I'm really interested in playing multiplayer Close Combat at its best, so having a balanced and fun campaign is a must.
Unfortunately, I can't promise you very much playtesting data, as the few games I've had in the past days ended in a freeze and desync/connection break (mostly due to truce, airstrike or random other factor).
What are the intended settings for the campaign, most importantly realism and time?
The best I can give you is an OOB (Order of battle) I've created for both sides, detailing every unit's entrance onto the strategic layer. I've also added in a short strategic overview of each sector, noting in particular armored support / lack thereof.
For this game it was easier to group units into their parent formations as they are largely connected to one sector. For GJS-LSA I've done otherwise.
In any case, the following is the OOB:
Axis Forces
• 1st Fallschirmjäger Armee – stationed in the Eindhoven sector, opposing the 101st Airborne. The majority of this Axis formation is paratroops and infantry, with 107th Panzer being a notable inclusion due to its Panthers. Generally ill-suited overall for making successful attacks due to the fact that US paratroops are well-supplied in this sector and supported by elements of the XXX Corps early on. Very useful for threatening the supply line, though.
• Korps Feldt – attacks the Nijmegen sector from the east, opposing the 82nd Airborne. Like units in the Eindhoven sector, lacks armor support in the beginning, but at least isn't opposed by Allied armor immediately.
• Kampfgruppe von Tettau – mostly low quality (training and replacement) troops, but they threaten the 1st Airborne's drop zones. They can also surround the paratroops and secure vital positions due to the number of maps this sector has.
• II SS Panzer Korps – the hard hitters. This formation has access to halftracks and armored cars off the bat, and good quality battlegroups following soon. Initially tasked with preventing the 1st Airborne in their charge to the bridge.
Arrival:
1. Fallschirm. Armee
• KG Rink (18. 0000h:Best) • Fallschirmjaeger Regiment Jungwirth (18. 0600h:Dinther) • KG 59.Infanterie Division (18. 0600h:Geelders) • 107.Panzer Brigade (18. 0900h:Helmond) • KG Chill (22. 0000h:Schijndel) • KG Walther (22. 0600h:Gemert) • KG 712.Infanterie Division (24. 0600h:Oss)
Korps Feldt
• KG Stargaard (18. 0600h:Groesbeek) • KG Fuestenberg (18. 0600h:Wyler) • KG Greschick (18. 0600h:Grafwegen) • KG Goebel (18. 0600h:Mook) • KG Becker (20. 0600h:Wyler) • KG Hermann (20. 0600h:Mook)
KG von Tettau
• KG Kraft (Wolfheze) • KG Helle (18. 0000h:Ginkel Heath) • KG Lippert (18. 0600h:Renkum Heath) • 10. Schiffstamm Abteilung (18. 0600h:Heelsum) • Fliegerhorst Batallion 1 (18. 0900h:Renkum Heath) • KG Wossowski (19. 0000h:Heelsum) • KG Knoche (19. 0000h:Ginkel Heath) • Panzer Kompanie 224 (22. 0600h:Heelsum) • Festungs MG Batallion 47 (24. 0600h:Valkenhuizen)
II. SS Panzer Korps
• KG Graebner (Oosterhout) • KG Spindler (Velp) • KG Harder (17. 1800h:Valkenhuizen) • KG Brinkmann (18. 0000h:Velp) • KG Euling (18. 0000h:Westervoort) • KG Reinhold (18. 0600h:Westervoort) • KG Knaust (18. 1200h:Westervoort) • KG Bruhns (18. 1500h:Schaarsbergen) • Sturmgeschütz Brigade 280 (19. 0600h:Velp) • III./Landstrom Nederland (21. 0000h:Papendalsche) • schweres Panzer Abteilung 506 (22. 0600h:Velp)
Allied Forces
• 101st Airborne – paradropped into the Eindhoven sector. Has by far the weakest opposition thanks in part to great support from the start and in part to the poor distribution of Axis forces in the area. The biggest difficulty lies in securing all the bridges in time, because Axis can actually afford to blow them in this sector.
• 82nd Airborne – paradropped into the Nijmegen sector, and immediately hold good ground. The opposition is weak at first, but with growing numbers presents one important problem for the security of this sector: how many units to send to assist with capturing bridges and how much to relegate to guard duty?
• 1st Airborne – the hardest part for the Allied player with the most difficult objective. Paradropped too far away from the bridges and supposed to hold that ground with at least some forces because more paratroops will land there on the 18th, while at the same time capturing and securing at least the bridges. It doesn't help that this is where the best (and armored or at least mechanized) Axis battlegroups are stationed from the beginning.
• XXX Corps – provides armored support and plenty of reinforcements for all the sectors on the way to Arnhem. The biggest problem is that its elements trickle down the road from Valkenswaard very slowly, the bulk of its force coming onto field on the 20th.
Impressed by recent experience in a smaller H2H Campaign in Close Combat LSA, I would like to play a Grand Campaign. I would definitely like to try GJS-LSA (vanilla LSA is OK too).
As for settings, this is what I would propose (open for discussion):
15 minute rounds with 2 minute warning upon capturing all VLs
Morale off
Realism full (or with 'Never act on initiative')
VL rules
Strength: Axis line vs. Allies line
I'm GMT+1. Reply here or drop me a PM if you're interested.
My guess is that there are two schools of thought at work here:
The first one looks at battles as something that is decided only by the players' actions, so to them having low morale kick in when one side could maneuver to a full win on a map is silly. This is because of the way morale is implemented in the game. When a force routs, the winner gets control of victory points equal to some formula, which may mean that the losing side holds on one turn longer despite having only vehicle crews and whittled second line infantry remaining on the field.
On the other hand, the other looks at the battle in a way that the battle between two sides is just one key part in a larger conflict between formations. In that case, you might be losing your part of the battle, but unless it's catastrophic, the other elements could still save the day by stabilising the front. If you've played the Combat Commander board game series, then you might've heard of this argument.
Never act on initiative is slightly complicated, because while your troops could realistically start moving according to what they see as important, the player can override them if he keeps an eye on the team status bar or the minimap. From that aspect, this setting only adds more micromanagement in a game that isn't micro intensive as the usual RTS. The complicating point is that sometimes units can spot and start firing on teams that the player doesn't know about.
I have little multiplayer experience, so I can't comment much more on the pros and cons of all you've mentioned. Maybe someone else can add to the discussion
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
Topic: 
