slysniper

My pet peeve is we have some real good designers when it comes to making maps and finding historical events and story lines. But a lot of them are terrible on setting up the scoring for competitive h2h play.
 
I find the trick to making a good scoring game is do not create the scores until after your play testing. Come to some decision as to what you think the end battle should look like from the test plays. Then learn to set the scores up from what your imagined end result is.
 
So in other words, if I had 5 test runs, I select the one I felt both sides played well and score that so it is about neutral if the end were to look like that battle. Then I adjust it so better results from either side swings the scoring slightly to their favor, I do not set up a point structure where there is a massive percentage swing of points for one objective. I only would do that if the objective was a very difficult and very unlikely area to gain. I also always like each trooper to be worth some points for kills. Just hate it when it is not a factor - I personally think it should always be some factor.
 
So a example might be.
 
I expect the attacker to lose 60% of his units. So if I give a 1000 points for them, 600 points would be earned. Now the defender is likely to lose 80% of his units, so I want that to earn 600 points also. So I would assign them a total of 750 points. That is my first attempt at what I am accepting as neutral.
 
Then I do the same for objectives. so that if the expected is captured from each side they neutralize each other. But what should they be scored as. I go back to my troop cost, then I think something along these lines. if the attacker pushes hard and gets the next objective, he likely will lose another 10% his troops. So the defender will gain `100 points , lets make the value 150 for that objective. So the objective is a benefit unless he losses hit 15%.  ( I then would normally set all my objectives with scores equal or under that value)
 
Well it really gets more complex than that because of all the variables you have. But it still comes to that type of basic thinking as to how to construct the scoring from a expected end result.
 
Hope that helps - I can only say it managed to help get me some very high score at the scenario depot years ago for some of my designs. You can make some very uneven battles but as long as you score it on this type of concepts. The battle will be competitive for h2h play.

My pet peeve is we have some real good designers when it comes to making maps and finding historical events and story lines. But a lot of them are terrible on setting up the scoring for competitive h2h play.
 
I find the trick to making a good scoring game is do not create the scores until after your play testing. Come to some decision as to what you think the end battle should look like from the test plays. Then learn to set the scores up from what your imagined end result is.
 
So in other words, if I had 5 test runs, I select the one I felt both sides played well and score that so it is about neutral if the end were to look like that battle. Then I adjust it so better results from either side swings the scoring slightly to their favor, I do not set up a point structure where there is a massive percentage swing of points for one objective. I only would do that if the objective was a very difficult and very unlikely area to gain. I also always like each trooper to be worth some points for kills. Just hate it when it is not a factor - I personally think it should always be some factor.
 
So a example might be.
 
I expect the attacker to lose 60% of his units. So if I give a 1000 points for them, 600 points would be earned. Now the defender is likely to lose 80% of his units, so I want that to earn 600 points also. So I would assign them a total of 750 points. That is my first attempt at what I am accepting as neutral.
 
Then I do the same for objectives. so that if the expected is captured from each side they neutralize each other. But what should they be scored as. I go back to my troop cost, then I think something along these lines. if the attacker pushes hard and gets the next objective, he likely will lose another 10% his troops. So the defender will gain `100 points , lets make the value 150 for that objective. So the objective is a benefit unless he losses hit 15%.  ( I then would normally set all my objectives with scores equal or under that value)
 
Well it really gets more complex than that because of all the variables you have. But it still comes to that type of basic thinking as to how to construct the scoring from a expected end result.
 
Hope that helps - I can only say it managed to help get me some very high score at the scenario depot years ago for some of my designs. You can make some very uneven battles but as long as you score it on this type of concepts. The battle will be competitive for h2h play.

And this thread is just a fine example of how wars are started. Because its amazing how different views can turn into a pissing match in no time.

Do you really think the world can ever avoid conflicts as long as men will continue to act like men.

Yes John, China does have maybe one of the best tanks in the world. Hard to say without actually being able to test them side to side with the Abram, and some of the other tanks.
 
But from what is know it is surely a threat.
 
But ripping on a tank that is still in the design phase in a sense shows no class. We really know very little about the thing.
 
So yes, there is missing parts and fake covering on the unit. But I am impressed that they even showed it as is. (What, would you prefer they left the canvas covers on and let you guess what was underneath it.)
 
And your Threat Analyst skills might have managed to get you a paying job but you have posted enough garbage here in the years that I question your basic logic. (So your Logic matches most of what we see coming from our Government lately) No basic sound decision making at all and  no policies being past that give direction for the future, just lies and efforts to win the vote for the next election and spending money on companies that hire people like you.   And you were thinking that statement carry some weight behind it, no, not for me. Just put me in the mood to write you this nasty gram.

Yes John, China does have maybe one of the best tanks in the world. Hard to say without actually being able to test them side to side with the Abram, and some of the other tanks.
 
But from what is know it is surely a threat.
 
But ripping on a tank that is still in the design phase in a sense shows no class. We really know very little about the thing.
 
So yes, there is missing parts and fake covering on the unit. But I am impressed that they even showed it as is. (What, would you prefer they left the canvas covers on and let you guess what was underneath it.)
 
And your Threat Analyst skills might have managed to get you a paying job but you have posted enough garbage here in the years that I question your basic logic. (So your Logic matches most of what we see coming from our Government lately) No basic sound decision making at all and  no policies being past that give direction for the future, just lies and efforts to win the vote for the next election and spending money on companies that hire people like you.   And you were thinking that statement carry some weight behind it, no, not for me. Just put me in the mood to write you this nasty gram.

Yes, it is somewhat hard for it to stand out when it is just one brief thing among many during a more than hour long event. Besides, we spoilt it for ourselves by hunting for every little glimpse of it during the previous months. But here is a bit shorter and more dramatic version for you, set to some classical music :



Duly noted, veering off topic now.

The other two most notable parades this year are probably those that happened in Donetsk and Lugansk Peoples' Republics. Not bad for the first time ever:

Krasnoarmeyets,
 
Simply stunning video shot with perfect parade weather! The T-14, sad to say, after 40 zillion posts about it, looks like the AFV equivalent of a cheap hooker. It's got so much Tank Bondo™ smeared on it as to be almost unrecognizable relative to what we've seen prior to the actual parade. To me, it looks as though some last minute decision was made to make it look as much like a "proper tank" as possible. In the process, a lot of sensor openings, surface detail and such were made to disappear. So much tank cosmetic work was done that it almost doesn't look real, instead more resembling bad model work for a Hollywood film. Rather than make a big splash, the T-14, in paint about the color of baby poo, was completely overshadowed by the very impressive, sharp looking and highly detailed T-90A in its powerful looking dark green paint. The Kurganets-25 looked great, but I don't understand the MG only version. I saw some Tank Bondo™ there, too, in the areas around the APS radar module on the right front. Tigr with 2 x quad Kornet was an eye opener. As for the T-15 and Bumerang, I must be so tired, or blinked at the wrong time, that I didn't see them, even the second pass through.
 
I feel thoroughly unimpressed and let down by the T-14 Putin showcased to his people and the world. What we saw before the parade had so much more presence, pugnacity and sense of new and different than what just rolled through. To me, the summary statement of the tank as shown would be T-14 Armata--The Boringly Bland "Revolutionary Breakthrough" Tank! Rather than having left foreign military observers stunned and awestruck, I believe the reactions will be more along the lines of "Why did we ever get worked up about this tank in the first place?!" and sniggering. Worse for him and the nation, the Chinese President, Xi Jinping, and his wife were there for the Potemkin village on tracks! In my estimation, Putin would've been better off coming up with some reason, say, belated MoD security concerns, not to parade what we saw. Maybe Putin should've borrowed some of these from his neighbor? If you paraded the two side by side, I guarantee this toy would outshine the T-14. By a mile. I know this isn't the kind of response you'd like to see, but I'm giving you my honest opinions and reactions--not just personally but from the perspective of someone whose professional beat for over 11 years was the Russian military as a Threat Analyst for two tip US defense firms.


 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

The stugs presently have a issue, along with the fact that most players do not know about it. Combined to create the problem.

The only way to use them is force them to stay Buttoned up, which if I recall correctly, even the AI will override that if it has a infantry target at times. The only MG gun on the Stug is the exterior mount. So if the tank thinks it needs to use the MG, the crew man pops out. Not a good default move. Thus the reason for the Stugs issues. But for most other tanks , the programmed AI response is fine since using MG's does not require the crew to expose themselves.

That is just a programmed decision that does not take the Stug in concideration

Here is one of my favorite if I have multiple TRP's and have areas I cannot see that I want to arty strike. (Like a city streets back in a town)
 
I will set a TRP on each end of the street or obstruction, if possible maybe a couple on each side so I have some options on drawing a line barrage from trp to trp at different points in the obstruction.
 
Nothing like being able to plot a arty strike down a major street that the enemy does not expect to be a problem because you don't have line of site.
 
Anyway, more than once has this worked well in getting accurate arty on the enemy in a place he felt pretty safe at.
 
Plus you might be thinking that is a long line of wasted arty. (but keep in mind your end point to end point you select does not have to be on the trp. It allows you to select 50 M if I remember right from the target point. allowing me to trim 100 meters off from trp to trp if I want.)
 
Anyway, by creating preplanned line arty strikes with multi trps instead of point or area target strikes with a single trp. I can generate a barrage that will get many more rounds on target and still cover an area I expect to strike the enemy.
 
Like the street example I gave or along a tree line, hedge line, wall line of any location where you might expect a line of defense or a route of travel by enemy units.

IMHO the walking fire is better termed "adjust fire" and I feel it is NOT so gamey. To me it is the standard Hollywood movie where the guy calls on the radio "add 50, left 100" or somesuch hurried words with his helmet cocked at an angle and the handset pushed to his ear, dragging the radio around, shells are pounding in at where he sees the enemy is....matching up the fall of the shells to where the enemy is approaching...it has been a while since I did it, the color line changes tone and you can't adjust once you get too far from the original mission IIRC.
 
OK, this is one of my favorites:
 
Put an anti-tank gun behind a wall or tall hedgerow. beyond the obstruction is nice clear LOS lined up like Minnesota Fat's at a billiards hall.
Then have a nice breach team standing by. It has gone quite well a few times. Blow the hedge and then let 'er rip. I have done the same thing for a
mortar team that was way back in the back field and a stupid hedgerow was in the way. Blew the hedgerow to give them great LOS for direct fire
using the "parallel blast line method" so the engineers didn't run out into "Purple Heart Alley".
 
A variation on this was to find a building with a solid wall up on the 2nd or 3rd floor facing the enemy and sometime into the battle, you blow that wall with your breach team and it allows an
HMG to fire out from an unexpected location. But they gotta bag it out of there fairly soon because there is no wall to protect them!

Your absolutely right, So smart to have picked that up. My claim is no better than his.
 
But I have on the other hand made test and have run stats in the past when I have felt something might be off in the game that I wanted changed. So I am going to stay with the attitude of get busy and show some real numbers as to what you are wanting to prove needs tweeking. Til then, you have done nothing.

I just wanted to point out what an amazing job was done on this campaign.

Even the way it is designed to give many levels of play depending on how the player does is just a work of art.

I can truthfully say it is the first time that I have ever felt that a designer and the AI has really beaten me. Yes I mean beaten.

Now for many of you, I know you have played this and likely long ago, maybe some even more than once. But here I am still working through it for the first time. I just finished the "A Bloody Encounter" and will be Rollin into the next mission at some point. But the last few missions have been no winning affair for me and I see I recently dropped to Green level. So a humbling encounter for sure.

But the thing that is most amazing is, I feel it is rightfully earned. The play has been balanced and I have had my chances. Position of defensive units have been great and time again I have moved myself into killing zones knowing they could exist, but finding myself forced to do it because of my goals and path of my attacks. It has been a nightmare and one I have enjoyed every step of the way. A panther did a number on some of my Churchill's a game or so ago. Now in this last battle an AT gun has his way against more of my Churchill and again I just could not get arty in there to eliminate the problem. My infantry have found themselves to be taking losses in every way possible. If I am cautious, they will find themselves in arty barrages. If I push them and keep them moving. I find the scouts are not finding all the surprises in store for them.

Maybe I am just at the wrong end of the numbers in this battle this time, but I think it is more than that and have found defensive units placed excellently. Good job to whom it is owed to.

I normally play just for something to do if my HtoH turns are a little slow. But this might be the first campaign I ever will replay just to prove to myself I could do better by focusing on it and not taking it for granted.

Well, I can confirm Doug is a Good player. And maybe he claims he does not like scenarios. But I recall him doing extremely well in a Tournament I hosted where it was based on scenarios.
(like he won it)  So a little too modest with that reply.
 
I will donate some of my service time to him. (but it requires he post a AAR of your battle with Bil)

I love the Tunguska .
 
It is a ugly machine (so it is not about its looks)
 
it lacks needed armor. (Too easy to kill if you can get a shot on it)
 
But from the very first time I ever used one, which was as I recall, used to take out a sniper in the top floor of a building and I watched as it basically sawed the floor of the building away in 30 seconds. (thinking to myself, now there is some firepower) I never have not enjoyed seeing it control a fight with its only good asset (Firepower) How can you not love that power.

I just wanted to point out what an amazing job was done on this campaign.

Even the way it is designed to give many levels of play depending on how the player does is just a work of art.

I can truthfully say it is the first time that I have ever felt that a designer and the AI has really beaten me. Yes I mean beaten.

Now for many of you, I know you have played this and likely long ago, maybe some even more than once. But here I am still working through it for the first time. I just finished the "A Bloody Encounter" and will be Rollin into the next mission at some point. But the last few missions have been no winning affair for me and I see I recently dropped to Green level. So a humbling encounter for sure.

But the thing that is most amazing is, I feel it is rightfully earned. The play has been balanced and I have had my chances. Position of defensive units have been great and time again I have moved myself into killing zones knowing they could exist, but finding myself forced to do it because of my goals and path of my attacks. It has been a nightmare and one I have enjoyed every step of the way. A panther did a number on some of my Churchill's a game or so ago. Now in this last battle an AT gun has his way against more of my Churchill and again I just could not get arty in there to eliminate the problem. My infantry have found themselves to be taking losses in every way possible. If I am cautious, they will find themselves in arty barrages. If I push them and keep them moving. I find the scouts are not finding all the surprises in store for them.

Maybe I am just at the wrong end of the numbers in this battle this time, but I think it is more than that and have found defensive units placed excellently. Good job to whom it is owed to.

I normally play just for something to do if my HtoH turns are a little slow. But this might be the first campaign I ever will replay just to prove to myself I could do better by focusing on it and not taking it for granted.

I love the Tunguska .
 
It is a ugly machine (so it is not about its looks)
 
it lacks needed armor. (Too easy to kill if you can get a shot on it)
 
But from the very first time I ever used one, which was as I recall, used to take out a sniper in the top floor of a building and I watched as it basically sawed the floor of the building away in 30 seconds. (thinking to myself, now there is some firepower) I never have not enjoyed seeing it control a fight with its only good asset (Firepower) How can you not love that power.

I think you have answered your own questions.
 
Ok, so you won that battle. so you are learning. Good
 
But you say you notice that you are not really winning the fire fight with overwhelming firepower.  if you were, your men would not be getting pinned.
 
So all I am saying is don't waste playing all your battles until your skill level is good. because playing scenario's the first time is the only time to enjoy a truly crafted scenario. After that much of the fog of war is lost forever. So playing them again is a place to work on your skills.
 
So you pointed out you still need to learn when and how will your men spot and shoot. So replay battles until you have a understanding and skill to make that work.  (One thing you can do is learn to check locations you are moving troops to, is to click on the dot where they will be located and check the line of sight from there before ever moving there - that is a skill most beginners do not understand)
 
And that skill will help with your other task. That is engaging in firefights with overwhelming firepower. Any fire fight you get into should have the goal to be a one sided affair. You should not get into a fight where you are only exchanging fire. Either, you better have more troops that you can bring in and position to engage the enemy to get the upper hand or you should be disengaging.
These things should be easy to control on offense. Learn to scout when moving into new terrain so that your main forces do not get ambushed, just expect maybe a scout unit here or there getting hit.
 
On defense, it is much harder to develop skills to win engagements when you have less troops than your enemy.
 
But skills to do it include learning to have light front lines that can withdrawal. Setting up kill zones with a major portion of your force where you see the enemy moving into that you can temporarily overwhelm. Having a reserve unit that is able to move into any needed area to help balance a bad situation or take advantage of a weakness in the enemies attack.
 
And it goes on and on and on. Buying the game does not make you a tactician. Its just a tool to craft them skills. And this is the best game out there to learn them skills that reflect real life tactics. So enjoy.
 
As many say, doing real life tactics  is the best way to be good at this game. So any source teaching them skills will help you.

The General Discussion forum is down below.

If you all are so willing to pay for smart AI.
 
I can solve your problem.
 
You can call me AI, send your checks directly to me and I will quite my job and will be available for your services each and every day.
 
I promise you to provide a high level of play and you will have complete control over any battle and situation you would like to play.
 
I even promise to never speak a word  so that you have that true AI feeling of not having to deal with another Human being.
 

If you all are so willing to pay for smart AI.
 
I can solve your problem.
 
You can call me AI, send your checks directly to me and I will quite my job and will be available for your services each and every day.
 
I promise you to provide a high level of play and you will have complete control over any battle and situation you would like to play.
 
I even promise to never speak a word  so that you have that true AI feeling of not having to deal with another Human being.
 

If you all are so willing to pay for smart AI.
 
I can solve your problem.
 
You can call me AI, send your checks directly to me and I will quite my job and will be available for your services each and every day.
 
I promise you to provide a high level of play and you will have complete control over any battle and situation you would like to play.
 
I even promise to never speak a word  so that you have that true AI feeling of not having to deal with another Human being.
 

If you all are so willing to pay for smart AI.
 
I can solve your problem.
 
You can call me AI, send your checks directly to me and I will quite my job and will be available for your services each and every day.
 
I promise you to provide a high level of play and you will have complete control over any battle and situation you would like to play.
 
I even promise to never speak a word  so that you have that true AI feeling of not having to deal with another Human being.
 

Good point. I play this a little different in HtoH play.
The trick is, send a scout unit or something like it with a short arc to where you want to place your F.o. firrst. let them see if they draw any fire, if they are safe, then move the F.O into position.
I also send the scouts on to another spot to check out the next location if you need to shift the F.O. to another location.

You are as good in the game as you are in learning to play smart. Every trick you can come up with as to protecting important units and sacraficing poor units if needed is worth trying. Just as in real life. A price must be paid, that price is normally in the form of the poor infantry.

Really, if you struggling winning the AI. Then you really do need to rethink the tactics you are playing with. Because the AI really is not different than it has been in all the other games. It is hard to say what your problems might be without actually watching you play..
 
I disagree with the fact that slowing down your game play is the answer, I see that comment a lot. I find CMBS actually requires faster moving and decisions if you are playing a good opponent.
 
Gaining firepower advantages need to done more quickly than ever before because the amount of fire power units can produce will win a battle very quickly.. So you do not want to be on the wrong end of that, so being slow will lead to that problem.
 
I think the problem most people have is understanding how to move troops. You need forward scouting units that risk their life to find what is out there. Stop trying to keep them alive, the best thing you can do for them is make sure they have covering fire. Then at least you can kill anything they expose and maybe if you have enough covering units. they might live to see a few more minutes in combat. learning this trick is the best offensive tool.
 
On defense, the best tool is learning how to have reserve units that can be moved into place once you know what the enemy is trying to do. Do not pin all your units on the defensive front line. That is a good way to lose.
 
Just two tips I see a major portion of players not do correctly. SO maybe two areas for you to work on also.

Got a mate who is a cabinet maker. Spent years acquiring the skills of his trade only to end up, over a period of time, punching buttons on a machine that churns out mass produced furniture that sells by the truck loads. Got sick of the mindless repetiveness so chucked it all in and sold his business.
 
Has a little workshop in his backyard now and makes one off hand made furniture. Makes enough to keep the lights on, food on the table and the bankers off his back. Goes to bed with smile on his face.
 
Have a couple of his pieces and very well made they are too.
 
Wouldn't have touched the crap he was churning out of his factory though.
 
Better graphics... I mean really!