Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Paying Player's Poll (no testers please)

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 5:36:28 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4456
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline 		I want to find out if my views are in the minority here.

Did you buy this game (or are you thinking of buying) primarily to:

1. Play against an AI that uses clever tactics, but which will play very differently from the historical human generals (for example, by giving up Minsk to defend further back), or

2. Play against an AI that gives you a reasonable facsimile of WW2 operational decisions, as per actual history (for example, by standing and fighting in 1941 even if a pocket is formed), or

3. Play PBEM vs. a human - anything goes.

Please post your thoughts.

_____________________________

WitE2 tester, WitW, WitP, CMMO, CM2, GTOS, GTMF, WP & WPP, TOAW4, BA2
Post #: 1
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 5:40:10 PM   
hgilmer3


Posts: 530
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline 		I didn't really put that much thought into who or what I would be playing except that I did plan to break into PBEM with this title.

But, probably the AI, because with the full campaign, that will take a really long time PBEM.  So, probably 60# #1, 40% #3.

The 2nd one - well, I don't know exactly the tactics they used because I'm not a historian on WW2 from the Russian front.  It interests me but I'm not very learned on what or how they did it, just that the Germans took their shot then the Soviets counterattacked and the Germans couldn't handle it.


_____________________________

KurtC in the WITE PBEM module.

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 2
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 5:50:28 PM   
stormbringer3

 

Posts: 875
Joined: 7/26/2007
From: Staunton, Va.
Status: offline 		Definitely choice #1 for me. If I'm free to not make historical mistakes, then I feel that the AI should also be able to avoid them.

(in reply to hgilmer3)
Post #: 3
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 5:55:36 PM   
Bradd

 

Posts: 24
Joined: 12/5/2010
Status: offline 		I bought a game what will reasonably recreate what it was to be "in Command" of the East front. As far as AI. I understand there are limitations. Because I would imagine it would be hard as the AI to decide when to go on the overall strategic offensive?

So I guess I would say a challenging AI that has realism, but is not tied into doing exactly what their real life counterpart did. After all, this is a simulation, that from the moment the first move was made, history was changed. (if that makes any sense).

(in reply to hgilmer3)
Post #: 4
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 6:06:15 PM   
Jabba

 

Posts: 62
Joined: 3/24/2005
Status: offline 		I second stormbringer3. Surprise is the essence of warfare.

Considering how often people complain about the poor quality of AI in strategy games, it is strange to find someone complaining that the AI is too cunning, and not folding over and dying like it is "meant" to.

I would imagine that the Germans in 1941 also felt the Soviets weren't fighting the way they were supposed to - like the Poles and the French who had folded in a matter of weeks. They didn't know whether or not the Soviets would evacuate Minsk or retreat to the Dnepr, so why should you?

(in reply to stormbringer3)
Post #: 5
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 6:16:16 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2903
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline 		#2 for me

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 6
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 6:35:55 PM   
E

 

Posts: 1247
Joined: 9/20/2007
Status: offline 		#2

_____________________________

"Lose" is the opposite of "win." "Loose" is the opposite of "tight."

Friends Don't Let Friends Facebook.

Twitter is for... (wait for it!) ...Twits!

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 7
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 7:10:49 PM   
wmcalpine

 

Posts: 131
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline 		#1 and #3 for me

(in reply to E)
Post #: 8
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 7:25:08 PM   
henri51


Posts: 1151
Joined: 1/16/2009
Status: offline 		1 and 2 for me. I play wargames against the AI only (so far), and I can live with more or less historicity.

Henri

(in reply to wmcalpine)
Post #: 9
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 7:28:04 PM   
cantona2


Posts: 3749
Joined: 5/21/2007
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline 		#1 until I get the hang of things then move up to #3

_____________________________

1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born


(in reply to henri51)
Post #: 10
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 7:30:59 PM   
fsp


Posts: 77
Joined: 11/22/2010
Status: offline 		Most of redmarkus' issues with the AI are found in a post by me in which I praised the AI. To be honest, it is very hard for me to answer that question.

I am still very much impressed by the AI, it is the best I have seen in such a huge game. But I do understand where you are coming from, as I am really divided myself. It feels weird to see such a defense in depth. It also seems really unrealistic for the Soviet's in 1941. On the other hand, it is giving me a tremendous game experience.

Here are a couple of thoughts:

a) For one, you said that you will go PBEM now. You will most probably not get any Soviet player to react like the real Soviets did. They will probably mostly employ a strategy like the Soviet AI does, which again goes to show just how good the AI is on defence.

b) I as the German player in this game/simulation have the benefit of hindsight. So does your Soviet PBEM partner. If I, as the German player get to avoid all the historic mistakes, not sending Guderian south, pushing extra for Leningrad and start preparing for Blizzard and avoiding Stalingrad or Kursk, I would surely win, wouldn't I? Would that not make playing kind of mood? Knowing, that the AI is exactly doing what the Soviets did in WW2, so I can easily use a blueprint to win?

c) I think if we have the Soviet AI defend like they did in history, we would easily achieve pockets even bigger than the Wehrmacht did in history. This again means that the AI would be a walkover or would need significant cheating/troops appearing out of nowhere to survive.

d) You cited board games like FITE as being able to realistically simulate the real thing. As far as I know, most Soviet players in FITE have avoided the big mistakes made by the Soviets in real life. The AI does the same here I think.

Again, not sure what I really think of this. This defence in depth just does not feel right when I face it. But it sure is a lot of fun. And I have only played 11 turns so far. Way too early for a final judgment.

(in reply to wmcalpine)
Post #: 11
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 7:33:41 PM   
JudgeDredd


Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline 		#1 for me too.

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to fsp)
Post #: 12
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 7:47:38 PM   
bilbow


Posts: 741
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Concord NH
Status: offline 		AI for learning then on the PBEM, "anything goes" within the realm of historical capability.

_____________________________

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile- hoping it will eat him last
- Winston Churchill

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 13
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 7:55:51 PM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline 		AI first, then (a big exception: in Witp I ALWAYS avoided PBEM: thousands of turns = a huge commitment ) PBEM, I guess

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to bilbow)
Post #: 14
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 8:09:30 PM   
KenchiSulla


Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline 		1 and 3 for sure... Player has benefit of hindsight and its not a re-enactment of the war in the east...

in other words - war is hell, deal with it *grins*

_____________________________

AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 15
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 8:20:37 PM   
OldSarge


Posts: 642
Joined: 11/25/2010
From: Albuquerque, NM
Status: offline 		1 & 3 for me. Although, for now, I'm more in the #1 camp until I can get free time to commit to PBEM.

It would be impossible for an AI to match human cunning and the ability to learn patterns after repeated games. I do like an AI that puts up a good enough fight to make the game interesting. If the AI performs at least as well as a beginning human player then I'm content.

_____________________________

You and the rest, you forgot the first rule of the fanatic: When you become obsessed with the enemy, you become the enemy.
Jeffrey Sinclair, "Infection", Babylon 5

(in reply to KenchiSulla)
Post #: 16
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 8:38:54 PM   
Krec


Posts: 548
Joined: 3/9/2001
From: SF Bay Area
Status: offline 		#3 this is where the game will really shine.

_____________________________

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." Patton


(in reply to OldSarge)
Post #: 17
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 8:48:36 PM   
benpark

 

Posts: 3884
Joined: 8/12/2002
Status: offline 		What if I bought the game AND tested it?

_____________________________

"Fear is a darkroom where the devil develops his negatives" Gary Busey

(in reply to Krec)
Post #: 18
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 9:33:10 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4456
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline 		Thanks all.  My preference is for 2 and 3, but I see that 1 and 3 are the winners here.

FSP, I'm not saying that the AI should do everything as per history.  Obviously that wouldn't work as a game.  But in the early months it should be in major 'shock' and it's ability to make big strategic moves should be very limited IMHO. 

All I know is that I've never seen a Soviet AI behave like this, but I have played other War in Russia games where I couldn't take Moscow, Leningrad AND Stalingrad.

I'm playing multi now, so I will see how that goes.


_____________________________

WitE2 tester, WitW, WitP, CMMO, CM2, GTOS, GTMF, WP & WPP, TOAW4, BA2

(in reply to benpark)
Post #: 19
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 10:07:10 PM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline 		#1 and #3.

Just an opinion: I don't think that #2 is even possible EXCEPT when done as seperate scenarios since the actions of the AI are inherently dependent on the path taken to the action decision point.

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 20
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 10:22:11 PM   
FredSanford3

 

Posts: 567
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline 		Historical question: Did the Soviet (military) high command attempt to defend forward in 1941 because they thought it was a good idea, or because Stalin ordered it (and you don't say 'no' to Stalin, or Hitler either)? Wasn't Stalin pressuring for early counter-attacks, even though it didn't make sense militarily (though he may have had politics on his mind in that turning tail might send a bad message to potential rivals)? Same thing for Hitler and the 'no retreat' orders later in the war?

So a solution perhaps is to allow for 'political' interference by either scenario design or random chance have your 'dictator' remove the option- e.g., no movements away from the enemy/disbanding/relocating units for X turns.

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 21
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 10:27:07 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4456
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack

#1 and #3.

Just an opinion: I don't think that #2 is even possible EXCEPT when done as seperate scenarios since the actions of the AI are inherently dependent on the path taken to the action decision point.


You're saying that you can't code a Soviet AI so that in 1941:

1. It is affected by shock and has 25% movement and admin points, etc.
2. It doesn't retreat for the first few turns.
3. The code that causes it to escape from pockets is deactivated for the first few months.
4. The General in command of STAVKA has minimal skills and cannot be replaced for the first few months.
5. Other Generals have reduced skills and no initiative for the first months.
6. It makes a defense line (e.g. with stacks) instead of defending in depth.

??????


< Message edited by redmarkus4 -- 12/12/2010 10:31:34 PM >

_____________________________

WitE2 tester, WitW, WitP, CMMO, CM2, GTOS, GTMF, WP & WPP, TOAW4, BA2

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 22
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 10:29:21 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4456
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

Historical question: Did the Soviet (military) high command attempt to defend forward in 1941 because they thought it was a good idea, or because Stalin ordered it (and you don't say 'no' to Stalin, or Hitler either)? Wasn't Stalin pressuring for early counter-attacks, even though it didn't make sense militarily (though he may have had politics on his mind in that turning tail might send a bad message to potential rivals)? Same thing for Hitler and the 'no retreat' orders later in the war?

So a solution perhaps is to allow for 'political' interference by either scenario design or random chance have your 'dictator' remove the option- e.g., no movements away from the enemy/disbanding/relocating units for X turns.


Many historians believe that Stalin was preparing either a first strike or a major counter-offensive to be launched as soon as the Germans attacked. However, this second theory conflicts with the obvious shock that he suffered when the Germans did attack him.

_____________________________

WitE2 tester, WitW, WitP, CMMO, CM2, GTOS, GTMF, WP & WPP, TOAW4, BA2

(in reply to FredSanford3)
Post #: 23
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 10:31:10 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4456
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

So a solution perhaps is to allow for 'political' interference by either scenario design or random chance have your 'dictator' remove the option- e.g., no movements away from the enemy/disbanding/relocating units for X turns.


Sounds pretty simple, doesn't it? Just code the AI to be a bit less intelligent while it's suffering from the shock of being invaded. That would make a big difference IMO.

_____________________________

WitE2 tester, WitW, WitP, CMMO, CM2, GTOS, GTMF, WP & WPP, TOAW4, BA2

(in reply to FredSanford3)
Post #: 24
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 10:41:00 PM   
FredSanford3

 

Posts: 567
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline 		Personally, I wouldn't want the 'no retreat' hard-coded, but maybe as an option in the scenario design. Or even have your 'Hitler' demand Operation Typhoon (or some other objective)- if he doesn't get what he wants (say if Moscow isn't taken by X), then 'heads roll' - e.g. AGC commander is executed, and automatically replaced by the highest Political-rated available FM.

Maybe no changes are necessary, except to adjust the scenario design to provide short-term VP objectives for the Soviets far forward that would entice the AI (or a player) to attempt to stick around and fight.

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 25
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 10:50:14 PM   
Tophat1815

 

Posts: 1824
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline 		Alright
quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

I want to find out if my views are in the minority here.

Did you buy this game (or are you thinking of buying) primarily to:

1. Play against an AI that uses clever tactics, but which will play very differently from the historical human generals (for example, by giving up Minsk to defend further back), or

2. Play against an AI that gives you a reasonable facsimile of WW2 operational decisions, as per actual history (for example, by standing and fighting in 1941 even if a pocket is formed), or

3. Play PBEM vs. a human - anything goes.

Please post your thoughts.

I'll bite........

#1 and #3 for me with equal emphasis on both of those choices. If pushed I do like the challenge between 2 players so #3 would get the advantage.

My question back is what are your views? Would be nice to know them without going through a merry thread search.

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 26
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 11:00:39 PM   
blam0

 

Posts: 133
Joined: 3/24/2004
Status: offline 		#1 and 3 for me.

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 27
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 11:15:10 PM   
Jevhaddah


Posts: 626
Joined: 11/24/2005
From: Scotland
Status: offline 		1 and 3 for me too.

As long as I start with the units and supplies that were availible at the time on the first turn, then it's up to me to decide what I should do with them.

I daresay yoo could go for historical results by following the historical Barbarossa as closly as posiible.

I iz gonna have to wait until after chrimbo to find out though

Cheers

Jev

_____________________________

I am really quite mad yoo know!

(in reply to blam0)
Post #: 28
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/12/2010 11:17:17 PM   
wosung

 

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Many historians believe that Stalin was preparing either a first strike or a major counter-offensive to be launched as soon as the Germans attacked.


Completly wrong.

1. There are simply NOT many historians, who do believe this.
2. ALL Wehrmacht file of summer 1941 indicate complete suprise of the Red Army.
3. Don't you think that IF there would have been the slightest evidence of such an Red Army preperation, that the German Propaganda Ministry wouldn't have sold this big time to the international audience? Like Katyn?

Regards

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 29
RE: Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) - 12/13/2010 2:45:48 AM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3283
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline 		2 and 3 here.

_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Paying Player's Poll (no testers please) Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.000