Time to rate my 5 scenarios - feedback

SlySniper

FGM 2nd Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
1,106
Location
KENTUCKY
OK, place the scenario's from your favorite to least favorite and give it a simple rating 1-10 with 10 being the best

the scenarios are
Scenario 1 (US to recover M1 and recapture land overlooking lake)
Scenario 2 (Dessert meeting engagement)
Scenario 3 (US convoy with enemy Gold)
Scenario 4 (US Prisoner rescue)
Scenario 5 (Russian vs Russian (ukraine))


Example of a report

5 - Rating (10)
4 - (9)
1 & 3 tied - (8)
2 (6)

Also any suggestions for a battle for the next Tournament is welcomed.
A few of these were created and motivated by comments you had from the last tournament,
 

Shady Side

FGM Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Sep 26, 2021
Messages
180
Reaction score
106
Age
44
Location
kentucky
Ok I wanna do this just a bit different than u ask for though but I think it will make sense
of the 5 battles my favorites were
1-battle number 1... I liked the ideal of the battle the map everything.. plus I got caught of guard by an attack I did not expect which is something a lot of map and missions rule out.
2-battle number 4... Like the prisoner breakout and having to keep the escape route open..less happy about mine placement :) but thought the battle was fun
3- battle number 5... it was a little hard on my machine... i was basically watching a slide show at different points but it was a good map to set a defense up on with a good sized force coming at u.... interested in hearing how other guys attacked it
4- battle 2 the desert meeting engagement cant put my finger on it but something about the stair step map .. just did not suit my eye...
5- battle 3 the gold rush.... I have not took a closer look at it yet and it was al long time ago when I played it but I had the Soviets in it but i had the feeling at the time the briefing told me to rush but almost my whole force blew up barely outside my setup zone... which was behind a tree line i was only moving up to cover the scouting units... but almost everything i had blew up before even reachings what I had intended to be their overwatch positions and the scouts did not even make it out of the treeline.. I know scouting is important but it felt in a way like an unfair map.... after that I kept up what fire fight I could til my reinforcements arrived but that time I sensed they had pulled back.. maybe low on ammo? maybe preparing to escort gold trucks.. either way I had some pretty strong units for reinforcements and figuring I had nothing to lose (battle already seemed lost) I would just charge forward with everybody and see what happened.... Well I broke thru pretty much right away... it was bloody but i still had more than enough to shoot some trucks up with ....but all the trucks had exited already ... so if i broke thru with my reinforcment all the way to the back of the map in less than five minutes of reinforcements getting there.... than what was point of getting them? so imho they where either late... or unnecessary....... I know some players won as soviets so I would love to know how those played out

That is my list of favorite to least fav.. now instead of rating them against each other I will rate them each on a 1 to 10 scale
battle 1 gets an 8... liked almost everything about it
battle 2 gets a 5..... sorry dude just did not like the map
battle 3 gets a 5 ... replaying it from US side may improve that score greatly.... So how bout it Sly want to take Russia in it and show me where I went wrong?
battle 4 gets 8.... u know why it is not higher but it was a fun one
battle 5 gets a 7.... that score would probably improve if my machine handled it better

Overall I thought they were good and well thought out battles.... the desert one is only low score I am solid in my opinion of as I said the 5 u got on battle 3 may just be colored by a combo of a really good defensive set up and maybe a lack of understanding the briefing and or me attacking it dumb....
so again if u want to play it with me maybe my mind will change but either way thanks for organizing and running this for us ... it was fun
 
Last edited:

Gorst

FGM Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
110
Reaction score
82
Age
51
Location
Wyoming, USA
Scenario Three: 9​
Scenario Four: 8​
Scenario Five: 7​
Scenario Two: 6​
Scenario One: Can't rate since I was not in the first round.​
 

Artkin

FGM Colour Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Jul 18, 2021
Messages
319
Reaction score
158
Location
East
scen 1: As said good idea, but I was a little disappointed to have my teams have the tank in sight when we started. This cost me 1 turn of movement, which was precious time. Because of that my opponent secured the tank without much contest.... however I understand this was probably for the better because the M1 made that scenario. I was fully prepared for a search. The ambiguity of the front lines was good, but I was really confused to where my opponent would be sending their reinforcements. Half the game my guns were pointing 90* the wrong direction. Otherwise, the map was great (chopped down and edited master map), and the force selection was great. I was really disappointed how my armor performed in this game. Never got a spot past 1km despite waiting in good ambush positions. The idea was top notch, something like this deserves to be in more organized events. Balanced scenario if not slightly Soviet favored. I just wish we had to work more for it. 8/10.

scen 2: Perfect scenario, though maybe too perfect for this type of tournament. Forces were pretty even, but I was surprised to not see more AT-3 for the Soviets. I was also surprised to have two TOWs and like 3 Dragons, which proved to carry my game. I would have expected the Soviets to have more of this kit. I believe this was acknowledged. The Soviets had about 50% more troops than I thought they would. That made for a nice surprise when overconfidence got the best of me halfway through. 9/10

scen 3: Good scenario, but I think this one was limited by how simple CMCW maps could be. The Soviets had to rush into kill zones which must have been unpleasant. Also the defensible terrain was pretty simple. It was easy to predict where my opponent would be for this one, and vise versa. The TRP's were absurdly powerful in this one, since I was able to have 105mm artillery down in what? 3 minutes? That's hardcore. I loved the theme of this one, similar to scen 1. I feel like a larger map with more routes and possibilities for Soviet ambush sites would be a good alternative. It doesn't take too much planning to move 4 trucks at a time across a map, and I personally enjoy watching my convoy timing pay off. I am able to play full CMCW master maps turn based. They lag a bit during setup (Because of setup zones?) and in the editor, but on turn 1 the game runs smooth. I was disappointed when I lost my M48 and I lost a tremendous amount of points to my enemy. I didn't lose a single gold vehicle so I thought I could risk it a bit and use the M48 to do a little fighting. I was expecting to have a total victory, but after I lost the M48 my opponent had a much higher score than I did. WTF moment. 7/10


scen 4: Gotta admit, I stopped playing this one after like 20 minutes. OK so idea is 10/10. I was expecting a large prison where prisoners broke out of their cells after 5 minutes, acquired weapons, and then rampaged through a large prison. So when I saw the prison had a max of 2 stories I was really surprised. I knew when the prisoners spawn in that they would get gunned down from any position. They just barely escaped death, spawning right on top of my men and then gunning them down. Then everything I had in the prison exploded because it was so small, and everything was able to be suppressed quite easily. I moved some troops away from the prison, as by now I knew what to expect from this tournament. I could have moved all of my men, but I felt like that was lame, and gamey, and I just accepted my fate with this one. I wanted to catch the prisoners on their way out, but my first reinforcement of 3 BMP-2 fully loaded were killed after their first turn of movement. My opponent placed bradleys all over the map, and he had enough where he could cover every corner. There was no move that I would have been able to do to save my troops. Maybe not move them after I get them? And immediately dismount in the field 1.5km from the prison? I feel like this was pretty fucked. Reminds me of the opening of the Soviet campaign, and like 1/6 of the CMCW missions. Troops spawn in, get spawn raped, and you get to play with the pieces. Then I got my 2nd reinforcement of BMPs. They were in a good position this time. But again, bradleys were already prepositioned, in pretty much impossible positions to beat. I lost all 3 of my BMP's again after their first turn of movement. Lame. I understand that this probably wasn't intended from the scenario design. I don't play with M1 or bradleys in CMCW for this reason. Same thing for CMBS. This scenario could have easily been a 10/10 if a better map was chosen. There's already a prison map in CMBS that would work. If not, a larger building with a detailed interior would have been desired. I wanted to fight inside the prison after finding the escapees, and try to eliminate them there. A game of cat and mouse would have been great, since doing it indoors is not really something done much in CM. Troops can kill each other pretty quickly in buildings, but tone down the veterancy to green or even conscript while subsequently bumping fanatism to something like "extreme" and it will be a better experience. Great idea, disappointing delivery. 3/10

scen 5: I liked the scenario, it was a good idea comparing two different styles of soviet military thought. T-64 vs T-72. Bmp-1 vs bmp-2. Good stuff. The map offered many avenues of approach, some more daring than others. I like scenarios like this where there is a reward to risking it. I took the long way around and it still wound up paying off. That's good scenario design right there. You dont even have to add shit to the scenario, just give a basic, open toolbox for the player to use, and you will get a good game in return. This scenario had that. There were so many routes that the attacker could be flexible if they spent time looking at their options. I felt like a chess player swiping his rook across the map when my tanks finally made it through the forested trails. This was a powerful base of fire location for me.
I have to admit I was a little lost as the attacker until I got my first batch of reinforcements. As the attacker I had limited infantry, paired with limited armor support. So my rate of advance initially was at a bog's pace. If I lost a single squad or vehicle it was going to have a huge impact. The 5 brdms gave me troops that I could expend without losing significant combat power. After recieving these I was able to pull some moves with my troops. I was able to play a true soviet style attack; when my troops were bogged in the fighting, I sent another platoon further to flank. This whole map was a manuevering dream. Good stuff happens when it's unscripted and your name is on the line. The only thing I was let down by was the little island. My opponent had eyes on it from turn 1. I had expected this, but others might not have. 9/10

random notes: 30 minutes is pretty short for some scenarios, like #5. I kinda get it, but I dislike playing games where you have to recon by getting your troops blown up. I feel like 45 minutes is much better but probably a lot to ask for. There is an active group of players on this forum, and it could be done.
only 1 desert map unless its a cool one B)

Rating:
5 - (9)
2 - (9)
1 - (8)
3 - (7)
4 - (3)
 
Last edited:

Artkin

FGM Colour Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Jul 18, 2021
Messages
319
Reaction score
158
Location
East
if my machine handled it better
Your machine must be pretty dated then. CMCW runs like butter for me. It is the smoothest game, and it is able to run maps that I was never able to run before. Because your machine is so old (I assume by your slideshow performance) you could probably spend very little and get huge gains in performance. Like a new processor might be $40 on Ebay, but it will make your game way, way faster.
 

Shady Side

FGM Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Sep 26, 2021
Messages
180
Reaction score
106
Age
44
Location
kentucky
Your machine must be pretty dated then. CMCW runs like butter for me. It is the smoothest game, and it is able to run maps that I was never able to run before. Because your machine is so old (I assume by your slideshow performance) you could probably spend very little and get huge gains in performance. Like a new processor might be $40 on Ebay, but it will make your game way, way faster.
brand new last christmas HP... not a gaming computer but not cheap... the one i have it install on now is little older i never have got good performance out of that game and have had it on 3 machines that run all my other titles just fine
 

Artkin

FGM Colour Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Jul 18, 2021
Messages
319
Reaction score
158
Location
East
brand new last christmas HP... not a gaming computer but not cheap... the one i have it install on now is little older i never have got good performance out of that game and have had it on 3 machines that run all my other titles just fine
Do you know if you have a graphics card? Maybe your HP wasn't sent with one (Understandable for a home PC), so maybe your processor is doing both tasks at once: calculation and graphics.
 

A Canadian Cat

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
My ranked order - to break ties:
9 Scenario 4 (US Prisoner rescue) [So, many interesting decisions in this one. Best scenario so far]
8 Scenario 1 (US to recover M1 and recapture land overlooking lake) [Also quite different and lots or choices to make]
7 Scenario 5 (Russian vs Russian (ukraine)) [Slow start but fun ending. I'm not sure how typical that is]
7 Scenario 3 (US convoy with enemy Gold) [Challenging]
6 Scenario 2 (Dessert meeting engagement) [I didn't care for this one it was very bash head into head]
 

Aurelius

FGM Company Sergeant Major
FGM MEMBER
Joined
May 12, 2020
Messages
427
Reaction score
562
Age
30
Location
Ruma, Serbia
Scenario 1 - 8.
Scenario 2 - 9.
Scenario 3 - 6.
Scenario 4 - 3.
Scenario 5 - 2.

First two scenarios were some of the more epic ones I played. Third scenario was somewhat confusing, but still within Cold War limitations.

Then came scenarios 4 and 5. A small prelude before I write anything further on those two scenario. I waited around 2 months for scenario 4 to start. In that timeframe I forgot that the tournament existed and lost interest in it. Now for the scenarios - they weren't Cold War scenarios, they were the authors critique of Russian Federation's Special Military Operation. Each has a right to an opinion (I know mine is diametrically opposed to the authors and every other player in the tournament), but within the constrains of a COLD WAR (US Army vs Soviet Army!) tournament, it was a clear miss. There already exists a game that covers the topic. That is why I gave them a low rating. Still, managed to have some fun, bullying the BRDM 2, destroying the prison, taking out a tank with an HE shell...
 

Lethaface

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Messages
1,528
Reaction score
1,248
Age
39
Location
The Netherlands
Scenario 1 (played as BLUE): 10
I think this was a perfect scenario for a doube blind PBEM. Only complaint in my case was rather passive play from my opponent.

Scenario 2 (played as RED): 9
Great battle imo, good showcase for pre 1980 conflict between USSR type / USA type forces.

Scenario 3 (Played as RED): 7,5-8
I had very good fun with this one, although I mixed up the briefing. Overall I prefer classic attack/defend scenario's for CM.

Scenario 4 (Played as RED): 6-7
Although there were plenty of options both for the Prison defense siting and the ambush, I felt the BLUE forces had a bit too much firepower; against good BLUE player RED had to be lucky to kill the prisoners at least imo. But these are not my favorite type of battles.

Scenario 5 (Playing as BLUE): 8-9
Still playing this one, but a large clash on a nice map with challenging terrain. Some reinforcements to keep things honest, apply CHAOS to the battlefield.
I think the culmination of this one will be great.
 

EvilTwinn

FGM New Member
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Sep 13, 2020
Messages
8
Reaction score
6
Age
26
Location
Indiana
Here are my thoughts as I see them:
As an overall note, the briefings were very low quality. There were many times when the briefings provided incorrect or insufficient information. There are times when you will be counting vehicles as reinforcements, which don't tell you what formation they are or what infantry they're carrying. And yes, the infantry is just as important as the vehicles. And thene you don't tell the players where they come in from. In scenario 4, the American player had more information about the Soviet player's reinforcements than he did. In addition to that, I mean no offence, but the quality of the writing itself was very poor. It would be unacceptable in a high school class. It came across as exceedingly unprofessional. For something that takes as little effort as the briefing, it has a rather large amount of influence on the player's experience, and is their first experience with a scenario. You want to make that a good one.

Scen 1: 9/10. I think this is ultimately the best scenario you made. It provided a reasonable-ish Cold War engagement with an interesting twist. The American reinforcements were not adequately described where they'd come in from, but that was very minor in this instance.
Scen 2: 8/10, with a caveat. With the professed setting of the 73 Arab Israeli War, it would have been nice if it had been clarified in the briefing that the not-Israelis had or could have had the ahistoric M150s, as their presence can be decisive in the long range desert fights. That being said, it was a fascinating scenario. Not entirely CW, but definitely interesting and worth including in the tournament.
Scen 3: 7/10. The briefing is again inadequate in describing reinforcements, but that's minor. The bigger problem, as I see it, is splitting up a small Soviet force across two separated avenues of attack. A Soviet company wouldn't fight like that. Still, an interesting scenario.
Scen 4: 3/10. I'm gonna be real, this was not a good scenario. The briefing was horrendous and the force ratios incredibly unbalanced. There was no reason for the Soviet player to expect that the Ukrainian rebels would be a mechanized force. Nor does the Soviet player know that his reinforcements would spawn behind the enemy, or that the enemy knew that either. I was completely blindsided when they came in where they did. That's not great. Additionally, I think the Americans have way too much firepower for this scenario. Bradleys are, to be blunt, completely broken for this scenario. If the American player was to really play at the top of his game he'd rush his Bradleys up into a support by fire position, pop smoke, and then use their thermal sights to just dump rounds throught he smoke into the prison, and there's not a single thing the defenders could do stop that other than vacate the prison ahead of time. Then, after it's flattened and everyone inside is dead, they can turn around and set up in positions to interdict the Soviet reinforcements. If the American player plays this right, the Soviet player has nothing he can do, and that's just a bad scenario. And I'm saying this as someone who won that scenario as the Soviets, wiping the Americans, so no salt from that here. I did like the overall concept, but the execution was poor.
Scen 5: 5/10. I'm not a fan of the continued Red on Red. This is not Black Sea, this is Cold War, and honestly we only got a single "traditional" Cold War scenario. Current events being what they are I can understand the desire, but I as disappointed that a Cold War tournament only had single traditional scenario. Again, a Soviet non-doctrinal assault by small units on split frontages. Soviets are all about massing a company in one area, so splitting it up like that isn't really a Cold War idea. Also, spawning a platoon on that little island was just a pain in the ass to the Soviet player rather than providing anything interesting tbh. Additionally, the issue with accurately describing and placing reinforcements. The terrain is also poor for the mission, being overly canalizing in the directions the map is to be played in. That being said, it's still a reasonable scenario. I would have liked seeing this with an American attacker.
 

OnePingOnly

FGM Colour Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Jun 5, 2021
Messages
267
Reaction score
449
Age
53
Location
Wisconsin, USA
Website
www.youtube.com
Although I've got 2 minutes left in Scenario 5, I'll go ahead and respond with my $0.02.... while waiting on @MeatEtr to send back more carnage.

Scenario 1 - 10
You never forget your first love, and I'll never forget my first Field Warrior scenario (is that weird?). The briefing was informative but a bit open-ended, yet it played into the confusion of the moment. Although given some interesting specific tasks, like crewing the M1, I felt very empowered to approach the scenario as I saw fit. I would definitely play this one again.

Scenario 5 - 8
I'm going to lose this scenario, but it was fun. I thought there were interesting tactical problems for both attacker and defender. Again, a lot of options but the objectives were clear.

Scenario 2 - 8
I didn't enjoy my particular game, but I would definitely try this scenario again. Again, it was an interesting tactical problem going down the stairs and one that lends itself to really trying to make the Soviets work. My one gripe was that IIRC, the briefing says it is 1973, but the US has Dragons. I didn't internalize that the CMCW TOE wouldn't match the year, and it cost me as I did not plan for the US to be able to strike me using infantry from all the way across a defile.

Scenario 3 - 7
The Gold run was fun, as was making fun of the concept :) , but it was neat to do something very different. Having the 2 Soviet companies start on opposite sides of the river may not have been particularly realistic, but it did help the BTRs learn swimming as a life skill. Again, this one left a lot of different approaches up to the Soviet player.

Scenario 4 - 2
This one was awful - I felt like I didn't have much agency after the first 2 turns. As EvilTwinn stated, the briefing was inadequate. The Ukrainian rebels were supposed to attack from "the town"....but was the significant buildings adjacent to the prison part of the town? When I read that Green Berets were helping Ukrainian rebels, I assumed I would be dealing with a light infantry force with the heavies coming from the US lines - not a mech infantry unit. I don't think that was a poor assumption to make, based on the briefing. The Brads were wickedly OP when the defenders are fighting a 2-front battle. It was not clear from where my reinforcements would be coming, so I couldn't really plan for them. They showed up, generally happened to be in the right spot to interdict the escapees, and poof! I won.

All of the scenarios seemed well-balanced in the end (except maybe #4).

I'm amused by how differently some of these are rated by folks.

Overall, I appreciated the variety, while in the back half missing a bit more "classic" Soviet vs. US Cold War feel. The biggest opportunity is in the briefings - to give more specifics to enable effective planning, while retaining some fog of war.
 

Artkin

FGM Colour Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Jul 18, 2021
Messages
319
Reaction score
158
Location
East
A watch tower in the woods on one of the maps would be a pretty cool idea for the future. Would have worked great for scenario 5. :)
 

sspoom

FGM Regimental Sergeant Major
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
880
Reaction score
727
Age
59
Location
Ohio
I rate every scenario in all the field warriors tournaments top notch. Since you are only competing with those who are playing the same side as yourself it hardly matters if some are one sided. This tournament format is my favorite.
 

SlySniper

FGM 2nd Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
1,106
Location
KENTUCKY
I rate every scenario in all the field warriors tournaments top notch. Since you are only competing with those who are playing the same side as yourself it hardly matters if some are one sided. This tournament format is my favorite.

Now here is someone who is trying to get on my good side.

With answers like that, you might get better match ups next times.

But in truth, even comparing how you did against others only playing the same side is still only partially fair, since the level of the player you are up against vary in skill level by large amounts.

I would love for it to be a tournament verse the AI, so that you all where up against the same challenge, but there is no way to make that happen where you are playing blind and can only play once through the battle. So never happening unless cmX3 had some new programming to provide such a thing, but I doubt that will happen.

So, the only other method would be to have everyone play against the same player, also not a logical approach. It would be like a grand master playing 20 games at the same time.

So the best I can do is as the battle progresses in the 5 games, the pairings I make, I start to place the better players vs each other as they perform well in the tournament. so by round 3 , 4 and 5 you should be up against someone approxiatly at the same level of performance.
 

SlySniper

FGM 2nd Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
1,106
Location
KENTUCKY
ok
from the comments submitted

Scenario One appears to be the overall favorite. ( which there was plenty of flaws about it when you all posted at the time of completion, so your memories are very short lived.)

Scenario two, It appears half of you enjoyed it, the others not so much. I admitted and still wish I had not forgot to strip the Americans of some of the weapons that should not have been there for the time frame I was trying to get the feel of. But that is what you get when the price is free.

Scenario Three, not great scores, not terrible scores, for what it was, I will take it.
The one main complaint was how I had the Russians entering the map. That not being a proper Russian Tactic.
I intentionally did that, I gave hints that the Russian player should consolidate his troops and to only break through at one location.
Some players were smart enough to take a few turns to combined their troops, others not so much, attacking on a broad front and paying the price for doing that.
As the designer of these battles, I am not trying for historical accuracy, I am trying to provide different tactical challenges and test you as a player.

Scenario Four, I knew this battle would not get a good approval overall, just by the type of battle it is.
Every one sided battle I have done pretty much will get some pretty poor ratings, now if all the ratings were poor, I screwed up, which has happened in one of my past scenarios, but since half liked it and half did not. I almost feel good about it. But for sure, this battle could have used some adjustments. The problem with this battle was trying to fit as much as I did into a 30 minute time frame, its limited what I could do as to force selection and how close I had to drop reinforcements in at to get them in the action.
No question as the defender, this is a hard one to enjoy. As the attacker, personnally I do not know how you could not enjoy some of the challenges this one could throw at you.

Scenario 5, only two bad ratings, only 2 very good ratings.
I saw a few players that did not know how to handle this battle, both on the attack and on the defence. So who you played against might have more of a influence on your feelings about this battle than just the battle itself.


Just a few other comments
Somewhere in these pages, there was comments directed towards me that were somewhat negative as to tone and as to how to critique my work.
Good thing for you, I am a big boy and can handle such words.
To tell you the truth, some were right on as to being true, even if they should not be shared in a open forum. Like slamming my briefings and my personnal level of use of the english language.
First, I hate to make the briefings and it shows, Second my mastering of the English launguage would be tested as to being even a high school graduate. So you will have to deal with it to a certain extent.
Second, I agree many times there is things I can do better in them and so I do not mind being informed about that.
Third, I do not like personnally like briefings that give detailed info and a perfect knowledge as to what you should expect as a player for the battle, but I do agree I can do more than what I do at times. The reason I dont beleive in such briefings, is, you are crazy if you think that is the information you would have in a real situation. After 8 years of service in the USMC. Let me tell you, it was so common as to things not going as planned that it was uncommon if something ever happened as it was predesigned in premission planning.
Troop movement, was off schedule, almost always. Different forces, not at correct map locations. Amount of troops would vary from full unit forces because of forces left behind because of equipment failures and issues. So when I get a comment about you neediing to know exactly where your troops are arriving, when they are arriving and the exact head count. As a player, I understand how important that is for you. As a realist, how I say to myself, guess what, this is more like what you get in the real world, learn to deal with unexpected events
 

SlySniper

FGM 2nd Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
1,106
Location
KENTUCKY
Also another comment was how I did not create 5 battles that did not reflect CMCW timeframe fighting.

No where did I ever indicate that is part of my tournaments, so putting your expectations on something that was not ever planned is not my issue.

The mission of my Tournament is to test you as a player to different tactical situations, to force you to play both offensive and defensive situations. To test your skills as to using of different forces and not just the typical units you might normally be accustomed to playing with or agianst.

In otherwords, to try and provide you with some challenges you might not be use to. So that is my goal. Beyond that, sorry if I did not meet your expectations that you might have come up with in your own thought process.

Thanks for another successful Tournament, and hope to see many of you again when I get about to running another one.
 

greyfox

FGM Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
May 9, 2020
Messages
156
Reaction score
130
Age
36
Location
Ireland
I think the scenario briefings were fine. While they were vague at times, they were never misleading - you just had to read them closely a few times to pick up on all the hints.

I really enjoyed all the scenarios.

One of the reasons I like this tournament is that the lack of information forces you to take risks without knowing what exactly you're in for.
 

A Canadian Cat

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
The reason I dont beleive in such briefings, is, you are crazy if you think that is the information you would have in a real situation. After 8 years of service in the USMC. Let me tell you, it was so common as to things not going as planned that it was uncommon if something ever happened as it was predesigned in premission planning.
And we all need to learn that so keep it up :D

The mission of my Tournament is to test you as a player to different tactical situations, to force you to play both offensive and defensive situations. To test your skills as to using of different forces and not just the typical units you might normally be accustomed to playing with or agianst.
Mission accomplished. Do you have a banner to stand under? :D
 
Top Bottom