Automatic battles? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815



Message

Jimmer -> Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 1:54:33 AM)

I want to lobby for a significant rule change: Stop having the computer pick chits for single corps. I just lost a major battle as GB because the idiot computer picked withdraw against the Turks, an option that would NEVER occur in a real game.

I also want to open a discussion on what happens when pre-selected chits are chosen. Does that selection stay with that corps forever (unless changed again)? How about if two such corps are in combat, and only one has the option chose? (And, don't tell me there's always human-chosen chits, because that's not correct.)

How about if you preselect a chit with your corps that has the leader that's the commander? THIS is what I thought preselecting chits was for, not to save phantom "time" by taking away the human interface of battle.

There has GOT to be an option "let me pick chits at time of combat". There's simply no excuse for having the computer pull a chit for 1/6 of the British army. No excuse whatsoever.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 2:02:28 AM)

Jimmer:

The battle was simply two MP corps? Tu vs Gbr?
I'll need to look back over the code because I thought this was explicitly vs minor corps units only???
Stupid question but your PBEM quick combat option is disabled?

Anybody else have an opinion?



NeverMan -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 2:03:29 AM)

I agree, it's way more trouble than it's worth.

I thought the "quick combat" option disabled got rid of this? Maybe I'm not sure what quick combat is.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 2:06:36 AM)

Quick combat simply puts the computer in control of combat for the defender. This prevents the round trip of battle files and quickens the game a bit. However, in battles against single minor corps units, the computer always assumes control of the minor to again quicken the pace.




eske -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 1:08:36 PM)

Using quick combat, could you preset a defensive chit, like in single corps battles ?

/eske



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 1:14:04 PM)

I think it does but I'll have to check since I haven't touched that code in a while...
I'll let you know...



Jimmer -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 8:09:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Jimmer:

The battle was simply two MP corps? Tu vs Gbr?
I'll need to look back over the code because I thought this was explicitly vs minor corps units only???
Stupid question but your PBEM quick combat option is disabled?

Anybody else have an opinion?


It was an Ottoman corps against a British corps.

No, quick combat is not turned on (I'll double-check this when I get home).



Jimmer -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 8:14:16 PM)

By the way, I didn't get any chance to handle the combat (he attacked me). The defender in this case is a major power (GB). The attacker is a minor Ottoman corps controlled by Turkey.

Do you believe it should have generated a battle series?

Also, I haven't been able to find the rules on this. Can you give me a page number or rule number that covers this? Thanks.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 8:23:16 PM)

There is mention of this in the Starting A PBEM Game section but it does not specify whether it is only minor corps or not. It does sound like your battle would qualify.




Jimmer -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 8:49:15 PM)

But, if that's correct, why would I (as the one MP present) not get to see the battle screen? Does it apply when either power is a minor? Or, just when the defender is? If it is supposed to be the latter, it didn't work correctly.

Anyhow, my lobbying point is that I don't think ANY battle should ever be handled by the computer. Long movement phases do not matter to me nearly as much as having a computer pick the chit for me (which is somewhat predictable and almost always a bad choice in single-corps battles). What I would like to see is any battle that is not a trivial battle MUST be fought using battle files, unless an option is set to do otherwise.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 8:54:04 PM)

If you attack any defender that is a single minor corps then the PC will assume control of the defender only in PBEM games.

I hear what you are saying but this would certainly lengthen the game play and almost nobody wants that so I want way more feedback on this!






Jimmer -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 9:33:55 PM)

I agree on more feedback.

What I'm having trouble with is that the game didn't give me a chance to pick a chit. I was the defender and I had a MP corps present (1). From what I read above, I should have been asked what chit to pull. But, I wasn't. So, this could be either a bug or a rules deviation (not likely, since the rules seem to be non-existent :)).



Jimmer -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 9:34:33 PM)

Oh, and it should be an option to disable this "feature", possibly tied to the "quick combat" option.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 11:00:00 PM)

FYI...The testers actually liked this not to be linked with the quick combat option because they liked the possiblity of them not being linked. Itwas a nice compromise.



NeverMan -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 11:08:45 PM)

I don't think the Quick Combat saves time and I, personally, just find it frustrating. JMO.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 11:10:38 PM)

How could you say that when it TOTALLY ELIMINATES battle file swapping???



NeverMan -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 11:18:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

How could you say that when it TOTALLY ELIMINATES battle file swapping???



I just don't like the idea of not knowing wtf is going on. Maybe I'm paranoid.

Let's say you "pre-select" a chit for that corps, are you using ESP to determine how many corps are attacking you and what leaders they are attacking you with? My chit for that corps might be different depending on how it is attacked and by whom/what. Also, 1PP might not seem like a lot, but it can be.

In all the games so far, combat has not really been a major slowdown factor like I thought it would be.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/13/2008 11:21:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

How could you say that when it TOTALLY ELIMINATES battle file swapping???



I just don't like the idea of not knowing wtf is going on. Maybe I'm paranoid.

Let's say you "pre-select" a chit for that corps, are you using ESP to determine how many corps are attacking you and what leaders they are attacking you with?

In all the games so far, combat has not really been a major slowdown factor like I thought it would be.


I'll stand corrected if others agree??? I never would have guessed that but I'm open to correction.

Anybody else use the quick combat option?





AGT4533 -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 12:37:52 AM)

I notice chit selection for corps can be done in the reinforcement phase, for when your opponent moves before you, and then again in your own land phase for those opponents who move after you. You just need to think of the possibilities and pick a chit so the program doesn't have to do it for you. It is a decent compromise to keep the game moving for the single corp combats.



gwheelock -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 5:56:27 AM)

As a compromise suggestion; add "Run as battle file exchange" to the list of "chits" that can
be preset for corp.  If this is selected; then the computer should generate battle files for the
combat whenever that corp is attacked instead of picking the chit.



bresh -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 7:17:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

How could you say that when it TOTALLY ELIMINATES battle file swapping???



I just don't like the idea of not knowing wtf is going on. Maybe I'm paranoid.

Let's say you "pre-select" a chit for that corps, are you using ESP to determine how many corps are attacking you and what leaders they are attacking you with?

In all the games so far, combat has not really been a major slowdown factor like I thought it would be.


I'll stand corrected if others agree??? I never would have guessed that but I'm open to correction.

Anybody else use the quick combat option?





Dont know anyone who does use quick combat.
First you loose the intelligence on your opponents corps.
2. one defender chit might be good vs 1 corps, while different ones seem better if the foe is bigger.

Say 2 Turkish feudal Cav, if i fought 1-2 regular infantry corps, i might use one chit, while if it fought a big stack "withdraw" might be wiser.

Kind Regards
Bresh



NeverMan -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 3:41:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

As a compromise suggestion; add "Run as battle file exchange" to the list of "chits" that can
be preset for corp.  If this is selected; then the computer should generate battle files for the
combat whenever that corp is attacked instead of picking the chit.


This is a good idea.

My main complaint was the same as bresh's, you might use different chits for different opponents (based on leader, size, type, country, etc).



AresMars -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 5:46:50 PM)

I have to agree with NeverMan, gwheelock and Bresh.  [gwheelocks suggestion was cool]
What is the fun of letting a/the computer fight your battles for you?   [>:]

And sometimes, battles are an excellent source of Game Intelligence, Opponent play style information, and opportunities for Diplomacy.



Jimmer -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 5:57:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis
I'll stand corrected if others agree??? I never would have guessed that but I'm open to correction.

Anybody else use the quick combat option?

I'm in partial agreement. I think I would personally prefer to never use quick combat of any kind. But, I could see how some players might like it. It does speed things up, but not dramatically. See my other post in the tech support forum for some ideas on how to speed up combat without loss of integrity in the process.

One problem I see with quick combat is that it opens up the game to a security bug: A person can try a battle, see the results, and then just exit the game. If we are using the house rule that they have to submit their land movement stuff before doing the combats, then at least they can't retract the movement. But, it is trivially easy to retract the results of a battle if all of the "action" occurs on one system: Just hit the "exit program" button and try again.



Jimmer -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 5:59:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

As a compromise suggestion; add "Run as battle file exchange" to the list of "chits" that can
be preset for corp.  If this is selected; then the computer should generate battle files for the
combat whenever that corp is attacked instead of picking the chit.

I REALLY like this idea. Basically, it would allow any player (independent of the other players) to choose to have a real battle.

My question would be what happens when one player selects this option, but the other player does not? Does the first player then play with a battle window, but only at the end does the battle file get shipped? If so, this is ripe for the same kind of security breach I mentioned above.



Jimmer -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 6:04:54 PM)

And, I hadn't even thought of the intelligence aspects of this.

However, I think intelligence ought to be thought through much more than just this. I think it would be really good for every single factor one has fought with or fought against would be noted in a sub-database. If I fight a French corps with 11 factors in it, I want to know that on the following turn, and I want to know where it went (until such moves are disguised by the presence of other corps). This is a HUGE part of the combat stuff that used to be routinely kept by most players (I used to know about every single factor on the board at some points in the board games I played).

So, I would lobby for some kind of interface that would keep running tallys on any information I have gained. Once a corps stacks with or separates from a pile, then said information is less valuable. But, the game ought to be able to tell me what happened for the last few months (to my stacks, that is).



NeverMan -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 6:19:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

One problem I see with quick combat is that it opens up the game to a security bug: A person can try a battle, see the results, and then just exit the game. If we are using the house rule that they have to submit their land movement stuff before doing the combats, then at least they can't retract the movement. But, it is trivially easy to retract the results of a battle if all of the "action" occurs on one system: Just hit the "exit program" button and try again.


Isnt this possible with the current battle system anyways? After seeing the "die rolls" can't you just exit the game and reload the turn? I haven't tried this (since cheating defeats the purpose of playing the game to begin with) but if someone has (and I'm sure there are some out there, not that they will come forward with a real game example) please let us know.



gwheelock -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 7:09:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer


quote:

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

As a compromise suggestion; add "Run as battle file exchange" to the list of "chits" that can
be preset for corp.  If this is selected; then the computer should generate battle files for the
combat whenever that corp is attacked instead of picking the chit.

I REALLY like this idea. Basically, it would allow any player (independent of the other players) to choose to have a real battle.

My question would be what happens when one player selects this option, but the other player does not? Does the first player then play with a battle window, but only at the end does the battle file get shipped? If so, this is ripe for the same kind of security breach I mentioned above.


It would only matter for the defender - the attacker ALWAYS has the ability to select a chit. The reason to leave the preset
chit options as well would be for combats where the defender is putting out blocking corp & knows what is coming at him ( thus
doesn't need the intel info). It still allows for game speedups when fighting trivial combats - either computer-picked or preselected
for those cases; but would do a full normal battle-exchange if the defender wishes it.



Jimmer -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 7:57:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Isnt this possible with the current battle system anyways? After seeing the "die rolls" can't you just exit the game and reload the turn? I haven't tried this (since cheating defeats the purpose of playing the game to begin with) but if someone has (and I'm sure there are some out there, not that they will come forward with a real game example) please let us know.


Yeah, I guess you are right.



NeverMan -> RE: Automatic battles? (8/14/2008 9:44:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Isnt this possible with the current battle system anyways? After seeing the "die rolls" can't you just exit the game and reload the turn? I haven't tried this (since cheating defeats the purpose of playing the game to begin with) but if someone has (and I'm sure there are some out there, not that they will come forward with a real game example) please let us know.


Yeah, I guess you are right.


Thinking about it, I'm sure this can be done for chit choice too (if the defender doesn't email his chit choice to someone else first). There are a TON of ways to cheat in this game, although I don't know why someone would want to.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.59375