slysniper

LOL, back to old post, you should see how many post complain how poor snipers are in the game, these numbers seem high only compared to that. For a man that is a crafted skilled shooter like elite should represent, these numbers do not seem out of line. actually a little low for the close ranges with a non moving target.

No big trick to it, I set up a map with 10 fire lanes, thick woods between them so that only the unit can fire on the unit within that area, but I can run 10 test at a time. if you do not want a unit to run or retreat to help get results, put water around it so movement is stoped. On this test I placed the sharpshooter in woods at the front edge and the tank at the given distance in the open. So each tank received only on shot from one sniper, normally taking 10-15 seconds in the first turn. all shots are at the same distance no varience. When running the game I use hot seat mode, when doing this I also make sure to alternate which side is selected to start the game, I do not want any setting to be a possible impact. I normally run the test enough times until I have decided I see a consistant data result from grouping to grouping of 10 matches, This could be as many as someone feels is needed. The more test, the better the acuracy of the numbers. I normally run a minimum of 4 or 5 games giving my 50 results per situation I am looking at, some others I have seen do much more, but I find their results do not differ much. In this test I was amazed at how consistant the numbers were, each round only varied one hit except at the 400 yard range where I started to see numbers vary more from round to round. What was interesting was the kill percentage climbed to the percentage of hits, not something you expect to see if the game as been programmed to calculate the figure within a certain percentage. [ August 15, 2007, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: slysniper ]

Since it appears that I am getting no takers, I might as well post the numbers and see what can be said about them. At 100 yards 85% chance of a hit, 65% wound, 20% kill, 15% miss At 200 yards 80% chance of a hit, 60% wound, 20% kill, 20% miss At 400 Yards 40% chance of a hit, 25% wound, 15% kill, 60% miss.

Not disagreeing, I know many of my games have the same feel in stats. But I can tell you that my kill ratio in this test varied much more than a few percentage points, thus not a result that can hold this theory to be true.

Hey Bert, you are right, I forgot to mention a elite American sniper, the numbers at that site there are somewhat close but still not the same, his testing methods was a little weak in taking out some variences. But no question as to 500 meters being a waste of time. What I do see from his stats is it appears that the snipers perform differnty from nationality also, whether that is taking into account the weapon they are using or skill level difference is hard to say but it appears to be different. Funny you should reply, Many of your tank commanders have fallen prey to my snipers

I knew someone would say something, I prefer to think of them as snipers even though they are sharpshooters. Now do you have a guess, that is the question

I agree with this in that normally not all crew members are dead, no matter what type of explosion, so are you stating in operations that death is accounted for more correctly or are you stating that how the game derives causualties is always by this method. Can you state if this aspect is true in other causalty rates or is it programing that only affects tank crews. So even though you have pointed out this aspect it still does not factor into every other aspect of the game I do not claim to know anything about the game mechanics, I do know that my question has to do wth the game itself, so of course it is influenced by game coding, thus the point of the question. I also know that the results show that this concept you describe which I agree with in the application you have used. It does not appear to be involved at all in the same way with the number results that I have generated here in this application. Not to say the programming still does not have similar approuches- who knows execpt steve Last, this was for those interested in a simple test of guessing what they think the game performs, not for someone that is looking to flame just because they see what they concider a incorrection on how the game just is not a perfect model of life. Those that would enjoy this type of question might be long gone from the forum, many that are left, make me wonder what type of people they are.

Operations to scenarios I cannot answer, but your second statement is not correct in the least. Even if my numbers add a varience for propability, they will show that you do not know the mechanics of the game, and likely no one does except Steve, even after all these years. So there is a clue for you all, the kill wound ratio is not the same at the three ranges.

Wanted to have a little fun. Without cheating, I want you all to take a guess on game sniper abilities. I remember some discussions on how under-performing they are in the game, lets see what you know? Give the answer in percentage points. For a American Elite Sniper shooting at exposed tank commander at 100 yards, 200 yards, and 400 yards. miss %, wound % and kill %. The three numbers should equal 100% Example: 400 yard, 5% kill, 15% wound, 80% miss. I doubt anyone is close without running test, and running test is cheating. No reward other than to see how close you get, so don't cheat, what would the point be, other than you had more time to waste than me. Let us see who love their snipers in this game and knows the facts. [ August 14, 2007, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: slysniper ]

I know, but it not a clean just open up the game and play the game and the machine does all the work like the modern computer games. The players still need to know all the rules that governs the original game to be good at it, even with all the added helps, its still just that old board game being used on the internet. Of course they will continue making money the way that makes sence, they will sell until someone else comes out with all that and more in a new package, one as I described, one that gives it to you for that $35 to $50 dollars and uses what is available today so that it will be so above VASL that there will be no comparision. At least It be a wishful hope.

BACK TO LT BULLS COMMENTS, I think that the concepts you have thought of are very open minded, Most here would love to see a modern ASL with the latest graphics, all the options of war, A forum with thousand of players waiting to play and a system that does a good job of preventing cheating and manages all the rules and calc's so that you can enjoy the game. Could not a game like this be made quicker, cheaper and more realistic if the AI was forgotten. Yes, the answer is not hard to see, it is staring us in the face. So your comments to say why not try is valid. Would money be made, again ASL proves that a market is there, could this not tap into it and quickly if again the designer would forget about having AI. Of course What is more interesting, as you have mentioned, could this not open the door to more creative designs, other games that no programmer presently dares to dream of because he cannot handle how to get the AI to do all the things he desires to Sim. Put the power back into the hands of the user, Make the games for the most incredible thing on earth, the human mind and see what type of games could be made. I like your points and what you are saying, sorry if i helped side track this for you to much. but its the first interesting thing i have read for many months from this Forum. I hope others will comment also with valid issues of why this could work or the challenges involved with the concept. [ July 18, 2007, 09:50 AM: Message edited by: slysniper ]

But then came close combat to the market, I could find someone on line almost anytime, the games were quick, normally around 30 minutes, there was no rule issues, cheating was minimal, and most everyone seems more interesting when you do not have to deal with them in your own home. The world changed, no longer would AI be more than a poor way to test the game, real players from all parts of the world, different styles, different backrounds, what a breath of fresh air to the interest in my life. Combat mission added to it, placed me into that 3d envirement that the player has always wanted, could still play small quick games, but with the PBEM function, now larger more complex games could be tackled and still not worry about coordinating your time with someone else. The simple aspect of making it open enough so now the adverage user could design new maps and games, that is what made this game the thing that changed the hobby. not because it was playable vs the AI, even though I know the majority of players have played it that way only. I cannot see the future, but I try to understand what I see, my kids long for interactive play against others, the AI is there to learn the game but they allways want to play others. From what I see in them, A great game has nothing to do with AI, it has to do with how much they can control the game, the effects and realism it gives them and how many things it can do so as to not be boring or predictable, that is what determines the shelve life and investment for them. It is this type of person that games will be sold too for the next 20-30 years, might at least try and figure out what is needed to make the next great leap forward, because what the hobby is doing presently will not get it there. [ July 17, 2007, 08:45 PM: Message edited by: slysniper ]

This could be part of the point, to drop the AI, to help push the level of the games in other areas to higher levels and in some way help the developer cut cost and design issues. But it still goes back to how to get them buyers to change their concept of wanting to play others instead of themselves, it is the fact that the designer will not change the approach unless present trends of all these hidden buyers would start to change, where they learn to find the enjoyment of what can now be offered over the internet. I personnally was one of these closet players since back in the late 70's. thousand's of hours of solitare play, not that I did not want to play others. But as many stories already point out. The few players I found were either unemployed, nuts or kids with too much time on their hands. The pool of players were very limited even though I lived in a major city, game companies sponcered events were normally a thousand miles away. When you did find someone that you could get along with, it was still hard, since the games tolk so much time, there was interpreting the rules and points of view, the game enjoyment was lost many times because of this, it was not like playing risk or monopoly with someone, it just beyond a social game type of activity, not saying it cannot be social. So solitare was a way to simple enjoy the game, so I do see clearly why the hobby is like it is.

Yes, maybe it will not die, but does it have to remain such a small supported hobby as it is presently. I would like to see a game that would bring more to the hobby because of what the game is offering, thus a reason to think how we approach the hobby might require some interventive change. No, I do not fear seeing the hobby die but I wonder at times if the future will produce good products for our use or will we be left with our classic games that are old tech because all the designers will be filling the needs of the market which will not be us because we could not understand how to make true wargaming grow in popularity. No, no certain game needs to carry the burden, but hopefully one has the magic touch to bring many new players to it and then to open their eyes into this hobby. That was how it has been in the past, but the future games need to be exceptional. They are judged on realism, graphic, game play, ease of use, substance, correctness and replayability. most are done for computers, all these type of things add up to years of work and that by skilled people. The make your own game in the basement is gone as far as making out to the market in mass. If we do not gain numbers to be a market then we will be lost by the times.

Now that was more civil, Michael. Most of what you say is likely correct, that for whatever reasons, the majority of players presently are solitare players. There is plenty of clues and reports to that. The question "why" might still be a unanswered issue. The thing that this topic brings up though is that "Is this trend likely to be the same in the future". That is a question that cannot be answered with present facts. The thing to think about is things that help one to predict future events. Example, this hobby presently is a dieing hobby in some sence, it is not growing in size, most of those in it today were in it 20,30 and 40 years ago, yes there is a few that find there way into it that are young but not in the numbers that reflect even the growth expearenced in the late 60's or 70's. Present sell of what works in the market and where future efforts will focus because that is where money is made. The days of making the game you want and finding a way to market it is already sliping away and will likely be hard to ever change in the industry. So my point, the games that will be a big success in the future is the ones that attracts a larger share of all them younger gamers, will fit the needs of those that finance them and somehow meets the needs of the consumer. It will interesting to see how Shock force does. Because one of the facts that might show up is that the younger players might show up within it, not for many reasons thought of in the past but for the simple fact that WW2 or earlier events is not of much interest to that age, but something protraying present day conflicts might be a big plus. The release of this game might be the biggest clue we will have as to the direction of this Hobby in the future

Oh, Thank you for typing that Mr Dorosh. I Thought for sure that the 10 people who still visits this site were all closet players and that I was directly speaking to them. May I say respectfully " Who spit in your cereal today" what a attitude!!. All that you need to get out of the comment is, Maybe as gamers, we should do more to promote all these closet players in finding the benefits of playing others instead of the AI, thus helping promote the concept of "Do these games really need AI". Yes it was written sarcastically, but I thought some might see the point without having to show their debate skills. "You are such a Master of that" thanks once more

I say a campaign against all these closet players needs to be waged. Get them from out of the shadows, make them willing to accept possible defeat by another Human being. Instead of this hidden habit of playing a AI system that almost any fool can beat with a little pratice and time to learn of its flaws. They must learn that they are nothing until they can accept victories or defeats in a honorable manor agaist another Human being. By the way, give up hope on CMC, it shall never succeed. You can breed a dog into another breed of dog but you cannot breed a dog into a cat. The same is true with this game, if it does see the light of day it will be a ugly dog, not the cat you were hoping to be breed.

I am always amazed at how many will not play CMBO since BB & AK came out. But though it might not be as accurate or have the few extras that were added to the others. It still is a great system and good fun for head to head play.

I can state that by the time I have time to think about another tournament it will be more than a few months away, it could be referred to more as a year or so away, thus by then we all could be on to other things. Not the type of news you wanted to hear but it is the facts of my situation.

Way too many high hopes here, With shock force still not out and looking at the company's track record of past performances, even with the same engine being used for a WWII version. I will give them a min. of a year and a half to get something out, that is after they get shock force out and their revisions of fixing bugs once it is out. Now once the first module is done you might get lucky and start seeing additional modules roll out about every 9 months, of course you will need to keep putting out funds to get a little more of what you want. but for sure they will sell you WWII in small bites this time. They are getting smart.

It will be about 3 years, about $60 dollars to get started with the first cm2 version, Then mod and new mission & theater areas coming out about every 6 months to a year at $30 dollars a pop until they sell you all of world war II for about $400 to $500 dollars or more. That is if we are lucky, first if they do not go out of bussiness, second if they can keep enough interest in the product. It will be like advance Squad leader was back when,they will get CM2 to pay for itself by giving us small portions instead of all of the west front or east front in one game as they did before.

A friendly reminder, please rate the scenarios and provide comments, it does help. Provides good feedback for future work.

I find the first part of this interesting, I cannot test it right now since the game is not with me, but I remember designing a scenario with one and I recall that it was lucky to see it fire more than once every other turn, I know the real thing had real problems with how a crew could reload it because of layout. But what are you saying the real rate of fire should be. As far as QB's, you propably are justified to make house rules against using it but again i have seen some with so many house rules that you might as well get away from QB's and learn to fight with what is given, even if against SturmTigers

Also note: the game does not handle operations well when it comes to selecting set up zones between battles, most players that want realistic game play make up house rules as far as set up from battle to battle to prevent some problems, but not much more can be done other than that.

I am 45, Started back with Squad Leader, then PC games like Close Combat series, Combat Mission series, Panzer Elite,IL2 and so forth. interested in historical publications on this period also. Also am excited to see the present day stuff about ready to be published in a realistic game by Battlefront. You will find that most of this community is not childish or will put up with it either. As far as finding guys that like to play at the level you enjoy, just be willing to play and you will find others that you will enjoy playing against and will have the same taste as you do, when you find them, you make them long term friends and buddies and play against them often, great stuff.