RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

vahauser -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/10/2006 11:34:15 AM)

Erwin,
You seem to be terribly concerned about who wins the war.
The Long Campaign does not score your battles based on whether the nation you are playing wins the war or not.
We already know who won and lost the war. That is history. Who cares?
I only want to play difficult and challenging campaigns and battles. I couldn't care less about playing a nation that historically won (or lost) a war that ended over 60 years ago. SPWAW does not care either. Playing the Germans provides for the most challenging campaigns and battles, and that is all that matters to me.
As for being pretentious, I'm not sure what you are implying here. Do you think it's okay to call yourself a veteran player but not an expert? Does it matter? I've played over 5,000 games of Steel Panthers. People generally only continue to do things that they enjoy doing and are successful at (if I hadn't won almost all of those 5,000 games, do you think I would have ever played that many games and still be playing today?). If you have played 20 games or so and then give up, then you are not a veteran player. If you have played 200 games or so and are still learning the game system and still playing and still enjoying the game, then you are an experienced player. If you have played 1,000 games or so and pretty much know the game system, then you are absolutely a veteran player. If you know the game well enough to teach somebody else how to become a veteran player, then you are an expert. If you can teach experts how to improve their games, then you are a master. Pretension is only pretension when you are pretending to be something you are not.


Riun T,
I'm afraid that I am not understanding what you are trying to say.
You seem to be saying that the computer AI presents you a challenging game most of the time, even if you don't give the computer AI any advantages. What I am saying is that the computer AI never presents me a challenging game unless I do many things to handicap myself and give many advantages to the computer AI. If I don't handicap myself and give the computer AI tremendous advantages, then I will win decisive victories all the time. And that gets boring. That's why I developed my German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge over the course of several years--to keep the game interesting and challenging for me.



azraelck -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/10/2006 6:56:10 PM)

The AI competence is dependant on what kind of engagement your fighting, more than anything I've found. Against even a basic defense, The AI falters. In a meeting engagement, it's not so bad. When dug in and defending, it's far better.

Aside from the usual wargame conventions of giving the AI more units to balance it's lack of skill, and probably having the fog of war removed like most games do for the AI, the best advantage the AI has is in artillery. It knows how to use it well. I like a fast advance myself, and have in a couple of battles maintained enough speed that the AI artillery fell behind my lines some 200m. Once, I never even saw enemy artillery, I was advancing so fast. But, generally, it is the artillery that lets the enemy push a hole in my own line. The AI is incapable of flanking, or creating effective fire zones. It also has a tendancy to rush the wrong units forward. Too many times in 8.x prior to installing enhanced I saw mortars on the front lines, and was able to destroy them with tank and MG fire before they fired a shot. The HMGs are brought forward as well, when I like for my own to hang back, positioned for maximum amount of area in the firing zone, and to provide covering fire for the main line of advance. My Mortars stay back as well, though I try to position them for maximum cover instead, and provide indirect fire support. I have used them for direct fire as well, but not often.

The AI is quite effective at using artillery to suppress my line, then using a combination of tanks and infantry in a mass assault. Occasionally I'll encounter aircraft providing close support, which is why I keep AA guns handy, even if it's just .50 AAMGs. It's also quite effective at Blitzkrieg, though that's not always the most effective strategy given the scale of SPWaW.

I think we all have our preferences on hwo we like to play. Vahauser likes to play the Germans, because he feels they give a more challenging long campaign. I don't feel that way, because they get one of the heaviest armed and armored tanks in the game, probably the best medium tank of the game in the Panther, the best AA/AT gun in the FlaK18, and some of the best MGs in the MG34 and MG42. Whats more is the Germans have those mighty MGs down at the squad level, giving them considerable firepower. Finally, I have never played any one nation in a long campaign that it didn't get easier as it went one. Within 3 or 4 battles, your men become battle hardened, and more skilled at what they do. Starting in 1939 as the Germans means you'll have Supermen in your core by 1945. Unless, of course, you think that more casualties makes you stronger, and use nothing but massed infantry and calvary in lieu of real, effective tactics. [8|]

As to whether you can call yourself an "expert" or not, it's your choice. My feel is that while you can claim to be a veteran player, you have to earn the title of expert or master. You can't just claim it. I've never seen a true master of a skill claim to be such either, they always refuse that title. My teacher in the Martial Arts is a former World Champion, yet he doesn't even call himself an expert at anything, just "somewhat good".



Riun T -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/10/2006 7:48:00 PM)

You hit a number of nails right on the head with that post AZRAELCK,we all play it the ways we like it, and we're all experts in my books just for the fact that we all get a little flutter in our hearts when we see and hear,or read that theres others out here in contact threw these forums that love and respond to it and make it SOOOOOOO much more than a game. I can actually say I consider most of u good headed FRIENDS and hope u think me likewise!!. RT



KG Erwin -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/10/2006 7:57:59 PM)

Good posts, guys. [;)]



Riun T -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/10/2006 8:08:01 PM)

So gunny since your on on this gorgeous sunday mornin, why don't we step into AAR's and start showin each other some stuff?? its 11:10 am here in saskatoon and I'm in the mmoooddd to post!![X(]
ALMOST SOUNDS perverted!!



KG Erwin -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/10/2006 8:21:11 PM)

Well, Riun, to tell the truth, I'm not in a fightin' mood today.  I have the house to myself, and a cooler full of beer.

I'm thinking of more peaceful pursuits at the moment.

The reason: tomorrow is the 5-year anniversary of 9/11. The atmosphere at the office will be quite somber -- I'm actually dreading it, in a way.  [:(]



Riun T -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/10/2006 8:28:09 PM)

My sorryies anyway, cause the internet from my side keeps booting me at the moment so I can't rely on how I'd get trhew right now. Sip a cold one for me too and consider all that we take for granted and respect so seldom, CHEERS BUDDY



vahauser -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/11/2006 12:52:32 PM)

Azraelck,

I agree with what you posted.  Since the computer AI is so bad at attacking, then the solution is to transform all the battles of any long campaign into advances, assaults, and meeting engagements.  That is one of the issues my German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge addresses and resolves.

As for the labels "expert", "master", etc., here is an example.  VikingNo2 has a well-deserved reputation as an expert PBEM player.  Indeed, if he cannot claim to be a "master" PBEM player, then perhaps nobody can.  He has earned that from the SPWAW community.  But what about players who do not play PBEM and only play solitaire against the computer AI? 

What evaluation can solitaire players use to measure their skill?  They have no community that can bestow upon them the accolades and respect that PBEM players have.  For solitaire players, the only measure of their ability is the battle-results screen at the end of each battle and the campaign score at the end of each campaign.  All I am saying is that if you can consistently slaughter the computer AI (decisive victories with scores like 12,832 to 463, etc.) in 95% or more of your battles in a campaign using default/100% settings, then clearly you are an experienced SPWAW solitaire player.  You have earned that respect.  If you can do that same thing with AI Advantage ON and Hard Battle x2, then you are clearly a veteran solitaire player.  You have earned that respect.  If you can teach somebody how to be a veteran solitaire player, then you are clearly an expert solitaire player, and you will have somebody who can directly learn from you and give you that respect.  It is easy to see that the experts and the masters are teachers (regardless of how modest and humble they might be).  Teachers who can teach others to be excellent SPWAW players themselves.  That's all I'm saying.



FlashfyreSP -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/11/2006 2:53:08 PM)

vahauser

While I understand the process and the reasons why you feel you must set the Long Campaign parameters as you do, I believe you would find a bigger challenge if you did not use the German forces in this. You claim that the reason you use them is because the AI cannot do good German tactics, but then you say that you don't play the game for history. So why worry whether the German AI can perform "correct" German tactics? Why not play the campaign by using only minor nations or allies, instead of the "Big 6" teams?

Here's an idea: Start the Long Campaign with a British HQ and only buy Indian forces; with Enhanced, you won't have any armour until 1947. So you would have to deal with all that German armour with only your infantry and AT artillery. Or go ahead and play as the German HQ, but only buy Hungarian, Bulgarian, or Romanian forces.

Or you could even try to play the campaign using nothing but paratroopers, with no armour or heavy artillery. There are many ways to "handicap" yourself, but using only the German forces to do so just makes you another "Tiger Kiddie".



vahauser -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/11/2006 4:13:31 PM)

Flashfyre,

You are exactly correct, there are an infinite number of ways of setting up a challenging Long Campaign.  That is the main reason Steel Panthers remains popular after so many years--its immense number of ways to set up games.  There are two main reasons that the Germans were chosen for my German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge. 

#1.  I call it "mine", but the truth is that a number of friends of mine (five, not counting me, as of today) in the Austin/Dallas region play this challenge as a kind of tournament (to see who can achieve the high score), and the Germans were chosen as much by my friends as by me.  They don't spend any time at the Matrix forums (with one exception), and none of them except me is a Depot member.  So I call it "mine" only because it was my original idea (to create a kind of tournament campaign format that all of my local friends could participate in using a standardized, level playing field that could generate comparable scores).  I'll continue to call it "mine" here, since you only know me and not my other friends.

#2.  The campaign format has evolved and been refined over a number of years to achieve a balance between a number of factors that cannot be easily changed without a whole new level of time and effort to create a new balance using a different force structure.  For instance, the 110-unit core size and the 2750-point initial core limit was arrived at only after much trial and error (to meet the needs and desires of a number of people).  By this, I mean that a number of test campaigns (I admit to being the guinea pig for most of these) had to be run from start to finish to see how the balance between size of core and composition of core and length of campaign and number of build points and types of battles and level of difficulty all played out from start to finish.  I personally would not be able to convince my friends to start that process all over again because they enjoy the format we have now.  I could do it for myself, I suppose, if I didn't have other things asking for my time (like my recent membership in the Depot, for instance).

So, while I certainly agree with you that SPWAW is robust enough to allow for an infinite number of ways to produce a fun and challenging long campaign for each individual person, my German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge was created and developed and refined over many months for reasons and goals (to create a tournament standardized level playing field long campaign for a number of different people) that would not be easy to change.

I do appreciate some of your suggestions, though, and if I get a chance I think I might want to explore some of them.


P.S.  If I were really a "Tiger Kiddie", then I wouldn't be a member of the Rostov Rats, now would I?



Riun T -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/11/2006 7:42:20 PM)

I understand now why u created that preferances setup and deploy,for a multipersoned tourney, good idea to make a base line force with regulations on limits, but how did the group fair when u had them do this?? kinda makes everyone put away their creative skills and turns all of the participants into the same sort of # crunching notactical response automatron, in otherwords how many of the players got duplicated casualty # 's and did their tactics for completion not mimic yours??? If your all starting out with the exact same force, but the AI's only real limitation is the battle type selected for its purchases,and the # of purchase points,? did the people that won this not fight it like u did??[&:] I don't think the AI makes the exact same purchases no matter what year your long camp. starts and you could very easily get an abundance of AI purchased heavy units that get concentrated on one side of the map,and just because you choose an advance,you still don't have any real control of the consistancy of of the AI's flow of battle to offer other players the exact same opposing force??
ADDENDM: upon doing the math for your engagement rules A: not being allowed to move or return fire from your initial point of deploy till until the enemy gains your paralell vic hexes, or B: 50% of the total turns for the battle are exhausted??? IF ITS A DELAY AND YOU HAVE NOTHING AROUND THE FRONT VH'S and flags are on a points per turn basis, theres really no way to win!!! who actually completed a full long campaign playing like this???? You really must post screen shots for this whopper of a brag vhauser cause I just can't believe it [8|]



vahauser -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/12/2006 9:23:48 AM)

Riun T,

The “tournament” part of the developmental history of the German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge is just a side-effect. It was not originally intended as a tournament, it just worked out that this campaign format could be used in a tournament setting. The REAL reason this whole thing got started began with two simple questions.

Question #1. How can you incorporate build points into a long campaign? This was the original and most important question.

Question #2. How can you set up a campaign so that a player in Austin can fairly compare his campaign score to a player in Dallas? This question only got asked after my friends showed some interest in the idea.

Pretty much everything that happened after that resulted from those two questions.

It’s the incorporating of build points into the campaign that makes this campaign format so interesting. By build points, I mean that after every battle a player gets build points to repair and/or upgrade his core units. My German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge has come up with a way to reward a player for using fewer build points over the course of the campaign. This changes everything, and makes the long campaign much more interesting and exciting.

As for the 110 units and the 2750 points for the starting core, you have an infinite number of ways to compose your starting core. I’ve seen cores where a player selected a starting troop quality of 110 and bought only light recon units, and I’ve seen cores where a player selected a starting troop quality of 50 and bought lots of battle tanks and mechanized infantry. The most successful starting cores I’ve seen had starting troop qualities between 65 and 90. But your starting core is not more important than the way you manage your build points throughout the campaign. Managing build points is the key to scoring high in this campaign format. Everything else is secondary.



vahauser -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/12/2006 9:29:25 AM)

quote:

ADDENDM: upon doing the math for your engagement rules A: not being allowed to move or return fire from your initial point of deploy till until the enemy gains your paralell vic hexes, or B: 50% of the total turns for the battle are exhausted??? IF ITS A DELAY AND YOU HAVE NOTHING AROUND THE FRONT VH'S and flags are on a points per turn basis, theres really no way to win!!! who actually completed a full long campaign playing like this???? You really must post screen shots for this whopper of a brag vhauser cause I just can't believe it [8|]



Riun T,

I never said it would be easy. That is why I call it German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge.



vahauser -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/12/2006 11:20:19 AM)

Riun T,
Here is what I will do. I'll start a thread in the SPWAW AAR/DAR section called "Extreme Challenge Demonstration Game" so you can see for yourself. Okay?


Azraelck,
There is a game called Diablo II that I play online. In that game, one of my characters has hired a mercenary named Azrael. Is that where you got your SPWAW username?



azraelck -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/12/2006 3:23:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: vahauser
Azraelck,
There is a game called Diablo II that I play online. In that game, one of my characters has hired a mercenary named Azrael. Is that where you got your SPWAW username?


Nope, my name actually comes from the DC Comics' character of the same name; who showed up in Batman books back in the 90's. He even was Batman for a time. And CK, which is my nickname.



vahauser -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/15/2006 11:08:04 PM)

Riun T and Erwin,

I added a special note to my German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge to indicate that it is best suited to Category II players. 

If you had not posted this thread (and the resulting Extreme Challenge Demonstration Game thread in the AAR/DAR section), then I might have never figured out the distinction between Category I and Category II players. 

So I believe that something positive resulted from all the misunderstandings and confusion. 

I thank you for that.



KG Erwin -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/16/2006 3:05:17 AM)

I see nothing wrong about Vahauser's categories, as this is a term that could be used in marketing strategies.  He's defined a target audience, and to be honest, I agree that the Type II players probably don't post that often.

The forum is dominated by folks who have some experience with the OOB editor, or have questions regarding history vs SPWaW's portrayal of it. 

Heck, that's why I joined the forum and volunteered my services on some of the past OOB teams and one of the Mega-Campaigns.

My stint as moderator, in retrospect, was ill-advised, as I was too close to the game itself and couldn't stay impartial.  But, enough about that -- I've found my comfort zone, and I'm satisfied with my role as independent commentator and unabashed USMC fan. [;)]

I was impressed by Vahauser's resume, and I hope he will continue to contribute to the discussions.  



Alby -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/16/2006 5:12:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

One more thing about playing in the Pacific -- long ago, I played through an entire 1942-45 USMC campaign, and as the character of the war changed from jungle battles to amphibious assaults on barren coral atolls and later to the varied terrain of the Marianas, Palaus, Iwo Jima and Okinawa, the defenders stopped stacking their troops on the beachheads and switched to a defense-in-depth.

This is portayed by the AI mix in the OOBs. I don't think Alby's team messed too much with the Japanese AI mix, and that's a good thing.

Some OOB history for a moment -- I have to credit Bryan Melvin with much of what my favorite AI opponents became, as he developed the fortification mix that has since caused me so much grief in the latter stages of the war. At my prodding, he kept tweaking it until we got a pretty good mix.

AFAIK, that mix has stayed with us from 8.2 to today. It is solid, and maddening to assault.



Something I noticed here, alot of the Japanese "AI" formations are given elite, or elite/recon staus. especialy their defendsive formations.
This really helps out the poor AI.
Cudos to whoever did this.
actually this should have been done throughout the OOBs, especially for "AI Assualt" formations.
Looking thru some various AI formations throughout the oobs, it is no wonder the AI sux in most Oobs, alot of 'Special Flags' have been omitted it appears, that could have helped out...
I see alot of company formations that don't even have the '1' flag for recon and all company formations should have that.
Whether just the '1' flag helps out the AI or not I do not know, but '10' or '11' surely would.
[;)]
Wish I noticed this before now..
[:(]
I can always fix this up for my "personal" mod though...LOL
[:D]



KG Erwin -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/16/2006 11:30:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alby

Something I noticed here, alot of the Japanese "AI" formations are given elite, or elite/recon staus. especialy their defendsive formations.
This really helps out the poor AI.
Cudos to whoever did this.
actually this should have been done throughout the OOBs, especially for "AI Assualt" formations.
Looking thru some various AI formations throughout the oobs, it is no wonder the AI sux in most Oobs, alot of 'Special Flags' have been omitted it appears, that could have helped out...
I see alot of company formations that don't even have the '1' flag for recon and all company formations should have that.
Whether just the '1' flag helps out the AI or not I do not know, but '10' or '11' surely would.
[;)]
Wish I noticed this before now..
[:(]
I can always fix this up for my "personal" mod though...LOL
[:D]


You know, Alby, I never thought about that -- to give the AI a boost, those flags could serve the purpose.

Hmmm --



FlashfyreSP -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/17/2006 1:21:13 AM)

The "1" Recon code would only help the individual units in the formation, not the subformations, unless they also had the "1" code applied. And, unless playing with C&C ON, the Recon ability given to these units is marginal; the main reason for this code was to enable the Company Commander unit to have "freedom of movement" under the C&C system. Otherwise, the Co HQ ould have to expend orders to tell "himself" to move away from his Objective path. Which seems a bit ridiculous, when you think about it...

The "10" Elite code, OTOH, would benefit the AI by giving all its units a potential boost in ratings; an extra 5-10 points in Experience or Morale could mean the difference between AI units breaking and fleeing or standing their ground after 2-3 shots.



KG Erwin -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/17/2006 1:46:06 AM)

Flashfyre, I think that this boost for AI formations is good, to a point. The worst-case scenario is for the AI's troops to simply stand and die when defending. The elite bonus then becomes a double-edged sword, and could be counterproductive.

For the Japanese, it works, as they will sometimes retreat from their entrenchments and regroup.

This artificial boost may not work so well for other countries, with national characteristics turned "ON".



FlashfyreSP -> RE: Here's the Thing About Long Campaigns (9/17/2006 2:02:28 AM)

Only if the "national characteristics" indicate the units "stand and die".

What I was referring to was the difference between levels of suppression that determine when a unit retreats. Because the unit's status is determined by the percentage of its Morale in Suppression points, a higher Morale results in a larger amount of Suppression needed to change the unit's status.

For example, let's say that a unit becomes Pinned when it reaches 10% of its Morale in Suppression points, Retreats at 25%, and Routs at 40%. These are hypotheticals, as I don't know the exact ratios.
1. A Unit with 60 Morale will Pin at 6 Suppression, Retreat at 15 Suppression, and Rout at 24 Suppression points.
2. A Unit with 70 Morale will Pin at 7 Suppression, Retreat at 18 Suppression, and Rout at 28 Suppression points.
3. A Unit with 80 Morale will Pin at 8 Suppression, Retreat at 20 Suppression, and Rout at 32 Suppression points.

So a Unit with 80 Morale, taking 18 Suppression points, would be Pinned, while the Units with a 60 or 70 would be Retreating.

Giving the AI the added +10 to its Exp/Mor ratings could potentially put more 80+ units in play than 70 or under units, if 70 is the default setting. And that would make the AI force a little bit more combat-worthy.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.15625