AUTO SURRENDER???????

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Elvis said:

OK I have to speak up again. I have never played a ladder before (I have noticed SS is not even on the CM ladder)

Lol CM isnt actually released yet as far as I know - you must be referring to a beta ladder?? When the game is out you can bet your A@@ I will be on a ladder.

Also Elvis since you hold a grudge against me I find it hard to take anything you say with less than a grain of salt

**********************************

OB&G Once again you have proven yourself only of displaying kindergarten style rhetoric, and consequently I see no reason to entertain you

Stooping to insults is something characteristic of you in many threads and I would be suprised to see much else from the likes of you.

**************************************

Lorak _ Ladders are fun man, I just enjoy seening agame to the end, and points do matter I feel If I have a tank on the field the game isnt over provided its functional, Troop wise If i have a good force with AT it aint over either.

I do not condone chasing the very last unit around the board and trying to use him to flip over a vict. But if I feel I have a reasonable chance of evening things up I want to have the option of playing on

*********************************

Simon , I 'm sorry If I took your post the wrng way I just figured you had jumpeed on the bandwagon with ELVIS and OB@G. Elvis has an AX to grind and we all can see what the other ones problem is

***********************************

KRazy Dog,

You claim you see my point, yet you still argue from the basis of realism, when in fact it is realistic in some cases for men to fight on. If both players can agree to not use the auto surrender(if it were in fact implemented, which so far is unlikely) Then I really don't see how that should bother you, You claim some people may get upset - well they dont ahve to use it - thats why I suggested and OPTION

Also everyone is on about withdrawing - lol I'd like to see someone manage to get all their froces out of town WITHOUT getting shot to **** in LD - especially when the KRAUTS are in teh center or town on turn 3

Come on !

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[Ron]

SS, I have no problem with you expressing your concern about a feature in CM though I disagree and have said so in email, what I take exception to is your posting on a public forum exaggerations and inaccuracies of the condition of the US forces in the game. Case in point:

The Germans weren't in the village by turn 3, try turn 7. Their intentions were quite plain before that.

The Hellcat does not have loads of HE, 26 you said, I have never seen one with more than 13 or 14 rounds. Your asseration that it could cause lots of damage is highly questionable as there still remained 3 platoons of German infantry.

The Hellcat did not capture an objective flag no matter what the view from the US side said. There were German troops hidden there. The 32% victory was due to FOW not to the reality on the battlefield.

Your troops were not holding their own. You made a good move taking out the Stug but the reinforcing infantry were battered and stalled from German fire part way down the hill. Once I saw that, I felt the game was over, your infantry had no chance in making it to the village. For 1 or 2 turns I did nothing, expecting at least a ceasefire request from you. Then it became plain you were going to take out the immobilized Tiger also. As a response the PzGrens and a HT were sent up the US hill to finish off those remaining GIs, the AI threw in the towel at that point. So really you were going to lose as much or more than you hoped to gain.

As an aside, in the final results of this game it said there were 220 US casualties. I realize now this is in error as there were not that many US troops in total. Has anyone else seen this? I still have the file.

Regards,

Ron

[Neutral Party]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Also everyone is on about withdrawing - lol I'd like to see someone manage to get all their froces out of town WITHOUT getting shot to **** in LD - especially when the KRAUTS are in teh center or town on turn 3

Come on !<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Consider the situation you're in. Your infantry has been almost annihilated. They are trapped and outnumbered in a town controlled by the enemy. They have seen most of their buddies killed or wounded and are either scared ****less or in shock (global morale =13). You have one open-topped tank destroyer left. If it comes into town without infantry support it's scrap metal. OK the TD has a full complement of HE ammo but this ain't much (IIRC) compared to its AP which is less useful in these circumstances.

What should happen - the choices are:

(a) infantry surrenders - TD bugs out

( infantry surrenders - TD fires off its ammo then bugs out

© infantry fights to the last man because the major wants to improve his cv

IMHO (a) is most likely, ( could happen, © is unlikely

So I think your infantry will/should surrender whether you want it to or not in reality/game worlds. The TD is harder to call. I think in reality it would withdraw. In game life there is no enforced withdrawal AFAIK so what are the options:

(a) enforced surrender

( annoying perpetual check-like endgame that pisses opponent off.

Got to go for (a) here.

Moral(e) to the story

There is a significant benefit to a timely withdrawal rather than total surrender in reality. This will, of course, come out in the campaign game and perhaps should be reflected in scenario scoring too. Then possibility of enforced surrender provides a positive incentive to "play for real" when you play CM.

Joe

P.S. just read Ron's post

So the reinforcements weren't actually in the town but were still up the hill. In that case, they could have tried to withdraw. However if they were taking heavy fire and caualties, surrender would still make the most sense - especially if the Germans were coming to get them.

[This message has been edited by Neutral Party (edited 04-19-2000).]

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Ron,

My apologies I thought you werein the town much quicker than that - but I went back and took a look and you are right it was when you stated, I assure you it seemed like it was much quicker

At any rate there is still no chance to get the troops out from their setup positions, without being shot to hell that was my point

with regards to the hellcat loadout I misread what I had - but I was full of he it was only 12 rounds tho as you said

I can admit when I made a mistake and honestly I thought you were intown quicker with the halftracks, Regardless tho yoru men were by the 1st wheat field wall supported by tanks - moving for me was not an option

Please accept my apologies, despite this it soesnt change my opinion< i should be the one to call the game not the AI in a Multiplayer situaion

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Neutral Party - you are mistaken by the assumption if the TD comes into town - the TD deliberately went through town and out the otherside - then outgunned two tanks leaving the germs with none

I'm sorry but killing two enemy tanks is not a detriment to morale and you won't convince me otherwise

Your analogy has my TD sitting on a hill watching everyone die _ that simply isnt the case it was INFLICTING enemy casualties

Ron BTW I did have a full squad untouched on the hill as well as a mortar that was in ok shape

TO all

REGARDLESS - I was not trying to say I could win and not trying to belittle RON's win or anything else that has been implied by some.

I simply see something I don't care for in the context of Competitive games _ i want to go until I feel I cant win not when the AI tells me

***********

Oh and another thing to consider for all those using realism as a basis for their argument -- how come you don't mind the fact FOW can be switched off?

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[This message has been edited by SS_PanzerLeader (edited 04-19-2000).]

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Ok well Ron and I played LD again and I set up in a position further back and better protected. Once again By turn 8 I was getting reamed a new a@#hole by the krauts

My Global morale was at 8% on turn 9 it gave me reinforcements allowed me to plot my moves and then AUTOSURRENDERED all the reinforcements.

I wondered how easily this could happen as some have suggested that it is RARE - Well my contention is that in a scenario that is setup similar to LD this will NOT be a rare occurance, and will be either one of two things

1. It will Be a delimiter for scenario design for competitive purposes

or

2. It will be an exploitable feature for the more devious of players

Don't anyone get me wrong I LOVE this game, I just see aproblem with this feature

Several people have pointed out realism issues stating that morale was so low with the men in the village all the reinforecements gave up. Sorry I cant buy this - I get Three tanks And several squads and they woul'nt want to avenge their buddies? I just cant see reinforcements arriving onthe scene and waving a white flag, Retreating maybe - But surrendering all the vehicles (which are counted as kills)?

Also another point of realism - THERE is NO ACTIVE LINES of COMMUNICATION with the reinforcements and smoke is blocking their view -- this simply doesnt make sense

I maintain my stand that this feature really need to be optional for multiplay

Well Flame away :0P

[Guest JonS]

8% huh? Seems you've found the magic auto-surrender trigger

Regards

Jon

------------------

Ubique

[Ben Galanti]

I believe that was a bug in the beta demo (I think Scott C posted it in this thread a while back).

CM now checks for 'auto-surrender' after the reinforcements arrive, not before as in the beta demo. So you shouldn't see reinforcements surrendering the turn they come in anymore...

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Yup it sure seems that way

Moon<

Sorry I didnt address your question earlier on scenario manipulation. I guess I overlooked it whilst responding to the other barrage of posts

As I dont have the editor infront of me this is speaking from a conceptual standpoint in scenario design

Basically what I mean is this,

If A designer happens to be unscrupulous, which There will be some without a doubt, He will find ways to exploit an advantage during the design process.

In this case Knowing that Global morale will force an auto surrender, on any scenarios with prepurchased units, Morale becomes a weapon that can be implemented during design.

Essentially we can probablty spot these scenarios, but unfortunately this will require extensive scrutiny adn we will probably get burned more than once before it really hits home.

With many squads on a map checking each and every unit for troop quality, before playing a scenario competitively, seems a bit much to me.

Yet, with the global morale/auto surrender enabled, how can you not? Unless of course you don't care if you lose the game.

Also if you only know you are getting reinfocements later on - What quality will you be getting? The designer can set up the time frame to be to late for you to hold on, or the quality to be total crap so they cant help

Terrain itself will be a major consideration for accepting a battle as is deploy.

These are factors that normally I would be used to looking at (if it isn't blind) But then if it is blind, boy are we in trouble (based upon my former objections)

with regards to terrain, when accepting a scenario for competitive play one examines the terrain and LOS, which with CM being 3d; a player will have to really watch what he's getting into with the force at hand, this will be time consuming in itself.

One also might want to examine the vehicles loadout

Since we now keep adding on time To ensure we aren't getting boned by the undesirable element, it starts to take the fun out of it.

It isn't ladder games that aren't fun. It's that small percentage of jerks that lull ya into thinking you have a fair match on your hand, only to find out it was a setup.

I guess if this feature stands as is, I will not play any competitive games unless they are point battles - that way I control troop quality reducing the GLOBAL Problem

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[This message has been edited by SS_PanzerLeader (edited 04-19-2000).]

[SS_PanzerLeader]

BEn,

Even if it waits a turn or two it aint gonna put youin much better shape morale wise as you haven' t had enuff time to repair the damage

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[Moon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Yet, with the global morale/auto surrender enabled, how can you not? Unless of course you don't care if you lose the game.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You seem to confuse the auto-surrender with a loss. The loss of the game comes way before the auto-surrender, really. A crappy (or simply unfair) scenario will not become more fair if you leave out the auto-surrender - if it is designed so that you lose 90% of yours guys within the first ten turns anytime you play it, you are going to lose, with or without auto-surrender. Taking out auto-surrender is not going to change that a bit - what it will do, though, is make CM games unrealistic, as more people will tend to fight to the bitter end (yes, even if you make it a toggle option, IMO).

And as someone who likes competitive play (although never had much time for ladders), in my opinion a CM ladder would be much more interesting if it would enable players which understand and utilize real-world tactics to shine more than the "gotta get the last point out of this" type. This fits the whole design idea of CM much better somehow...

[fiftymicrolitres]

While I want to keep the 'auto surrender' feature in the game, it would be nice to be able to toggle it off if BOTH human players want. If this is already in the game, my stupid.

SSPZL: I've played many ladder games, and both myself and my opponents have played some games out well past a losing point just to see what would happen, so I guess I agree with you.

And after all, it is a game, so if the players want it, we should have it. But I fear we are in a minority here

5m

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Moon,

My point is if I am being subjected to a scneario, where Im getting the royal screw, I would like to be able to fight on to minimize the damage done to my rating.

I still don't see where Fighting to the bitter end is unrealistic- nor If both players agree where it shoudl bother anybody - it would be our decision as the competitors

I see no one screaming about the FOW war being able to be turned off THATS UNREALISTIC

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[Guest KwazyDog]

SS, the main thing that Im suggesting here is that you are getting upset about something you have only seen once in how many games, and could have VERY well been tweaked since then! Also, you are going on about the scenario being the problem and people being about to exploit it well, if you had started this thread after your 1st 2nd or even 3rd game I think that would be fair, but really, you surley are over exaniming the scenario!

Here is an example from a game I was playing last night, one of Martins (Moons ) excellent scenarios. I was attacking a town in thick fog, and initially got beaten up pretty bad as the Germans, but to cut a long story short fought back and took the town (mean scenario martin ). Two interesting points came from this game.

* at one point I had only 1 Pz IV on the map and a few scattered crew and burning vehciles against a sizable US force. The AI DIDNT surrender me.

* At the end of the game it came down to hand to hand because both sides were very low on ammo. The US opponent had a total of 18 men left alive and after a fight all routef and ran towards the edge of the map together, hehe He had taken if I recall something like 100 casulties in the game, probably more, and I still have the IV, 2 half tracks and probably an understrength company around the town. The AI didnt surrender HIM.

Now those cases are extreme and the AI didnt jump in. My point is it is REALISTIC to have the feature in there is you royally screw up, but I HAVE NOT seen it in probably 100 games on varying scenarios. Trust me when I say that I honest believe in the final this wont be a problem

I think in the above example, if the routing troops couldnt exit off of the map, they may indeed have surrender becuase they were cut off but really, if they has the US player deserved them too!

Bottom Line : I dont believe this feature will be changed at this late date and probably dost need to due to tweaks, so play the gold and see how you go

[Lorak]

SS,

I have played many a ladder game. My clan in tribes kicked ass. I can see your point to an extent. I do remember reading where the victory conditions have been vastly improved over the beta. So I guess I'll have to wait and see how the Gold plays out. As for the standings on the ladder. It isn't a liner process. You haven't got to beat the number 2 man to be number 2. Hell you could have 50 guys all tied with the highest ranking. Its just a "skill" rating. And you playing a lot of ladders you know that there are a couple checks in place. One chooses sides, one chooses maps, ect... If a person makes cheater maps I'm sure it won't take to long for his named to be made public, so he'll get blackballed. Same as happens with cheaters in other ladders. So if you do play this guy once your "skill" rating may drop a few points. Easy enough to make up in another game or so. I'm sure most of you are familer with the chess ranking system. To me that is how the CM ladder will be. It's all about "skill" rating not positional rating, that is one thing I think most need to keep in mind.

rambled enough now...

Lorak

------------------

http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Kwazydog

I hope you are right, if you refer to my first initial post I ASKED if this had been fixed or what - no one really gave any indication that it was not like this in the later builds. I hope you are correct, But I gaurantee When I get the scenario Editor, I will see if this can be used as an angle, and believe me I HOPE I am wrong

BUT regardless I would still like to see it as somethign that can be turned off If it isn't to difficult to code

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[BFCElvis]

I have just seen the last turn of the file for the game we are talking about here. I agree with the AI that the game was over and that very little, if anything,could be gained by continuing. Having said that I gotta hand it to you SS. That Hellcat move was something to watch. I am NOT being facetious here. I mean it. I was watching the movie and said "holy cow..that took some balls" especially against a Tiger. Please do not think I am being sarcastic because I'm not. With your and Ron permission I would like to have it sent to MadMatt. Again I am NOT busting your stones this time SS..it was sweet.

------------------

"Tryin to be so so bad is bad enough, don't make me laugh by talkin tough" EC

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Lorak<

You are right about the guy making cheater maps getting blackballed. Yet unfortunately (tho fortunate as CM is doing well ) when there gets to be a large number of people playing the ladder, the number of people doing stuff like this wil aslo increase _ this may sound pessimistic but I'm speaking from experience and it really sucks to have to be suspicious of a map before you scrutinize it

I do hope this isn't as big of a deal in the gold I really hope I am WAY off base

I have been looking for something to fill the void of CC2 and have gone through God knows how many games since they screwed up the release of CC3. I have found nothing since then that was worth my effort competititvely, so I'm extatic abut the release of CM. - hence my aprehension over the possibility of this feature being a detriment to the enjoyement of the game at a competitive level

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Hehe I was happy with my performance with my last cat too that is why I was so disturbed by not being able to play it out.

I also sent ya the previous few turns where I did the same thing to the STUG

There was never any doubt that RON had the game I only wanted to see the end and was real bummed at being denied so, and by the fact I might've been able to knock down the victory level abit

Thanks for the compliment man

I sure woulda loved to seen what else I coulda pulled off withtaht HEllcat - he was out for blood

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[Eridani]

Ok, that was a marathon read...

after thinking about it-

SS I see your point, not on the realism end, but for gameplay, I see you desire to want to keep you your men fighting to the last man, after all, its your name and rank on the line.

I also see the arguement for realism... honestly by the time ur down to 13% (or 8%), no offence but ur men are pissing in their pants... they are going to surrender

personally, well, I hate to tell you guys, but this issue is moot. The game is code complete and I do NOT consider this big enough of an issue to delay it... I'm sorry, but I've waited long enough.

Althought I fully understand where you are coming from SS, I have to say I don't agree. The last thing I want when I'm playing ladder games is a truly beaten opponent making a horribly gamey charge for a victory

location...

I definately believe that you were truly beaten in both cases. not only do 'cats only have 12 rounds of HE, the longbore 76mm HE is noticably less effective than the sherman's 75mm.

You might have been able to knockout a few halftracks, but nothing else... and those 'cats have paper-thin armor.

If you've lost, you've lost. Its not the games fault you surrendered. God knows that LD is extremely winnable by the Americans (if you don't believe me, scott.cragg@erols.com, I haven't played pbem in a LONG time)

I understand your frustration watching one of ur tanks being the man, then suddenly not being able to continue battle... but hey, this is war, **** happens.

and as for the cheating with maps... personally I think that ladder games should be played only on 3rd party maps that should be ranked on cmhq for LADDER balance (i.e, does the map present either side with a fair ability to upgrade their standings, this would take into account points, terrain, objectives, ect). If you play someone who has created an unbalanced map and you loose to him, it really is your fault for not checking on the map first... (I do understand we might have an issue with people creating look-alike maps that resemble fair onces in the dbase but give one side an enormous advantage. Doing this would take a great deal of work, however, and I think anyone caught doing such should have their ladder rank reset to buck-ass private (it would be easy to tell after the fact)

When all is said and done though, this ladder is for fun, it isn't competitive. If you **** up you loose points... oh dear, its not the end of the world. A gamey charge to lessen the spread somewhat while your men (realistically) should be balling up in the fetal position and asking for mommy isn't going to make the ladder any more enjoyable.

my .02

-EridanMan

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Eridan

You said :

quote:

If you've lost, you've lost. Its not the games fault you surrendered.

Sorry but you obviously DID"NT read the entire thread _ otherwise you would know I DIDN"T surrender

As for a GAMEY CHARGE I think not - scroll up to ELVIS's post( ELVIS was My worst critic prior to his last post BTW ) and I can show you the files myself if you want to see some tank tactics in action

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[Guest tom w]

sorry to interupt the thread

SS-Panzerleader:

ITs your turn in PBEM......

Tom W

[SS_PanzerLeader]

TOM W already finished emailing it out now

[Eridani]

I meant to say its not the games fault your men surrendered...

and, honestly, you deserved to loose if your moral was that low

-EridanMan

[SS_PanzerLeader]

How many time have you actually played LD as AMERICANS ?

I'd like to see you keep your morale at high levels - Also I never said I didnt deserve to lose _ I merely wanted to play it out _ I wish people would quit putting words in my mouth and Implying things that simply arent there

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

sorry forgot a smiley

[This message has been edited by SS_PanzerLeader (edited 04-19-2000).]