An almost silly rebuttle to CM's superior AI

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

I was trying to pass the word of CM over at the Matrix Games' SP:W@W forum and they're not buying into the idea.

Someone made this ridiculous remark about the AI.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"IMHO, Combat Mission is nothing like Steel Panthers. If I had to compare it to a game, I would have to say it's most like Myth 2 or WarZone 2100, but with poorer graphics and an intentionally dumb tactical A/I. I personally didn't like it. I like to have an overall picture on the screen of what's going on so that I can take a break and come back in a week and not lose much. I can't ususally allocate the contiguous block of time that it takes to play a game of Combat Mission."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rather a simplistic mind that can't grasp a 3D battlefield, if you ask me.

And then in the same breath he says,

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"When the new demo comes out, I'll try it, and see if any of the issues that I have have been 'corrected'. I doubt that they will be since some of them at least were intentional, like the lack of a campaign."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sounds like he's not a "True-Believer". The campaign he's referring to is Steel Panthers' campaign of where your troops get better and stuff.

I don't know about him, but I have always dreamed about playing a Steel Panther-isk game in 3D.

They keep talking about the scale differences and CM's micromanagement system through the order window. They complain that the micromanagement tends to get boring and teadious, but I think that what makes CM great, is that you CAN control exactly what your men do.

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

"I am not interested in the names of your fathers...nor of your family's lineage. What I am interested in...is your breaking point!"--Gen. Chang

[This message has been edited by Ol' Blood & Guts (edited 04-04-2000).]

[Colin]

Wow your posting threads every three seconds.

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

Visit my webpage!

http://cm4mac.tripod.com

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colin:

Wow your posting threads every three seconds.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ehhh, I'm bored. No CM to play.

[This message has been edited by Ol' Blood & Guts (edited 04-04-2000).]

[jdmorse]

OBG Wrote

_____________________________________________

I don't know about him, but I have always dreamed about playing a Steel Panther-isk game in 3D.

_____________________________________________

I remember when PanzerBlitz (Avalon Hill) came out. Boy did I long for a game that had an easy way to incorporate same time moves or LOS or more importantly, indiv. units. To play we'd have to have a third party to tell us if an enemy unit was in position. Then came Tobruk (also AH) and and the flat desert solved much of the sighting issues and took it down to the individ unit. Boy of boy is it nice to have a game that computes LOS, facing, hull position, etc.

For those of you who were raised in this technological age (not old codgers like me), I hope you appreciate what CM is really doing, it is in it's way revolutionizing the wargame.

As to Matrix Games' SP:W@W forum and they're not buying into the idea.....Well, They just don't get it.....

(besides we used to play in 5 feet of snow, barefoot!

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

[L.Tankersley]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jdmorse:

(besides we used to play in 5 feet of snow, barefoot! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll bet you always had to attack uphill, too, right? And when you had to retreat? Uphill, unless you were trying to establish a commanding position, in which case the enemy had the high ground.

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

Leland J. Tankersley

[Guest Big Time Software]

Whoops... double post...

[This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 04-04-2000).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

Hehe... been a while since we have seen a SP Head try and trash CM. Always makes us smile. Such people have no idea that SP is hardly realistic, that CM doesn't need to be micromanaged (hey if you wanna, go ahead but we don't!), lack imagination, and in general haven't a clue about warfare. Yeah, pretty harsh of me to say that, but when you see a duck you don't call it a goose

Oh yeah... and what AI does SP have? Not much to write home about unless you think that a mad rush of units towards flags constitutes "intelligence"

Steve

[Kraut]

Bloody guts said:

"They complain that the micromanagement tends to get boring and teadious, but I think that what makes CM great, is that you CAN control exactly what your men do."

I love micromanagement, and i love to give my troops exact orders that they should carry out to the best of their abilities. However, from what i've seen of the CM demo, this aspect is lacking. As i mentioned months ago, i absolutely hated it when my MG's, zooks, schrecks etc, retargeted without my specific orders, even if their retargeting was a "better" move. So, i wouldn't say that CM allows you to micromanage at a very detailed scale. At least from what i have experienced in the old beta demo.

MK

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

Hehe... been a while since we have seen a SP Head try and trash CM. Always makes us smile. Such people have no idea that SP is hardly realistic, that CM doesn't need to be micromanaged (hey if you wanna, go ahead but we don't!), lack imagination, and in general haven't a clue about warfare. Yeah, pretty harsh of me to say that, but when you see a duck you don't call it a goose

Oh yeah... and what AI does SP have? Not much to write home about unless you think that a mad rush of units towards flags constitutes "intelligence"

Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You hit the nail on the head, Steve. SP is nothing more than a fun time watching tanks blow up from the cheesiest shots.

[Guest Captain Foobar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"IMHO, Combat Mission is nothing like Steel Panthers. If I had to compare it to a game, I would have to say it's most like Myth 2 or WarZone 2100, but with poorer graphics and an intentionally dumb tactical A/I. I personally didn't like it. I like to have an overall picture on the screen of what's going on so that I can take a break and come back in a week and not lose much. I can't ususally allocate the contiguous block of time that it takes to play a game of Combat Mission."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

He must have been looking at a different game, because there is nothing in that statement that ISN'T wrong.....

People in general do not adapt easily to change, but eventually, those with any sense will come along.... The ones that don't, well they probably hug the map edge, try to cheat FOW, etc, so it's no big loss....

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

I know, it's like people can't grasp the idea that a wargame can be 3D. The Warzone 2100 reference is kinda funny. I have that game, although it was kinda cool when it came out, I have never seen a gaming company that comes out with patches that introduce new bugs like stability and AI.

In fact that game always turned into the classic tank rush. My favorite tank was a super heavy "Mammoth" (I think it was) Guass Cannon tank. I would just build up a ton of these and go around the map in a clockwise direction and destroy the bases as I would find them.

I wrote an contrary rebuttle to that very quote, probably get kicked off the Forum by a somewhat immature administrator that doesn't believe in free speech, but so what.

[Moriarty]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by L.Tankersley:

And when you had to retreat? Uphill, unless you were trying to establish a commanding position, in which case the enemy had the high ground.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My units NEVER retreat ... they just advance in a different direction.

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

It's a piece of junk — Moriarty

[Miyamoto Musashi]

I'm all for the occasional RTS (StarCraft being my fave, but there's not much choice on the Mac), but CM is so much better than the RTS games I've played. I know absolutely nothing about SP, so I can't talk about that... but I will say that I really enjoy the management and AI from CM so far. I've never had a game where the outcomes can be so utterly different from game to game. For example, in StarCraft, like Warzone and some of the other "strategy" games I've played , the goal is to accumulate power. If you've got enough hardware, you win... period. After a while, it gets a little old. In CM, I really enjoy the fact that I CAN micromanage and that the enemy does different things game to game. For example... a few nights ago, I played Riesberg as the Germans and totally annihilated the poor little Allies... my 2 88's (and a couple of hidden panzershrek units) wiped up the Shermans and my mortars pounded the bunched up infantry into a gelatinous mess. Last night, at 2 am, I played it again, still having a little post-victory hangover from the last Riesberg battle, and sure I'd have the same result. Agh... I got pounded mercilessly. One of my hidden 'shrek units did get a tank, and one of the 88's also tallied one, but the rest of the force completely avoided my other 88 and proceeded to pound the crap out of the town and my pockets of infantry which tried to envelop the Allies. It was a heinous defeat... although useful in my ongoing strategic education. But anyway, my point in all that is to say that very few other games can promise such a wide range of outcomes. CM requires you to think on the fly, not apply the same strategy over and over again to get the job done. And it is this aspect of the game that makes it so appealing to me, and probably many of the other CM-heads here. Of course, the fantastic graphics help too

[Mark IV]

CM and SP are really different approaches to different scales (being mono-game-ous myself, meaning I can only delve into one game at a time, this is no contest. Sorry, SP.).

That said, if SP folks were so fired up, they could divert their energies to providing the documentation that SP1 and 2 lacked (I never went further with the series than that). Hell, the threads on the CM manual here, were bigger than the documentation that came with SP2.

And the AI comparison is tragic... shall we talk about OBA targeting? I don't think SP could have thought up a more convoluted, unreal system than the one they chose.

Micromanagement was MORE necessary in SP; it just took place at a different scale. However I would argue that if you want to micromanage, the capacity and the tools for it are easier in CM.

I like the realism the tacAI provides in CM- I like troops to disobey me when local situations threaten, and I can accept that this will result in some dumb decisions because that's REAL. A good commander has to plan on a certain amount of independence, misinterpretation, and outright pig-headedness because he leads men, not ones and zeroes (well, there's zeroes in every outfit... ).

[Guest PeterNZ]

gimme the url to that board, i wanna go rip the ****e outa someone :>

PeterNZ

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

.C O M B A T. .V I S I O N.

* Film From The Front *

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

I know. I don't know where that guy got where the Tac-AI was dumb in CM. He obviously wouldn't know good AI if it bit him in the ass!

And for those that don't like micromanagement, then I guess lets move this tank to this hex and see if it draws 'op-fire'.

Geez!

I personally love how you can order many different orders to the same unit, like Move Fast, Turn Here, etc, Hunt to there, Rotate once you get there, etc.

And where does he get off on saying "poor graphics"? Yeah, like the SP graphics are something to shout about.

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

"I am not interested in the names of your fathers...nor of your family's lineage. What I am interested in...is your breaking point!"--Gen. Chang

[Ron]

I was curious also and went to the SPWAW forum to read the comments but the thread isn't there anymore!

Ron

[Eric Alkema]

I love micromanagement, and i love to give my troops exact orders that they should carry out to the best of their abilities. However, from what i've seen of the CM demo, this aspect is lacking. As i mentioned months ago, i absolutely hated it when my MG's, zooks, schrecks etc, retargeted without my specific orders, even if their retargeting was a "better" move. So, i wouldn't say that CM allows you to micromanage at a very detailed scale. At least from what i have experienced in the old beta demo.

Yeah, I agree/disagree It drives me nuts when they choose their own targets contrary to my orders but I suspect that I would hate it even more if they acted like mindless automatons and ignored the changes to the situation that take place during the course of the turn. (I still wish they wouldn't waste so much ammo on targets they aren't likely to hurt without orders to do so. Sigh)

MK

[DEF BUNGIS]

QUOTE:

IMHO, Combat Mission is nothing like Steel Panthers. If I had to compare it to a game, I would have to say it's most like Myth 2 or WarZone 2100, but with poorer graphics and an intentionally dumb tactical A/I. I personally didn't like it. I like to have an overall picture on the screen of what's going on so that I can take a break and come back in a week and not lose much. I can't ususally allocate the contiguous block of time that it takes to play a game of Combat Mission." END QUOTE

That bastard, I will get him.

He better not ever play CM with me.

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

Better to make the wrong decision than be the sorry son of a bitch to scared to make one at all

[Guest KwazyDog]

Ahhh, Ive met people like him many a time before. Really, his comments make him sounds like an amature whom is spitting the dummy becuase CM is peeing in SP's pool. Both games are different, and appeal to different audiences. For me personally I dont think there is any way I could go back to SP (or even CC2, which I did rather enjoy) after playing CM, the true 3D really does add another 'dimension'. On the other hand though, I can understand others interest in SP, I played it a lot and its a fun game. Cant we all just get along

Just live happy in the fact that unless he opens his mind he will never experience the true depth and detail of CM

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

[Lee]

Kraut, no need to worry. The tac AI has been tuned to not retarget

any more unless it's under serious and immediate threat from

another enemy unit (which is realistic). It should happen much

less often in the full game.

[Guest Big Time Software]

Kraut, no worries. When you see the Gold Demo you will realize why we called what you have now a BETA Demo

And Eric hit the nail on the head. As described many times on this BBS and in an article on our site, without the TacAI making targeting decisions for you CM would be totally unplayable. I know because I did play CM before it had TacAI (or any AI for that matter) and it was beyond frustrating and totally unrealistic.

Steve

[Fionn]

What's the guy's name who wrote that inane comment on the SPWAW board?

Odds are I probably know about him and I'd be interested to know who he is.

[von Lucke]

Humpf! I must say it's rather disenheartening to see so much Steel Panther bashing going on here.

Oh, hey, don't get me wrong, I think CM is the best thing since diesel powered Shermans and IMHO it will completely renovate the sagging computer wargame genre. But c'mon now: How many of you Grogs out there thought the original release of SP was the best thing you'd seen since -- oh maybe -- Panzer General? (I would have said Panthers in the Shadows, but I'm trying to be more mainstream). I, for one, played the s**t out of SP when I first got it --- and will probably do the same to SP:W@W. If for no other reason than I'm curious about what renovation work Matrix Games has done on SSI's venerable code.

And, realisticly, we're talking apples and oranges here: Sure both CM and SP are wargames based on WW2 --- but after that the similarity ends. SP is a top-down, IGO-UGO, 2D, HP damage, traditional EP-based long-campaign, regimental level game that covers most of WW2. CM is a true 3D, battalion level, individual-plot / simultaneous movement, physics-based damage, simulation that covers a specific time-period of WW2.

I know which one I prefer (CM), but that's not going to keep me from enjoying SP:W@W when it's finally released.

So there

[Stef]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"IMHO, Combat Mission is nothing like Steel Panthers. If I had to compare it to a game, I would have to say it's most like Myth 2 or WarZone 2100, but with poorer graphics and an intentionally dumb tactical A/I. I personally didn't like it. I like to have an overall picture on the screen of what's going on so that I can take a break and come back in a week and not lose much. I can't ususally allocate the contiguous block of time that it takes to play a game of Combat Mission."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this guy has not played more than 30 sec with CM or is not interested in realistic wargames. I'm astonished by such a reflection. Every wargamer - who's natural aim ,IMHO, is to simulate war as realisticaly as possible - who's interested in platoon/squad squale tactical wargames has always dreamed about a CM like game: 3D(reality) and improved AI. ( a new kind of AI as it has to manage a realistic world (3D)). Even if the demo has AI drawbacks it's the best AI I've ever played against! ( This guy has just to wait some years for the bioprocessors built with DNA and human neurone...then he gonna get a quiet perfect AI...and anger then as the PC gonna kick his ass all the time)

I've shown CM to a 40 year old WWII fan/collector who has no PC and he was totaly amazed by the game and its realism...he gonna buy a PC/Mac soon. CM Crusade goes on...

Stephan

[This message has been edited by Stef (edited 04-05-2000).]