I don't think I can go back to playing against the AI

[Simcoe]

Recently finished up a great PBEM in Final Blitzkrieg "To Verdenne and Victory" and after having a few multi-player games under my belt single player just feels dull. 

In the PBEM my opponent was constantly trying to outlflank me while I fought to maintain a screen of scouts to detect his movements. Every turn was fluid and deadly.

This isn't a dig against the great AI designers here. Just saying this game really comes alive against an opponent and I'm glad I took the plunge.

 

[JoMac]

Luke, I'm your Father. Come Join the Dark Side...That's an Invite for a Small CMBN QB Meeting

[weapon2010]

once you go human.......................................

[Simcoe]

1 hour ago, JoMac said:

Luke, I'm your Father. Come Join the Dark Side...That's an Invite for a Small CMBN QB Meeting

Taking a break for the next week or two. The last game took a month of daily rounds. I'll reach out after though!

Edited January 1, 2023 by Simcoe

[Combatintman]

Glad you enjoyed To Verdenne and Victory - that was one of my two scenarios for CMFB.  I wouldn't be so down on computer controlled AI - I think there are some titles where it suits quite well and I'm mainly thinking Cold War here.  If you want a more realistic experience of what it would be like to be on the end of a Soviet Battalion attack then a well-designed AI plan put together by someone who has a thorough understanding of how a Cold War Soviet battalion would attack delivers that better than a human player who will likely employ tactics that they know to have the most optimal effect.  @George MC pulled this off very effectively under @Bil Hardenberger's tutelage in the NTC campaign for Cold War.  Nonetheless, there is no doubt that humans are more challenging opponents and at the end of the day, so long as you're enjoying the game, that's all that matters.

[Simcoe]

8 hours ago, Combatintman said:

Glad you enjoyed To Verdenne and Victory - that was one of my two scenarios for CMFB.  I wouldn't be so down on computer controlled AI - I think there are some titles where it suits quite well and I'm mainly thinking Cold War here.  If you want a more realistic experience of what it would be like to be on the end of a Soviet Battalion attack then a well-designed AI plan put together by someone who has a thorough understanding of how a Cold War Soviet battalion would attack delivers that better than a human player who will likely employ tactics that they know to have the most optimal effect.  @George MC pulled this off very effectively under @Bil Hardenberger's tutelage in the NTC campaign for Cold War.  Nonetheless, there is no doubt that humans are more challenging opponents and at the end of the day, so long as you're enjoying the game, that's all that matters.

Not trying to disrespect any of the great scenario designers here. I've played my fair share of AI battles. the NTC campaign had great AI. I just think at the end of the day, Combat Mission is best played against a human opponent.

Verdenne and Victory was great! I really liked that both sides had an objective to attack and there was a lot of room to manuever. I was worried at first (playing the axis) that I only had five panthers but they won every tank duel they faced. I think the scenario does a great job of teaching you to fight for every bit of intelligence. I even resorted to dismounting kubelwagon drivers in forests just to get hearing contacts to know where his tanks were moving.

[dkchapuis]

On 12/31/2022 at 5:36 PM, Simcoe said:

Recently finished up a great PBEM in Final Blitzkrieg "To Verdenne and Victory" and after having a few multi-player games under my belt single player just feels dull. 

In the PBEM my opponent was constantly trying to outlflank me while I fought to maintain a screen of scouts to detect his movements. Every turn was fluid and deadly.

This isn't a dig against the great AI designers here. Just saying this game really comes alive against an opponent and I'm glad I took the plunge.

 

100% agree.  I played a couple of CMx1 games against the AI (~20 years ago), but started playing humans and never played another AI game.  Tried to play CMx2 against AI and only made it through about 10 turns. 

[SgtHatred]

Can't really play games like Combat Mission in single player. Beating a script is not a good time.

[AstroCat]

Statically I believe almost no one actually plays multiplayer. So I hope the next CM has a much improved more immersive single player experience. And long ago I used to play a ton of both single and multi CM1 and CM2.

Edited January 6, 2023 by AstroCat

[Erwin]

The AI in CM1 was not so great and after one become experienced it was much more fun to play PBEM.  However, BF has done an admirable job with the CM2 AI and while it is fun to play H2H, I can't say that I find a human oppo that much more entertaining.  The other issue is that one can easily play 5-10+ turns a day playing vs the AI while it's tough to get more than one turn per day when playing H2H, and often return of turns is a lot slower than that.  Plus, campaigns is where CM really shines and of course one has to play vs the AI in campaigns.  (I play campaigns almost exclusively and very few scenarios.)  As AstroCat says, the vast majority of us play vs the AI probably for those reasons.  

[SgtHatred]

12 hours ago, AstroCat said:

Statically I believe almost no one actually plays multiplayer. So I hope the next CM has a much improved more immersive single player experience. And long ago I used to play a ton of both single and multi CM1 and CM2.

This is pretty much true in most strategy games unfortunately. People are more comfortable going up against a script.

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

The AI in CM1 was not so great and after one become experienced it was much more fun to play PBEM.  However, BF has done an admirable job with the CM2 AI and while it is fun to play H2H, I can't say that I find a human oppo that much more entertaining.  The other issue is that one can easily play 5-10+ turns a day playing vs the AI while it's tough to get more than one turn per day when playing H2H, and often return of turns is a lot slower than that.  Plus, campaigns is where CM really shines and of course one has to play vs the AI in campaigns.  (I play campaigns almost exclusively and very few scenarios.)  As AstroCat says, the vast majority of us play vs the AI probably for those reasons.  

Sounds like you've had some terrible human opponents. Also, the best way to play multiplayer is to block out an evening and play WeGo turnbased, not PBEM. No agonizing for 10-20 minutes on a turn, you gotta move quickly.

[Blazing 88's]

In regards to the OP, I sure can and have many times over. Not even an issue for me thankfully. Just need to get a really good functioning campaign layer added that is all automated for even more bliss.

@SgtHatred. No time to block out an evening for multiplayer. Single player or sometimes PBEM for me and it has nothing to do with being comfortable only going up against a "script". Because I do not venture into the editor to see how things work in the game in regards to the ai scripting, I think this has helped me playing mostly against the ai at my own leisure. That and I ignore advise in the briefing most of the time and do my own thing for the most part.

To each their own.

 

[Erwin]

1 hour ago, SgtHatred said:

block out an evening

Right there is the problem for many of us...  The facility of playing when one can squeeze time and then stopping whenever a crisis or distraction arises without inconveniencing a human oppo is a primary advantage of single-player.  

[Vacillator]

11 minutes ago, Erwin said:

The facility of playing when one can squeeze time and then stopping whenever a crisis or distraction arises without inconveniencing a human oppo is a primary advantage of single-player. 

I think I must have very understanding PBEM opponents then. And I'm not in any hurry if they have RL things to do.  You know who you are you lovely people .

EDIT: I also play a bit of single player if nothing has come in, plus of course any testing I have been given by the great designers out there.

Edited January 6, 2023 by Vacillator

[SgtHatred]

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

Right there is the problem for many of us...  The facility of playing when one can squeeze time and then stopping whenever a crisis or distraction arises without inconveniencing a human oppo is a primary advantage of single-player.  

That's what the save function is for. Also, I've always been bothered by this idea I see about adults not being able to budget their time to have a night off occasionally. Not everyone is a CEO or President, you should be able to put 4 hours together somewhere if you want it.

[George MC]

On 1/5/2023 at 7:51 AM, SgtHatred said:

Can't really play games like Combat Mission in single player. Beating a script is not a good time.

Are you not playing the designer? I mean to create an AI plan as the designer I have to playout the scenario. This then forms the basis of the AI Plan. Then tweaked to take account of players doing 'leftfield' stuff. The only downside is I have to plot all my moves at the start of the game whilst you as the player get to do em each minute.

But yeah playing against people (which I do both for fun and competitively in tourney's)adds another dimension but I think playing PBEM has developed my CM skill set, deeper appreciation of tactics and that helps inform creating interesting AI plans - caveat - I'm not expecting good players to be beat by the AI plan but hopefully have an engaging time. So in my world view - plenty room for both types of play

[domfluff]

I definitely think it can be useful and viable to play single player scenarios (also, you paid for them...)

There are also scenarios which are *better* single player, especially ones where the opponent has few or no choices to make. 

Multiplayer CM is great, and a human opponent is a wonderful thing, but it's also a (very) large investment in time and effort. You can knock out a battalion level scenario within a single (perhaps long) day if playing single player, but multiplayer that'll typically take months.

[chuckdyke]

23 minutes ago, George MC said:

plenty room for both types of play

They should publish screenshots of Total Victories with Zero casualties on Iron. In twenty years I have achieved it only once. Playing Ambush in  BS a Minor Victory against the AI because the only way I could pull off the mission was by doing a Banzai Charge. Kudos to the designer with that one.

Edited January 6, 2023 by chuckdyke

[SgtHatred]

6 hours ago, George MC said:

Are you not playing the designer? I mean to create an AI plan as the designer I have to playout the scenario. This then forms the basis of the AI Plan. Then tweaked to take account of players doing 'leftfield' stuff. The only downside is I have to plot all my moves at the start of the game whilst you as the player get to do em each minute.

But yeah playing against people (which I do both for fun and competitively in tourney's)adds another dimension but I think playing PBEM has developed my CM skill set, deeper appreciation of tactics and that helps inform creating interesting AI plans - caveat - I'm not expecting good players to be beat by the AI plan but hopefully have an engaging time. So in my world view - plenty room for both types of play

Sure, but that can only go so far. An organic brain can adapt to changing situations, a set of scripts and if/elses cannot. It just doesn't compare. 

6 hours ago, domfluff said:

I definitely think it can be useful and viable to play single player scenarios (also, you paid for them...)

There are also scenarios which are *better* single player, especially ones where the opponent has few or no choices to make. 

Multiplayer CM is great, and a human opponent is a wonderful thing, but it's also a (very) large investment in time and effort. You can knock out a battalion level scenario within a single (perhaps long) day if playing single player, but multiplayer that'll typically take months.

Just gotta budget out an evening to play a multiplayer game. PBEM isn't the only option. I'd also pay full price for CM games without any campaigns or scenarios. Obviously not everyone agrees with that.

[dkchapuis]

46 minutes ago, SgtHatred said:

. I'd also pay full price for CM games without any campaigns or scenarios. Obviously not everyone agrees with that.

I'd pay double price for multi-multi player with no scenarios. 

Edited January 7, 2023 by dkchapuis

[Phantom Captain]

Campaigns are where it's at for single player.  When you have to take care of your core units across an entire campaign it changes everything and makes single player a lot more interesting.  I love playing well done campaigns and find I get totally immersed even though it's against the AI (scenario designer).  Losses in core units are exponential across campaigns and it really does change the dynamic.  When you are briefed that reinforcements are coming but then only 20 show up instead of a whole company because they were completely decimated two battles ago, it does change everything.  You feel the loss of each soldier and every tank, and gun, and FO, and platoon leader, a LOT more deeply.  

I've been playing these games since the beginning and I love playing both PBEM and against the AI for all the reasons stated above.  Currently, I have 4 PBEMS going against the same opponent (CMCW, CMRT, CMFI and CMFB) and still play my campaigns against the AI when I have time.

A well written and crafted campaign put together by one of our many community designers can be just as fun and entertaining as playing humans, in my opinion, just in a different way.  If you haven't played @George MC's campaigns (just 40 minutes to go on the first battle Five Days One Summer!) or even just his scenario's you really don't know how devious a good designer can be.  Breakthrough to Kovel, by @Lille Fiskerby took me nine months (literally hundreds of hours) to complete but it was entirely epic and challenging and a really great experience.  One of my favorite campaigns ever, honestly.  

Just my unsolicited two cents.

Edited January 8, 2023 by Phantom Captain

[chuckdyke]

Playing single player gives you the opportunity to design tactics for forests, urban environments etc sandbox style. Environments which are well known challenges.

[Simcoe]

16 hours ago, Phantom Captain said:

Campaigns are where it's at for single player.  When you have to take care of your core units across an entire campaign it changes everything and makes single player a lot more interesting.  I love playing well done campaigns and find I get totally immersed even though it's against the AI (scenario designer).  Losses in core units are exponential across campaigns and it really does change the dynamic.  When you are briefed that reinforcements are coming but then only 20 show up instead of a whole company because they were completely decimated two battles ago, it does change everything.  You feel the loss of each soldier and every tank, and gun, and FO, and platoon leader, a LOT more deeply.  

I've been playing these games since the beginning and I love playing both PBEM and against the AI for all the reasons stated above.  Currently, I have 4 PBEMS going against the same opponent (CMCW, CMRT, CMFI and CMFB) and still play my campaigns against the AI when I have time.

A well written and crafted campaign put together by one of our many community designers can be just as fun and entertaining as playing humans, in my opinion, just in a different way.  If you haven't played @George MC's campaigns (just 40 minutes to go on the first battle Five Days One Summer!) or even just his scenario's you really don't know how devious a good designer can be.  Breakthrough to Kovel, by @Lille Fiskerby took me nine months (literally hundreds of hours) to complete but it was entirely epic and challenging and a really great experience.  One of my favorite campaigns ever, honestly.  

Just my unsolicited two cents.

Totally agree on the effect of a great campaign. The Cold War campaign took me close to three months. 

I had days where I swore I would never play it again and delete my saves (Hello third mission and final mission). I would take a week off and then a eureka moment would happen and there I was again, playing into the wee hours of the night. 

Definitely looking forward to working on the Red Thunder Battle Pack campaign though.

[herr_oberst]

Plenty of room for both types. Some of the designers do bang-up jobs of scripting and are very challenging, but then again, against a devious human mind can be frustrating/enjoyable.

Aeons ago, during CMAK, there was a player (apologies, but who it was escapes me) who used the gamiest, sheer genius maneuver I can recall to mask his attack. Moving across the desert caused dust trails. Rather than telegraph his avenues of advance, he took a couple of his lightest, fastest pieces of armor and ran them back and forth across the map in front of the rest of the attacking force. A dust cloud effectively masked all his early movement. L'audace, toujours l'audace...