tanks, so they are more likely to get in on the action. 
  • Added 10 more minutes.

It's perfect now, and I put my name in the briefing as the creator. 😛

Kidding, but it's only intended as an experiment to see if it fine tunes the fun now that we have played it many times. If it isn't good then I will change it back to the original version. 

Absolutely cool with you making any changes you like to any of the TGIF sce's ive thrown in the ring. Schlogberger is a particularly convoluted scenario to edit as i recall, so thanks for taking the time to go into it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
7 hours ago, Volcano said:

Also, just FYI, plan is to start the next mini-campaign on either 19 JAN or 26 JAN. Let's see how it goes (still working out the details of how it will work, and so on). 

 

I guess there will be a dedicated thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On 1/5/2024 at 4:48 AM, Gibsonm said:

 

I guess there will be a dedicated thread?

 

Just noticed your question here. Hmm, maybe, actually that isn't a bad idea if it turns out the way I intended (with it being played in parts over the year - but that would be only if people had fun with it).  So, let's see...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
32 minutes ago, Volcano said:

 

Just noticed your question here. Hmm, maybe, actually that isn't a bad idea if it turns out the way I intended (with it being played in parts over the year - but that would be only if people had fun with it).  So, let's see...

 

OK, I created a thread here:

 

 

Let's see what happens. Flop or success, who knows - it's all part of the fun. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

26 JAN 2024:

 

Future Wars-Viper-2024-1A-4379a

(This is scenario 1 of 5 of the campaign mentioned before)

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

  • Draft? No (unless the teams are not balanced)
  • Random CO selection? No
  • Minimum # players: 8
     

NOTES:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
7 hours ago, Bond_Villian said:

I understand there is an hour allocated for planning (not unusual), is the scenario itself time limited/ anticipated? I ask because It's Saturday here and I have an 🇦🇺 Day thing to get to later, just trying to plan my day.

 

Cheers

Right, as mentioned in the game (just answering here in case anyone else is wondering)...

About 45 min for planning, and ~ 120 minutes for the scenario (+/- 6 min).

 

No problem, just play when you can and and if you can't make it some games that is OK. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

02 FEB 2024:

 

Future Wars-Viper-2024-2A-4379x

(This scenario 2 of 5, round 1 (of potentially 4), of the ongoing campaign; anyone may join in progress)

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

  • Draft? No (unless the teams are not balanced, or new players take part)
  • Random CO selection? No
  • Minimum # players: 8
     

NOTES:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

09 FEB 2024:

 

Future Wars-Viper-2024-3A-4379x

(This scenario 3 of 5, round 1 (of potentially 4), of the ongoing campaign; anyone may join in progress)

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

  • Draft? No (unless the teams are not balanced, or new players take part)
  • Random CO selection? No
  • Minimum # players: 8
     

NOTES:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Moderators

15 FEB 2024:

 

Future Wars-Viper-2024-4A-4379x

(This scenario 4 of 5, round 1 (of potentially 4), of the ongoing campaign; anyone may join in progress)

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

  • Draft? No (unless the teams are not balanced, or new players take part)
  • Random CO selection? No
  • Minimum # players: 8
     

NOTES:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...