Slapdragon Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 After reading Tom's very nicely written little ( ) rant on a different thread, I finally realized why we have many of the arguments on this board that we do: it is because we have two distinctly different reasons for playing CMBO, each leading to a different mindset and attitude. These two tribes are: 1) The Historical Wargamer (HWG) 2) The Video Gamer (VG) Perhaps I should also add a third category: 3) Munchkin Now let me recount a friends tale. He is playing a scenario right now and he suddenly started facing British Armour. OK he says, I am fighting Brits. Then he runs into an American Jackson, some US paratroopers, some UK armoured infrantry, and then soon has seen every allied Army in Europe at his door step. Wargamers have a term for someone who does that. A Cherry Picker. Video Gamers have a term for someone who does that: smart. You see, they have different motivations: The Wargamer sees themselves in the war making tactical life of death situations. The Video Gamer sees themselves as in a personal battle using their Sopwith Pentium against a nameless foe. The Wargamer likes to mull over the historical details of units in the game. The Video Gamer likes to discover the sure fire killer unit. The Wargamer avoids heavy units because of bogging, but will take them because of the spice they provide. The Video Gamer avoids rainy weather because it makes his heavy units bog down. The Wargamer enjoys a historical esthetic: His lone Panther fighting hordes of Shermans, his tanks attacking the dug in British. He deals with changing history by changing outcomes. The Video Gamer enjoys the "Doom" esthetic. Each weapon has advantages and disadvantages, and you must mix and match to defeat an implacable enemy. Once you find the winning combination, you stick with it. The Wargamer becomes annoyed at things that break his feeling of really being there. The Video Gamer gets annoyed at rules that keep them from figuring out the system. Wargamers beat history. Video Gamers beat the game. A Wargamer would love to win a game with a 75 armed HT, a Hetzer, and some Volkstrum. The only way you would catch a video gamer with those units is if he dies and someone ordered them and sent them in his or her name. Wargamers want the simulation to get more realistic. Video Gamers wish the Maus was included cause it would be cool. Wargamers will play a good wargame for years, it is just a model and the reality is in their heads. Once a Video Gamer figures the ultimate force combination, he is done and needs a new video game. The solution to many arguments on posts perhaps is to say right up front if this is a wargamers discussion or a video gamers discussion, and let the two sides agree that they will never agree. Otherwise we will never get to discuss anything because one side will say "IT IS JUST A GAME" amd the otherside will yell "HISTORY IS IMPORTANT" As to Munchkin, they are the ones that only play German in open terrain defending no matter what (usually with 5000 points) and no air cover. My dog could win in that situation and that is why they play it. Munchkins are neither video gamer nor wargamer so I do not consider this discussion about them. [This message has been edited by Slapdragon (edited 09-23-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 Good ponts. And your right! Rob ------------------ Check out my CM web page! members.home.net/rwdisney/Combat1/Combat1.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oddball_E8 Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 Your insight and clearmindednes moved me to tears man... but i have to add that i must be a munchkin since im somewhere in between... I had no real interest in ww2 history, but since i started playing the game ive become interested. And i really love the heavy hitters and mega monster tanks that are in the game... but then again so did Hitler... maby he was a VG all im saying is that you cant put everybody in two distinct groups, theres bound to be some that dont fitt either. ------------------ Wof, wof, wof, wof... Thats my other dog imitation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 I have played many PBEM games and at this point understand your thoughts completely. I am beginning to see that a note or two exchanged before a PBEM match begins will be a good idea. It is a little distressing to try and tailor a force along historical lines only to be met with a hodge podge of troop types that are a conglomerate of the most effective (in game terms) fighting units that can be fielded. It seems one has to allow for the possibility of facing the “Video Game Mix” when choosing ones own forces which almost always forces one to alter their own ToE. One solution is often game with the same players over and over. Once you have met a player that thinks along the same lines as ones self towards unit selection and composition. Another solution (one I enjoy) is to have the forces chosen by the computer which often leads to some very interesting force compositions. This of course is only practical if both sides agree to use this feature. Personally after 30 some odd PBEM games completed I have yet to purchase a Koing Tiger, JadgTiger or JadgPanther. I have purchased one Jumbo to use in a quick battle. It was my first and took a gun hit before it fired its first shot. I will at some point purchase one or two of the units I have not yet used as I would enjoy seeing them on the field. I just seem to find the tactical mix of the more common equipment a bit more enjoyable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 Excellent post, SD! I began noticing the same thing even before the game came out. This caused me considerable anxiety at the time, as I knew what a powerful lobby the VGers are within the hobby and was fearful of them taking over the game and turning it into another historically meaningless fantasy game. Fortunately BTS did not permit that to happen. Again, after the game was released, it was clear that a lot of the posts on this board had a definite VG slant, which I found depressing. Eventually though, I have come around to the view that once a person has paid for his/her copy of the game, he/she is entitled to use it in whatever manner he/she wishes. As long as I can continue to play it in a historically accurate manner, I'm happy. I will, however, argue strenuously against any measures that would diminish the game's historicity just to appeal to the VG/fantasy gamer crowd. Michael [This message has been edited by Michael emrys (edited 09-23-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted September 23, 2000 Author Share Posted September 23, 2000 I agree Mike with keeping the game historical. I think being a good video game is needed for sales, but we already have close combat. I do, on my own, some gamey things to mostly in tests. I have a hug Red Versus Blue map which I mix and match forces on to test concept -- it is taken from a CPX exercised used by NATO. I have a simulation scenario of Omaha Beach but the way I simulate Naval artillery is weird. I even have a map of Keene New Hampshire (used in the movie Jumanji) which I enjoy blowing up every so often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 Good observations! We have NO problem with the VG crowd either playing CM or discussing it here in VG terms. In fact, we are flattered that in this day and age of flashy games "twitch" games that CM is as popular as it is with the VG crowd. So we welcome them for no other reason than we are happy they find enjoyment in CM. Having said that, CM is and has always been designed for the HWG crowd. Therefore, if anything comes up that must ultimately fall on one side of the fence, it will go toward HWG. Fortunately, these kinds of things are rare and actually do not really diminish VG interest even when they happen. We also have gone through some pains to allow both the HWG and VG to be equally happy. For example, you can play a QuickBattle with forces being restricted to a particular nationality, or you can allow full fledged Cherry Picking. There are three different FoW settings, only one of which a HWG would even think of using (obviously "Full" ). User created battles are also without restrictions in terms of historical context. Those can be made as "silly" as the imagination of a VG and it has ZERO impact on the HWG. In the end all these things noted above are CHOICES. And as we go forward with CM2 we will keep this design philosophy in place and in fact expand upon it. Meaning... CM2 will be even more "realistic" than CM1, but will NOT appeal any less to the VG crowd. In fact, I predict it will appeal more to both! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rondor Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 One of the issues is that the ladders are inevitably populated with many VGr's. Thier sole purpose in playing is to win and climb the ladder to be top dog. I have nothing against the way they play it simply is different than the way I play. I prefer scenario's for many reasons others have stated. QB's are like a Doom Deathmatch IMHO. One nice solution would be a ladder that ONLY allows historical play. I think that this would solve alot of issues that are always creeping up on the ladders right now. My 2 cents... Rondor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 Thank you, Steve, for your reply. I am greatly reassured. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanco Posted September 24, 2000 Share Posted September 24, 2000 OK, why do VG's find the game fun? Because the drama in whether the zook team can ambush the tank is exactly the same to the VGer, it doesn't matter to him if the zook team is called an "Enforcer" and the tank is colored bright red. He probably would prefer it that way. I know I would. The innovation (for VG's we're talkin here ) in CM is uniting: 1) a realistic, dynamic reaction set for human beings in high stress situations on a battlefield in WWII (TacAI) 2) the wego system. I'm firmly convinced that if the TacAI hadn't been as good as it is, CM would have enjoyed much less success than it did. The point is, you can trust your men during those 60 seconds to behave realistically. Otherwise, give me real time, I'll click on him myself. The wego provides the tension. Instead of, "I can't click fast enough" the tension is, "Have I thought of everything? Am I sure I've made the best decisions possible?". Since in most cases the answers to those questions are no and no, tension is assured. It's in the AI's hands now (which I can trust implicitly 99% of the time don't forget). It's these two aspects (TacAI and wego) that I wish BTS would license out so us VG'ers could have our own beer and pretzels version... and maybe even our own forum. DeanCo-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted September 24, 2000 Share Posted September 24, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Good observations!.... Having said that, CM is and has always been designed for the HWG crowd. Therefore, if anything comes up that must ultimately fall on one side of the fence, it will go toward HWG. Fortunately, these kinds of things are rare and actually do not really diminish VG interest even when they happen. We also have gone through some pains to allow both the HWG and VG to be equally happy. For example, you can play a QuickBattle with forces being restricted to a particular nationality, or you can allow full fledged Cherry Picking. There are three different FoW settings, only one of which a HWG would even think of using (obviously "Full" ). User created battles are also without restrictions in terms of historical context. Those can be made as "silly" as the imagination of a VG and it has ZERO impact on the HWG. Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I agree, Great Observations Slapdragon Many of you May have concluded I'm strictly from the VG camp. Moztly nI just really enfoy the role of the Devil's Advocate The game is wonderfully designed as Steve points out to accomondate both crowds. I prefer historical OB's and I am thrilled that all the weapons (save the current discussion regarding the Long german 88 penetration values) are modeled with such amazing attention to historically accurate data and specifications and detail, right down to the actual mantel thickness recently tweaked on that Tiger I. I fully support all eforts to make the game play and feel more realistic, in fact as realistic as techincally possible. As for cheery pickers if you choose to trust the person you are PBEMing against perhaps both could agree to play a recently released user designed Scenario at CMHQ that has been play tested for game balance? This presumes both players will be honest and play it double blind for the first time. Mikester from Denver and Myslef both recently PBEMed "First Clash at Casmbes" for the first time, and each trusted the other to play double blind, I did not use ANY tactics he found gamey, other than the questionable use of slipping two Sherm's along the far right map egde up his left flank, unsuportted, you'd have to ask him if he was offended by the tactic? Since we aggreed to play "no holds barred" and he was ready for the gameyest tactics I could throw at him I don't think he minded. Any way He royally kicked my allied butt and won 72 to 37 or somthing. The point is if you choose to trust your opponent you could play a recented released, play tested scenario. OR as boring as it sounds, Play Reisburg or Last Defense or Chance Encouter? anyone of those have been played by so many people here so many times that it is as far from Double blind as you can get. Chance Encounter is still a great tactical excersise and it seems very well balanced to me. Last Defence pits the Stugs and a Tiger against those Three FAST Hellcats that come in late, its now a classic battle IMHO. In my opinion, like Steves said the problem with Cheery pickers is that we are playing battles where VGers are allowed to pick very leathal combinations of "cheeries" Maybe we can set up a list of recently designed NEW scenariso and a couple of guys that want a well balanced PBEM match can request that a never before publically released user designed "historically accurate" scenarios be e-mailed to them. OR even let two PBEMers play test or beta test scenario's before their public release, there are all kinds of folks here always looking for players to test their latest ideas for new scenarios. If two PBEMers agree and trust the designer to offer a well balanced scenario it would be a great test of doing the best you can with what you been dealt with in a truely double blind match. The problem with Cheery pickers is that we agree to let them choose the cheeries. Take the "let them choose" out of the equation and we can get down to some great battles where you have to learn to do the best you can with what you've got. Just my opinion again. OK I'm about to get kicked off the computer now... NO.... gotta go -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mannheim Tanker Posted September 24, 2000 Share Posted September 24, 2000 Great post, SD. Tom, are you a "cheery" picker, or just a jolly rancher? In all seriousness, I like to consider myself a HWG, but I'm sure that compared to a true grog I still buy ahistorical forces to an extent. Apart from reading through a myriad of historical texts (which I try to do as much as possible in what little spare time I have), is there a good source for OOB's? Perhaps someone could put together a "OOB for Dummies" for those of us that wish to follow historical setups, but are somewhat clueless as to how common Jagdpanzers were. You could also use this as a guide for a HWG ladder. Just a suggestion... ------------------ "No other game models the "Holy Crap! Where the Hell did that come from!" factor like CM currently does." - unknown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted September 24, 2000 Author Share Posted September 24, 2000 If anyone would like to start an OOB for dummies that I will host it on my web server. Also if someone would like to write a tactics discussion on their favorite armour or unit I would throw that in with the slow work I am doing now. As long as it is academic or at least noncommercial then I can host it. Sadly, I only have 120gb left on my personal server. An OOB for dummies would not be written in stone, but it would be a nice way to say: this is the norm, then you can throw a little spice in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mannheim Tanker Posted September 24, 2000 Share Posted September 24, 2000 SD: That would be great if you or CMHQ could host an OOB guide. I realize that you can never force someone to follow it to the line, but that's not the point. It would simply be a great guide for those well-intentioned HWG wannabees like myself that are clueless when it comes to certain unit OOB's and unit rarity factors. In fact, I'd argue that historical units didn't follow the TO&E to the letter either. We had a few extra M88's in my unit that were above and beyond our TO&E. I have NO idea how that ever came about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted September 24, 2000 Share Posted September 24, 2000 What is great about this game, is that it can appeal to so many type of people. I would consider myself a HWG to some extent, but I certainly dont look down on anyone who views it as JUST A GAME.... Why? because Combat Mission turned me INTO a HWG. I LOVE action games, and all kind of video games. But CM is so rare in that it is available as a "portal" to play out things that really happened, in ways that are very accurate. BUT unlike "War In Russia"(SSI), which also does this, it plays out like a war movie!!! Try not to puke when you read this next line, but THIS COULD BE THE WARGAME THAT BRINGS EVERYONE TOGETHER!!! (trying not to hurl myself ) [This message has been edited by *Captain Foobar* (edited 09-23-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted September 24, 2000 Author Share Posted September 24, 2000 I have posted the idea under 10 seconds to midnight... take a looks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts