Need playtesters. (Full Version)

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



Message

Dragoon 45 -> Need playtesters. (1/29/2005 2:07:15 PM)

As I mentioned in an earlier thread I have developed a scenario loosely based on the events around Trois Pointes, Be on 20-22 December, 1944. It is pure and simple a fight for the bridges. I have tested it as much as I can. Would any one be interested in testing it and then giving me their critique afterwards. Unfortunately the AI does not seem to handle either side well in this scenario, it will not blow the bridges if theatened by capture if it is playing the Americans and goes pell mell for the bridges as the German and does not effectively use its engineers to clear obstacles. There fore I am looking for suggestions to improve the play of the scenario. Thank You in advance.



IBTyrone -> RE: Need playtesters. (1/29/2005 3:33:44 PM)

Hook me up Dragoon. I'd like to take a look at it. You can PM me the file here or you can email it to me. My email is tyronevance@yahoo.com.



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Need playtesters. (1/29/2005 8:28:39 PM)

I need to do a couple of tweaks and I will probably email it to you tomorrow. I look forward to any comments or suggestions you might have.



KG Erwin -> RE: Need playtesters. (1/29/2005 9:28:22 PM)

Dragoon45, I think you should focus on this as a human vs human scenario. It's unfortunate that the AI scripts can't be tweaked, as this is built-in to the mech.exe. Some designers have done wonders with "tricking" the AI, and I can only encourage you to keep experimenting and building upon what others have done. I wish I had the patience for scenario design, but I don't.



IBTyrone -> RE: Need playtesters. (1/29/2005 11:12:09 PM)

I dunno, Gunny. [&:] If he doesn't play PBEM I don't know if he should try to design one. I don't think I could design a good PBEM game because of my lack of experience with that format. I've played quite a few human-designed scenarios and campaigns where the AI was plenty challenging.

But you are right, for the most part the AI is dumber than a box of rocks, especially in the long campaigns.

I look forward to seeing the scenario, Dragoon.



Raccoon_TOF -> RE: Need playtesters. (1/30/2005 3:00:27 AM)

I haven't spent a lot of time in the editor yet, but you can do alot with the waypoint system. If you place a series of waypoints directly in front of each other, it will slow the advance of the unit assigned that route by a good bit (they wait till the rest of their platoon has reached the objective hex before moving on to the next one, thus eating up a lot of movement points through stacking when the objective hexes are all in a row...at least that's the only reason I can see for it...). Unfortunately I don't think there is any way to get them to blow the bridges on the defense, but that should help with the mad rush of the attackers at least...

A zig-zag set of waypoints can also be useful for concentrating forces before moving on to a main objective...just have the rearmost units have a direct line, and the more forward units a set of staggered zigzags to traverse on their path there...



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Need playtesters. (1/30/2005 7:30:50 AM)

I set waypoints for the Germans in the scenario, it helped but not much. I finally settled on bringing in the German Forces over a 7 turn interval using reinforcements, broke down by platoons and sections. All the German Forces have waypoints and objectives assigned to them. Initial German forces have two plt's of engineers to clear obstacles and mines. Unfortunately the AI never seems to do a good job at that. I have pretty much already decided that this scenario should be human vs human due to the limitations of the AI in certain areas. The design of this scenario is that Piper got across a bridge at Trois Pointes on 19 Dec 44. The Americans recaptured the town after Piper moved on cutting his supply lines and at the same time bottling him up around La Glieze with elements of the 30th ID. The Scenario starts (roughly 21 Dec) with the remaining elements of the 1st SS Panzer Division trying to force the bridges at Trois Pointes and reopen a supply line to Piper. Right now the scenario is at 28 turns due to the effort needed to breach obstacles by the German Player. A Task-organized Engineer Company with some reinforcements is the U.S. Defender. German Forces consist of a Pzr Company, Pzr Gdr Company, with Recon, Engr, and Artillery attached. Also a Section of Tiger II's is added. The major problem with this scenario has been how to balance it to where if the Americans are forced to blow the bridges they can only get at best a marginal victory. When I started the design of this scenario I did not realize there would be some serious challenges to overcome. It has been fun but also very frustrating at times.



Major Destruction -> RE: Need playtesters. (1/30/2005 8:21:13 AM)

I would like to playtest this scenario.



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Need playtesters. (1/30/2005 9:28:08 PM)

Please send me an email address so I can email it to you. The email function on the board will not let me
attache the scenario to the email. My email: dragoon_45@cox.net. Thank you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

I would like to playtest this scenario.



Major Destruction -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/1/2005 5:48:06 AM)

I finished this scenario. It really is a good battle but the bridges were never seriously threatened by the attacking Germans.

The problem with your Computer Opponent not using his engineers to clear mines is a game limitation (maybe) or maybe it is the AI being smart to a point.

Engineers will not clear mines effectively when they are under fire, suppressed or even threatened. Therefore the AI will not ask engineers to attempt to clear mines if there is any threat to them. A Human player would smoke the area to prevent his engineers from being spotted and targetted bu the AI does not know how to use smoke.

In the case of the Computer Opponent playing the defending side, the AI does not know how to destroy the bridge and will not consider "cutting his losses" or using a demolition to slow the enemy advance.

I think this scenario has good potential as a PBEM battle. There are some changes you can make to make this a more challenging battle for the US defender. I'll send you my ideas privately so as to not spoil things for the eventual release.

By the way, I believe the location is Trois Ponts (Three Bridges) and not Trois Pointes (Three Points)



Raccoon_TOF -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/1/2005 5:50:24 AM)

The bridge demolition/target units in the Norway OOB can be used for bridge demo duties by the AI if needed...



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/1/2005 2:49:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

I finished this scenario. It really is a good battle but the bridges were never seriously threatened by the attacking Germans.

The problem with your Computer Opponent not using his engineers to clear mines is a game limitation (maybe) or maybe it is the AI being smart to a point.

Engineers will not clear mines effectively when they are under fire, suppressed or even threatened. Therefore the AI will not ask engineers to attempt to clear mines if there is any threat to them. A Human player would smoke the area to prevent his engineers from being spotted and targetted bu the AI does not know how to use smoke.

In the case of the Computer Opponent playing the defending side, the AI does not know how to destroy the bridge and will not consider "cutting his losses" or using a demolition to slow the enemy advance.

I think this scenario has good potential as a PBEM battle. There are some changes you can make to make this a more challenging battle for the US defender. I'll send you my ideas privately so as to not spoil things for the eventual release.

By the way, I believe the location is Trois Ponts (Three Bridges) and not Trois Pointes (Three Points)



Thank you for the comments. I have seen the name of the village spelled three different ways in reference books. My copy of the U.S. Army's official history of the Battle of the Bulge spells it both ways. I don't know which is actually correct. I look forward to your other comments.



IBTyrone -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/1/2005 10:16:23 PM)

Major,

Did you try it as the Germans? I played the Americans Sunday and walked away with an easy decisive (lost 30 guys). I played the Germans last night and got a draw. Not sure why, though, I didn't think my losses merited that many points. I did lose seven AFVs, mostly to mines, but held all the victory hexes and all other losses were about equal.

I might have been able to pull off a marginal by exiting my troops off the map, but I forgot and took the last victory hex at turn 13 whereupon the scenario ended. Doh!

However, that still doesn't answer the question how the AI ran up 4500 points on me controlling no victory hexes and only knocking out seven AFVs.



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/2/2005 2:27:51 AM)

That was one of the issues on the victory points total that I couldn't understand also when playing the German side. The only thing I could figure out is I made a mistake somewhere with the victory points per hex but couldn't find it. I was hoping someone could find out my mistake.

quote:

ORIGINAL: IBTyrone

Major,

Did you try it as the Germans? I played the Americans Sunday and walked away with an easy decisive (lost 30 guys). I played the Germans last night and got a draw. Not sure why, though, I didn't think my losses merited that many points. I did lose seven AFVs, mostly to mines, but held all the victory hexes and all other losses were about equal.

I might have been able to pull off a marginal by exiting my troops off the map, but I forgot and took the last victory hex at turn 13 whereupon the scenario ended. Doh!

However, that still doesn't answer the question how the AI ran up 4500 points on me controlling no victory hexes and only knocking out seven AFVs.



IBTyrone -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/2/2005 5:55:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dragoon 45

That was one of the issues on the victory points total that I couldn't understand also when playing the German side. The only thing I could figure out is I made a mistake somewhere with the victory points per hex but couldn't find it. I was hoping someone could find out my mistake.


Here are some observations:

In looking at your Headquarters view, for the German side you have about a third of your units listed as player 1. You might want to change them to player 2 so they are all consistent. That *might* be a problem and you probably want to fix it. It could cause a pbem to be screwy as well.

I went through and added up the total value of the victory hexes which equals 3080. If I have all 3000 points worth of victory hexes where is the AI getting its 4500 it kicked my tail with?

So I surrendered. By simply surrendering as the Germans I lost a decisive to the Americans 5604-0. Where did the AI get 2524 points before I even moved a unit? I did a search of the manual and came up with the following concerning victory EXIT hexes:

"When using this option the player will receive victory points for each of the units
that is able to exit off of the map. If there are any Exit Victory hexes in a scenario, the other side gets ½ the escaping side’s starting force value as victory points immediately. Units exited through the Exit Victory hexes now score 3x their (and their passengers’) value as victory points."

The two victory exit hexes in the map means that since I didn't exit squat, the AI got half the point value of my force (which I assume is 2524 points--where do you find that?) in addition to the 20 victory hexes for the total total of 5604.

That probably explains why the AI put 4500 points on me last night. My losses weren't that severe but I didn't exit any of my troops since I took the last victory hex too early so I was penalized for my oversight. If I would have exited most of my remaining troops I probably would have pulled at least a marginal win.

So...I would either emphasize the importance in getting the German units off the map before time runs out or eliminate the victory exit hexes altogether. Because of the emphasis of destroying the bridges in this scenario, the importance of getting the German units off the map sort of gets lost in the scenario intro text. It just says "advance to relieve Peiper", and does not say something like "if you do not use the exit hexes you will not win this battle!" You might want to alter the text a little.



Major Destruction -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/2/2005 5:55:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: IBTyrone

However, that still doesn't answer the question how the AI ran up 4500 points on me controlling no victory hexes and only knocking out seven AFVs.


The victory exit hexes guarantee that the German side can not score enough points to win the game. I thought that was deliberate.

At the conclusion of the battle, any German units that are still on the map score against the German player. Only units that are exited off the map via the exit hex(es) will score points for the German player. The value of those exited units can be multipied by a factor. This factor is determined by the scenario designer. Therefore by careful editing, the designer can permit the German player to score a victory if he manages to exit only a few units; especially if those units are high value units, while permitting the player to take normal precautions to defend his captured flags with less valuable units.



IBTyrone -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/2/2005 5:59:05 AM)

Major,

We must have posted the same response about three seconds apart. heh.



RockinHarry -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/2/2005 5:17:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dragoon 45

As I mentioned in an earlier thread I have developed a scenario loosely based on the events around Trois Pointes, Be on 20-22 December, 1944. It is pure and simple a fight for the bridges. I have tested it as much as I can. Would any one be interested in testing it and then giving me their critique afterwards. Unfortunately the AI does not seem to handle either side well in this scenario, it will not blow the bridges if theatened by capture if it is playing the Americans and goes pell mell for the bridges as the German and does not effectively use its engineers to clear obstacles. There fore I am looking for suggestions to improve the play of the scenario. Thank You in advance.


Dragoon 45, I can help you setting up the AI to blow bridges and stuff. I already got that working for a scenario named Stockheim Clash some time ago. Best you PM me and send me the scenario with a couple of your notes (about how your scenario is intended to work, issues, timing ect.)



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/2/2005 6:31:37 PM)

I would be glad to send it to you but I can't figure out how to attach a file with the boards email utility. My email is posted above please send me an email and I will email back, the scenario.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dragoon 45

As I mentioned in an earlier thread I have developed a scenario loosely based on the events around Trois Pointes, Be on 20-22 December, 1944. It is pure and simple a fight for the bridges. I have tested it as much as I can. Would any one be interested in testing it and then giving me their critique afterwards. Unfortunately the AI does not seem to handle either side well in this scenario, it will not blow the bridges if theatened by capture if it is playing the Americans and goes pell mell for the bridges as the German and does not effectively use its engineers to clear obstacles. There fore I am looking for suggestions to improve the play of the scenario. Thank You in advance.


Dragoon 45, I can help you setting up the AI to blow bridges and stuff. I already got that working for a scenario named Stockheim Clash some time ago. Best you PM me and send me the scenario with a couple of your notes (about how your scenario is intended to work, issues, timing ect.)



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/2/2005 6:37:16 PM)

Thank you for your comments. I must have misread the manual, because I was under the impression that if you exited any units the other player did not get that 1/2 the opposing force point value bonus. That was my mistake. I will consider some options and see what I can get to work best.

quote:

ORIGINAL: IBTyrone

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dragoon 45

That was one of the issues on the victory points total that I couldn't understand also when playing the German side. The only thing I could figure out is I made a mistake somewhere with the victory points per hex but couldn't find it. I was hoping someone could find out my mistake.


Here are some observations:

In looking at your Headquarters view, for the German side you have about a third of your units listed as player 1. You might want to change them to player 2 so they are all consistent. That *might* be a problem and you probably want to fix it. It could cause a pbem to be screwy as well.

I went through and added up the total value of the victory hexes which equals 3080. If I have all 3000 points worth of victory hexes where is the AI getting its 4500 it kicked my tail with?

So I surrendered. By simply surrendering as the Germans I lost a decisive to the Americans 5604-0. Where did the AI get 2524 points before I even moved a unit? I did a search of the manual and came up with the following concerning victory EXIT hexes:

"When using this option the player will receive victory points for each of the units
that is able to exit off of the map. If there are any Exit Victory hexes in a scenario, the other side gets ½ the escaping side’s starting force value as victory points immediately. Units exited through the Exit Victory hexes now score 3x their (and their passengers’) value as victory points."

The two victory exit hexes in the map means that since I didn't exit squat, the AI got half the point value of my force (which I assume is 2524 points--where do you find that?) in addition to the 20 victory hexes for the total total of 5604.

That probably explains why the AI put 4500 points on me last night. My losses weren't that severe but I didn't exit any of my troops since I took the last victory hex too early so I was penalized for my oversight. If I would have exited most of my remaining troops I probably would have pulled at least a marginal win.

So...I would either emphasize the importance in getting the German units off the map before time runs out or eliminate the victory exit hexes altogether. Because of the emphasis of destroying the bridges in this scenario, the importance of getting the German units off the map sort of gets lost in the scenario intro text. It just says "advance to relieve Peiper", and does not say something like "if you do not use the exit hexes you will not win this battle!" You might want to alter the text a little.



IBTyrone -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/3/2005 12:03:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dragoon 45

Thank you for your comments. I must have misread the manual, because I was under the impression that if you exited any units the other player did not get that 1/2 the opposing force point value bonus. That was my mistake. I will consider some options and see what I can get to work best.


The reason I did not do well was because I did not exit ANY units. That was my fault.

I think you read it right. However, I don't know if the 1/2 bonus goes away if you exit a minimum of one unit or if the AI gets 1/2 cost for each unit remaining on the board at the end of the game.



RockinHarry -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/4/2005 7:35:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dragoon 45

I would be glad to send it to you but I can't figure out how to attach a file with the boards email utility. My email is posted above please send me an email and I will email back, the scenario.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dragoon 45

As I mentioned in an earlier thread I have developed a scenario loosely based on the events around Trois Pointes, Be on 20-22 December, 1944. It is pure and simple a fight for the bridges. I have tested it as much as I can. Would any one be interested in testing it and then giving me their critique afterwards. Unfortunately the AI does not seem to handle either side well in this scenario, it will not blow the bridges if theatened by capture if it is playing the Americans and goes pell mell for the bridges as the German and does not effectively use its engineers to clear obstacles. There fore I am looking for suggestions to improve the play of the scenario. Thank You in advance.


Dragoon 45, I can help you setting up the AI to blow bridges and stuff. I already got that working for a scenario named Stockheim Clash some time ago. Best you PM me and send me the scenario with a couple of your notes (about how your scenario is intended to work, issues, timing ect.)



files received!



Wild Bill -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/5/2005 11:27:22 PM)

In cases where I wanted a scenario playable from either side, I have designed two of them, one to be played by say the Americans, the other to be played as the Germans. That way a person has the option of playing either one and yet both can be challenging....WB



Dragoon 45 -> RE: Need playtesters. (2/6/2005 8:01:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild Bill

In cases where I wanted a scenario playable from either side, I have designed two of them, one to be played by say the Americans, the other to be played as the Germans. That way a person has the option of playing either one and yet both can be challenging....WB


If I can get the kinks worked out, I wanted this to be a two player scenario. But your idea also has merit. If with help of others I can figure out how to get the AI to blow a bridge if threatened I could make the two separate scenario's. Frankly I am at a loss so far on getting the AI to blow the bridge if needed. If the bridges are not in danger of capture I don't want them blown, but if they are they should be blown. A human player can do this with engineers with satchel charges or other ways.

One question, All sides in WW II developed AVLB's of one sort or another, although the British made the most use of them. Depending on the type, emplacement time could be as short as a couple of turns in SPWaW. Has any attempt ever been made to model them in the game?



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.71875