Victory Conditions

[muzzlehead]

Hi All,

I’m an old ASL’r and have noticed that the way CM designates VC in computer generated DYO scenarios tends to facilitate mammoth conflict around a chunk of "known" terrain. The VC flags tend to funnel the attack to certain points on the map. The effect is the focus of both players on the defense and attack of “flag points”, it detracts from any chess like aspects that other games (ASL) seem to have.

Here are some additional VC options that could enhance CM play and expand the experience of tactical conflict.

1) Seek and Destroy missions: Similar to meeting engagements but without flags. The side that inflicts the most damage on the other side after a set number of turns wins the game. This could be tweaked to allow the AI to force withdraw after when side gains a ~40-30% force advantage over the other.

2) Building Control missions: The player who controls the most heavy buildings, two level buildings or any other combination of building types wins the game after a set number of turns or after a specific for advantage has been achieved (again ~40-30%)

3) Exit Games: One side must exit their forces off the map. (I understand that there currently are some issues about this type of DYO due to limitations in the DYO generator.)

All of the above options would open up the combat and add a strategic tone to combat similar to that found in the operation level CM games.

I am refering to Quick Battle scenarios not human designed scenarios. The editor is awesome and able to imitate all of the above suggestions.

Later,

Muzzlehead

[This message has been edited by muzzlehead (edited 07-07-2000).]

[This message has been edited by muzzlehead (edited 07-07-2000).]

[Guest Scott Clinton]

Hmmmm...are these not possible now?

"Seek and Destroy" is possible by just NOT placing any flags and makeing the scenario a destroy type.

"Building Control" is possible by placing small (or large) flags in or near each building you think is valuable.

"Exiting games" are also in the game. You can set it so that one player gets points for exiting units.

Am I missing your meaning?

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

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[Seanachai]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott Clinton:

Hmmmm...are these not possible now?

"Seek and Destroy" is possible by just NOT placing any flags and makeing the scenario a destroy type.

"Building Control" is possible by placing small (or large) flags in or near each building you think is valuable.

"Exiting games" are also in the game. You can set it so that one player gets points for exiting units.

Am I missing your meaning?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Scott, I think he's specifically refering to the Quick Battle generator, rather than the Scenario Creator. The retention of the term DYO (Do Your Own) is, I think, causing confusion on this Board. I realize that many of the old timers retain the use of the term, but many newcomers take one meaning for it, and some take another. The problem is is that nowhere in the manual or game is the term DYO used, so there's no standardization of meaning. I've noticed this in other places; I wish an agreed upon useage for the two different methods of battle creation could be found.

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

After witnessing exceptional bravery from his Celtic mercenaries, Alexander the Great called them to him and asked if there was anything they feared. They told him nothing, except that the sky might fall on their heads.

[Guest Michael emrys]

Attempt to standardized common usage in English on the internet are usually futile, but...

How about we limit DYO to battles and ops that are created in the Editor by a human and call Quick Battles...well...Quick Battles? Could that work?

Michael