Wasn't the charm of CM that you could carefully plan your turns....

[M Hofbauer]

Steve/BTS: Note that people can play CM with Fog of War off, which "ruins" much of what we carefully designed Combat Mission to be. I should know But I don't see ANYBODY stating that CM is worse off for including this feature even though it has a far more profound impact on what CM is "supposed" to be than TCP/IP ever could.

hey, now wait with that big hammer, I am not turning against TCP here, I was just wondering:

have any of you ever used or heard of somebody use that "FoW off" - option?

I can't imagine doing that. No fun. It's like robbing a bank by telling them to deposit the booty onto your account. Or something like that.

Kingfish: I like that sig. )

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

"Im off to NZ police collage" (GAZ_NZ)

[Alexander]

I've been reading with interest the various posts on the new TCP/IP upgrade. I haven't tried it myself, but the emerging consensus seems to be that beyond 1000pts, or so, it becomes unmanageable- at least with the timer.

Maybe the ultimate application will be the for the eventual multi-multiplayer edition; 10,000 point regiimental matches with a major and a half dozen lieutenants per side. Sign me up for that battle. .

[Lawyer]

I agree with Freyland. I have not yet played a TCP/IP game, but I do appreciate the PBEM time between turns to view results and organize my thoughts and troops for the next move.

On the other hand, I wrote a stinging letter to a computer magazine editor five years ago castigating him for spending so much coverage on the internet, which I considered an exotic option to home computing. So my Luddite credentials are quite good.

But Freyland is simply pointing out the joys of the present (which shall remain with us if we choose). I'm sure we will evolve to the CM future which will include some real time experience.

I'm pleased with the choice of play options, although not sure I will find much time to sit through a whole game in real time. Thank goodness for the ability to switch back and forth during a game. In my experience, game setup takes some serious time, whereas play time could move faster, particularly as the number of units become fewer.

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

Only the Lawyer knows what Evil lurks in the minds of men....

[Guest Big Time Software]

Thanks for all the comments.

I agree that TCP/IP, even without timers, gives a sense of urgency to the game. I for one think this is GREAT. I like working under pressure, and feel pretty confident that I do better than most, so this is a plus in my book.

The "disconnect" feeling of PBEM games, especially when one of the players takes off for a long weekend, has always left me a little bummed out about PBEM. I feel distracted and not totally "into it". TCP/IP fixes that. The switching between PBEM and TCP/IP, or simply saving a TCP/IP game and restarting at a different time, offers further flexibility that PBEM alone can not offer.

And it is true. A little time pressure does offer a bit more realism to the game, but not in a direct historical way. As has been said many times, in CM you are making the decisions which dozens of men would be making in real life. However, no real life commander has the luxury of NO pressure to make quick decisions. So if the player is forced to feel some degree of pressure to act from the gut instead of just the mind... the game is made much more realistic IMHO. That is what real world commanders do most of the time.

M.Hofbauer wrote:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>have any of you ever used or heard of somebody use that "FoW off" - option?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup, quite a few in fact. The feature was even put in by request from users When CM was first released we had a lot of problems with people reporting odd behavior (AI "cheating" for the most part) only to find out that they were playing with FoW off. It is a good way to learn how to play for people not yet comfortable with either the game system or the tactics needed to do well.

And like I said... the inclusion of this feature does not negatively impact CM at all, even though it affects the realism and game aspects far more deeply than TCP/IP ever could.

Steve

[Pak40]

"Even with that much time we both felt rushed and our strategy suffered from it."

Don't forget that you can both pause the action thereby eliminating the timer for that turn. And I assume the pause feature works in setup also.

"what I think Freyland is trying to say is that there is a subliminal sense of urgency

when playing over TCP/IP. Even if you're using an unlimited timer."

While I do enjoy taking my time in reviewing the movies and carefully plotting my next moves, the "sense of urgency" you talk about actually gives a more realistic flavor to CM battles. Let's face it, our real life counterparts in WWII did not have all day to plan their tactics. Good snap decisions were crucial for a company/platoon commander to have. Therefore, being rushed may not be desireable to most gamers but it is slightly more realistic.

Damn, Steve, you beat me to it!!!

[This message has been edited by Pak40 (edited 11-30-2000).]

[RokSS]

I agree with Deanco et al who feel it adds yet another aspect of realism. You get a bit of RTS urgency and pauses to check out the action. Hotseat games took way too long IMHO because of micromanagement and the one at a time sequence.

The TCP addition is flexible and well implemented. I crashed to the desktop once during a battle last night. The autosave worked perfectly and we were back in action within two minutes with no moves lost and finished without a hitch. BRILLIANT! With any other game- you start over. Thanks a ton BTS.

And BTW I want to thank Deanco for the latest interface mod. It looks great and I think the new typeface solved some garbled text problems I was having.

RokSS

[bogey]

TCP/IP Pickup Games

Looking for an opponent?

http://playbyweb.com/cgi-bin/cm/cm.cgi

If we can get enough people using the thing, you'll never have to go out looking for an opponent.

Free. No advertising.

Posted ads only last one hour so they're always fresh. Newer ads are placed at the top of the list.

[Croda]

I think that TCP/IP also adds an additional level of competition to the game. With PBEM, you plot your moves and send away. You don't need to be present to "be responsible" for your moves. It is, to use Steve's word, a very "disconnected" way to do battle. With TCP/IP you and your opponent get to see your genius (or in my case, my folly) immediately. In some PBEMs there is a week turnaround between turns. I have so many games going, that I sometimes forget the situation, my overall strategy, and what my opponent had been trending towards. TCP/IP allows you to keep your head in the game.

That said, I will most likely continue playing more PBEM than TCP/IP just for convenience sake, and because I like playing the variety of games that my PBEMs offer me. Both are fantastic though: PBEM reminding me of the way people sometimes play chess by mail, and TCP/IP your standard, adrenaline pumper.

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

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Elijah Meeks: You rock, Croda<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Fuerte]

I just played two TCP/IP test games. It was quite fun, but the problems with the real time connection are also very clear. Here are the plusses and minuses:

+ It was quite fast, both players viewing the recording and making the moves at the same time.

- When one player has much more to do than the other, then it must be quite boring to just wait. If one attacks and one defends, then the defender is going to have a boring game, unless the time limit is very low, in which case the attacker is cursing a lot.

+ It was quite intensive. More than PBEM.

- You have no time to see everything, so something important or funny or beautiful is missed in every game.

The TCP/IP play is nice to have, but I'm certainly going to play a lot more PBEM than TCP/IP. TCP/IP takes so much time, one or two hours, and you have to sit on the computer all the time. PBEM has freedom, you can play whenever you have the time. And you can carefully plan your turns... and view the recording as many times as you want.

[Guest KwazyDog]

"I've been reading with interest the various posts on the new TCP/IP upgrade. I haven't tried it myself, but the emerging consensus seems to be that beyond 1000pts, or so, it becomes unmanageable- at least with the timer."

Alexander, to be honest Ive found that not to be true.

Ive been playing a LARGE Op on TCPIP now for over a week. I usually connect of an evening and play four of five turns, which Ill add are probably in the time I would get 2 PBEM turns done with all the extra swapping. I then save, exit and arrange to send an email at a time to start the next night Now and then we convert back to PBEM and do a few turns that way if we are busy.

I think its all about choices, and I think its a great choice to have, for big battles or small

[M Hofbauer]

KD: Ive been playing a LARGE Op on TCPIP now for over a week.

wow. true dedication. must be a HUGE scenario.

sorry, couldn't resist

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

"Im off to NZ police collage" (GAZ_NZ)

[Guest kking199]

As has been stated TCP/IP "can" have a VERY different feel than a PBEM game. I would fully expect a "Careful Tactitian" type to shy away from TCP/IP because they like the luxory(sp?) of viewing the battlefield and carefully plotting points, taking their sweet time. Nothin wrong with that. Now the more impatient and action oriented fella (or gal) is gung ho for the TCP/IP game.

I have played one TCP/IP game so far... a QB, 700pt, 5min timer game. I can tell you one experience I had that I never had before... tension!! It was intense and I loved it! You know what, I made 2 bad decisions that "I think" i would not have made if playing PBEM. I reacted to the moment... the tension! BTW.. those bad decision cost me the game...

So I second the comment that TCP/IP can simulate a more real world environment, in a real fight you don't have time to mull for 30 minutes over whether you should send that tank over the hill or hold back a bit longer.

So, as also stated previously, I have choices. Depending on my mood I will play both PBEM and TCP/IP. However I am not sure if I will ever play the AI again.. no knock on the AI, just like playing people.

So now the appeal of CM has broadened even further. It can satisfy the action junky and the armchair general, and in some cases at the same time! Good lord BTS... you have truly created a classic!!

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

Some call me Kong...

[patboivin]

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

I've been reading with interest the various posts on the new TCP/IP upgrade. I haven't tried it myself, but the emerging consensus seems to be that beyond 1000pts, or so, it becomes unmanageable- at least with the timer.

Maybe the ultimate application will be the for the eventual multi-multiplayer edition; 10,000 point regiimental matches with a major and a half dozen lieutenants per side. Sign me up for that battle. .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And when we will be able to string the movie files together, we will be able to sit back and watch the 3 hour motion picture...

I am waiting for Kursk in CM2, that will be a total mess. heh heh

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

Lots of good comments here.

I think tcp-ip is a better way to play CM, if you have the time, and your opponent's schedule is similar to your own. There will be a lot more Game Scheduling happening these days. (OK, meet me at 7am GMT on Saturday before my wife wakes up..etc)

The one area that I think PBEM, aka disconnected CM play is a superior choice, is for studying and practicing the Combat Mission interface, and for learning tactics.

You don't really have time to LEARN certain things in a tcp-ip timer match, if the timer is set to apply the "pressure". The pressure is an important aspect, and it adds realism to the game, but I think people should learn and practice the fundamentals of tactical combat in single player or PBEM.

THEN you start playing tcp-ip, and learn how to execute those fundamentals under pressure.

#1 benefit of TCP-IP? The chat! (Haha..you lost your Tiger )

[ScoutPL]

I skimmed through most of the these posts concerning this topic and as always, feel the need to add my two cents.

I think TCP/IP adds a dimension to Combat Mission that catapults it leagues ahead of its competition in terms of realistic combat simulation and enjoyment. My biggest gripe about PBEM is the wait between turns. My formal training emphasises quickly taking stock of a situation, developing a plan and executing it as quickly as possible. The intention being to overwhelm the enemy with violence and aggression, seize the initiative and maintain it until the battle is won. Sound anything like those personal narratives from your favorite conflict?

If you look at CM as a chess match then, yeah, tcp/ip play may come as a shock and a disruption to your careful, arm chair style of play. Now before everybody gets all huffy, I'm not belittling anyone (except maybe Tris, whom I'll belittle every chance I get). But I am trying to explain why I find it so appealing. The true test of ones tactics, grasp of the capabilities of your assets, and decision making only comes under pressure. And the timer does a wonderful job of adding that pressure.

I played a 1000 point game with the timer set at 5 minutes. The only time I had to do a replay was when I'd tab-alt'd the screen to do something else. But I still had more then enough time to see if my PLAN was still on track and make any adjustments. A bigger scenario might take more time but I doubt it.

I do want to add that playing under such constraints should only be done by a player who is comfortable with his abilities and isnt as interested in the pretty explosions as he is getting that victory at the end of the game. After all, the faster you play, the more pressure you put on your opponent, hopefully giving you an edge that will help you in CM just like it would in combat.

[Maximus]

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

And it is true. A little time pressure does offer a bit more realism to the game, but not in a direct historical way. As has been said many times, in CM you are making the decisions which dozens of men would be making in real life. However, no real life commander has the luxury of NO pressure to make quick decisions. So if the player is forced to feel some degree of pressure to act from the gut instead of just the mind... the game is made much more realistic IMHO. That is what real world commanders do most of the time.

Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I knew somebody would eventually say that. I agree with what everybody's saying, it's just going to take a while for everybody to adjust to this new pressure...err, I mean format.

[Mr. Clark]

I really like the TCP/IP option... and I agree with the "combat pressure" arguments.

I only have a problem with people saying that commanding huge forces in real time is more realistic.

Now then, when we get to the multi-multiplayer era, it will be a different story!

EDIT: Imagine yelling at yor team-mates things such as "Where in blazes are you??? I need backup now!!!"

Ah, what times we will have then...

[This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 12-01-2000).]

[Big Ron]

The main advantage of PBEM to me is that you can play across time zones. I'm in the UK and can attack the US or something like that. Also over here we have piss poor technology so 56k is top speed. I haven't played on TCP/IP but I'm guessing it won't be quite such an experience at that speed.

[Theron]

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

The main advantage of PBEM to me is that you can play across time zones. I'm in the UK and can attack the US or something like that. Also over here we have piss poor technology so 56k is top speed. I haven't played on TCP/IP but I'm guessing it won't be quite such an experience at that speed.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I only have a 28.8 and it works fine on small battles. I haven't tried any large battles. You can scroll around the map while the data is downloading and the download is a lot faster than PBEM. It is important to note that the 56k modems are only 56k download. The fastest they can upload is 33.3k. Therefore they are a lot better at surfing the web where a web site has a wide data pipe, but in a home computer to home computer link they run at 33.3k. Note that this is definately the case with modems in the US. The phone lines in the UK might be better and therefore allow a faster upload.

Theron

[Spook]

Just want to post quick to weigh in with Steve, deanco, & most others about the added benefit of TCP/IP as an option. Deanco, your first post was an impressive "nutshell."

In all due respect, Freyland, the only compelling argument that could be made AGAINST the addition of the TCP/IP option would be if adding TCP/IP required the removal of some features or detail in the CM game engine that was available earlier. (In effect, a "dumbing down" of the CM combat models.) That isn't the case.

[lassner.1]

Quite apart from the issue of of “realism” and “pressure” I feel the TCP/IP option is terrific addition. For me, the game has now assumed the “feel” of war-gaming in the past: meeting the guys on a Saturday/Sunday afternoon and playing all day.

To those who feel hurried I would respond by observing that in the days of face-to-face board games one might take one’s time planning a move, but one did not really have the option of taking as long as one wanted. The game had to keep moving – even if it was not expected to finish on the same day. Since it is not necessary to use the timer the TCP/IP option has created an on-line version of “meeting at the game shop” and playing. Personally, I always felt a twinge of excitement in the head-to-head experience that the old board games gave and felt that that excitement had been mostly lost with the PBEM. I will still play PBEM, but it definitely takes a back seat to TCP/IP.

[BFCElvis]

Ron, Timezones should not be too big of a problem. I would imagine you could find someone to play 24 chours a day. If you want to play someone in the US maybe someone here will be looking for a game Saturday afternoon which is Saturday night for you.

I use a 56K modem and it runs VERY fast. I played one last night, 17 turns in one hour and twenty minutes.

Something for some of you guys that don't really see the usefulness of TCP/IP to think about. If you are ever in the mood to play a game against the AI from start to finish in one sitting, you might as well play TCP/IP. It will take the same amount of time and be a much more interesting game.

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

What do we do with a terrible liar? Well, Great liars we send into the clergy.

Good liars we groom for politics. Moderate liars we supply with sherrif's badges

and guns, and the bad liars, well, we make them heroin whores. So what the hell

do we do with the Terrible Liars? Well, it seems we turn them into physicists

called "chrisl." Peng

[Claytonious]

And don't you think real military commanders are ALWAYS thinking "Oh, did I really do the right thing?" when they hit GO!?

[deanco]

One last comment: TCP/IP will always have some inherent "tension" built into it, regardless if the timer is running or not. The reason? The "bloop" sound and 'opponent is waiting for you to finish orders' message. AND the fact that you know that there is an actual human somewhere in the world waiting for you to HURRY UP AND FINISH!! Someone mentioned face to face games...yes, perfect. If your buddy sitting across from you finishes moving before you, there is a TEENSY bit of pressure to hurry up, right? PBEM will always be the game of choice for those who want to take their time, I think.

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

DeanCo--

CM interface mods: http://mapage.cybercable.fr/deanco/

[Pasu]

If you want some realism and pressure even more try this.

Question is "Is it possible to make true leadership experiment with Combat Mission?"

Here is one quick little idea of modelling the true leadership in Combat Mission.

To do this first you have to make a simple scenario (defend) in Company scale. (choose also some pretargets)

Then follow next basic house rules.

- You yourself are in the company commander group

- Make setup and give first orders so far away to the future as it is possible and reasonable.

- In playing you have to keep view all the time in lowest stage locked to company commander group where ever he (or she) is.

- Ordering subordinates is possible if you can do that with earlier explained rule.

- You are permit to use review of minute only one and first time. So you have to make your decisions of situations with that information. Hopefully you have good sound card to pick important sound courses...

- You can view around 360 degrees in your command group with a movement of about 5 meter.

- To get better view of situation you can of course move with different styles. But remember earlier rules.

- If last of your command groups men is lost so of course your war is also over.

And then some advanced house rules.

- If your stance is hide, crawl or run it is only possible to look 180 degrees from your place. Be aware that locked option is lost when you do this. So be ready to move your view forward at the same time with group.

- It is possible to jump QUICK in that view minute to your platoon leaders and get the situation briefing of that place. (modelling signal systems...)

- To simulate your messenger soldiers pick pair of sharpshooters. Put this to find out what is happening on use somewhere use same system that in earlier paragraph.

Other rules.

- Use cars or other vehicles like usually to command vehicle purposes. Lock view to these when you are embarked.

- If this kind of playing feels too easy, attack, take more troops, bad weather and so on....

- BE HONEST FOR YOURSELF! DONT BLUFF!

Any idea how to put more realism in this "Leadershipmod"?

How about combat messengers, communication systems, reporting situations, signaling with hands or some other elements like lightpistol and lightbullets?

Can we see this without houserules in future patch of CM or CM2 or CM5...? Is this a vision or hallucination?

TRY this mod and feel the problems of battletime leadership! WAR IS NOT SO SIMPLE.

Best Regards to every fan of The Combat Mission: Best Wargame Ever Made.