TacOps, Longevity & 'Success'

[Covert Sniper]

Hi,

I'm just curoius about how long people have been playing TacOps. I have been playing, with an occasional hiatus, since the v1.x release for Windows 3.x. The hard copy manual, which I do miss, was copywrited in 1996, so I have had the game on my computer for at least 6 years. That is pretty long lived considering that most games remain on my hard drive for a maximum of about 18 months. If you are relatively new to the game, do you intend to keep it around for more than 18 months or will a few months or year of play suffice?

Are there any games you have kept playing for more than, say, two years?

On the 'success' side, has anyone ever completed a mission with zero causualties? If so, what side, what game prefs and what scenario? Was there a time limit on the order phase and did you replay any turns to get out from under ill-given or forgotten orders? What about 5% or less, and 10% or less?

I know that better players, of which I am not , can knock out games with casualties of 15% or less.

Six years and counting,

Randy

[Goran]

TacOps since first Windows version (I'm on a Mac, but a Windows-using friend and I ordered it together, one version each).

Civilization since a bit before that, and still. I do an Allied General campaign every other year or so, also.

[tar]

On the 'success' side, has anyone ever completed a mission with zero causualties? If so, what side, what game prefs and what scenario? Was there a time limit on the order phase and did you replay any turns to get out from under ill-given or forgotten orders? What about 5% or less, and 10% or less?

Depends on what you mean by "zero casualties".

Just the other day, I ran a Team Sposito. I think that was it. It is the one where the US Army must defend a bridge for 20 minutes. The forces are an infantry platoon with Javelins, TOW-Bradleys and Apaches.

A few of the infantry soldiers were killed by artillery, but very good shooting by the helicopters and good luck having all tank return fire miss the Bradleys caused me to loose no units.

Of course, I couldn't leave well enough alone, so I then went and played the Canadian Army version and got overrun, losing the scenario.

[ December 06, 2002, 06:47 PM: Message edited by: tar ]

[JHHood]

Are there any games you have kept playing for more than, say, two years?

Half-Life FireArms, Team Fortress, and Quake 2.

On the 'success' side, has anyone ever completed a mission with zero causualties?

Kincaid is easy to do so.

[Goran]

On the 'success' side, has anyone ever completed a mission with zero causualties?

Does zero enemy casualties count?

[Redwolf]

I picked up 3.0 but never got really warm with it, mainly because the mechanism to select one of several overlapping units. I know that sounds silly but the 4.0 selector got over it and I am much happier now. I only play on a really regular basis since the 4.0 beta tests.

I only played TOAW before I picked up TacOps3 and CMBO at the same time. I own most other recent computer wargames but cannot get warm with them. I only like "efficient" wargames, that means you learn the most for each minute you play. Most games prohibit a good rating here in their interfaces or by being too inflexible.

CMBO was very long-lasting game by my standards and completed the two years until it was worn out almost by the day. TOAW never left my harddrive, but I never played PBEM.

I don't think I ever played a TacOps game without own losses. ATGMs are nasty (in TacOps and in real life).

[ December 07, 2002, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[Covert Sniper]

Hi,

In response to the questions 'what are zero causualties?'

I am referring to the Game Status Report. This is the report that is flashed at the end of the game. For example, if one had an infanrty squad with P6 and ends the game with P1, and these were the only losses during the game, there have been five personnel lost during the game but the Game Status Report would show 0% casualites (I think) because no unit markers were eliminated during the course of play. That's what I am looking for, 0% casulties by the Game Status Report definition.

If anyone can play with absolutely no losses, not even one one team or squad member of dismounted troops, I want to be on your side when I eventually play a CPX and I don't ever want a PBEM game with you .

Clear as muddy water?

Thanks for the responses so far,

Randy

[Covert Sniper]

Does zero enemy casualties count?

I hate when that happens!

Randy

[Jeff Gilbert]

I don't beleive I have ever had ZERO casualties. I have been stomped unmercifully but both the AI and PBEM opponants early on. And occasionally still in PBEM.

I do not know which version of TacOps I started with but it did include the book version of the manual [i still have it] and I loaded the diskettes on my MacSE ... yup, that's right, a black and white 8MHz monster machine with a whopping 4MB of RAM. :eek:

[minmax]

In 1994 my wife pointed out TacOps in the discount bin at a Electronics Boutique it was the 3.5 floppy version I think it was 1.5 or so. Anyway I played it religiously until I bought 2.0 then 3.0. I can't think of a time that some form of TacOps hasn't been on my computer since then.

The lowest casualities I have gotten away with was 38% that seems to be my plateau.

I started playing on my Power Mac 6500 and now enjoy it on my G-4 Cube

[Goran]

On the 'success' side, has anyone ever completed a mission with zero causualties?

Finally, after ten or so attempts of actively trying, I did so with TF Kincaid 1. Keys to succeeding:

1. Superior weapons system.

2. Real cowardly hit-and-run behavior.

3. Lucky with artillery. I got a few extra salvos, and a couple of lucky hits (eliminating or disabling about 15 vehicles each) when almost guessing where the enemy columns would be. ("Guessing" since I extrapolated from a recent position rather than exposing my helos to check precisely where the columns were.)

4. Withdrawing my helos when Red was at 74% losses (Kincaid demands that Red exit 20%) and using my F16 flight to guide in the final artillery salvo. Luckily, it hit, and Red only exited 19%.

5. Easy scenario.

6. Luck

[Covert Sniper]

A question for those with a military background:

Goran noted that luck played a factor in his 0% casualties in Kincaid. Do miliartary planners factor luck into their plans? If so, how?

Statistics can work to a degree, but statistics are not as effective when trying to string together a series of independent events. This is an oversimplification, but, if one were to flip a coin the odds of getting heads is 1 out of 2 or 50%. If one flips a coin a second time, the odds of getting heads are the same. These are two independent events and the outcome of the current event has nothing to do with the outcome of the previous event. If one were to flip a coin 100 times and get heads each time there may be a way to put a number on this, but when do statistics break down and this almost nonquantifiable, etherial event which we call luck take over?

Luck, either good for the enemy or bad for the freindlies, has undone its fair share of military plans over the years. But do planners, at least in exercises, ever go out on a limb and say "this plan will work but we need a healthly dose of luck"?

Maybe this question should be asked of philosphy profs .

Randy

[Carter]

Originally posted by Randall Erickson:

On the 'success' side, has anyone ever completed a mission with zero casualties? If so, what side, what game prefs and what scenario? Was there a time limit on the order phase and did you replay any turns to get out from under ill-given or forgotten orders? What about 5% or less, and 10% or less?

Well I've won TF Peterjohn with "zero" casualties. I did lose a few individual personnel to artillery, but no unit losses. I've played the scenario a bunch. Generally I would lose 2 Tanks to artillery, but If I keep my tanks moving and get lucky I finish with no unit losses.

I normally played the scenario with the default preferences. (Although I do turn off the 'see enemy OOB, and I make it so that firing units are NOT always spotted). Most of the time I throw in ALL the 'Red force' optional extras. Their artillery is the only thing that can touch me (unless I get sloppy).

I don't use a time limit or replay bad turns.

Saddam never stood a chance!

I think Peterjohn was a tremendously cool scenario. Its easy but I felt like I learned a lot about the gulf war playing it. Thanks MajorH!

I think I also had similar results on Team Sposito one time. (A few individual personnel losses only) The Army version is easy after you play a couple times.

Generally my casualties run around 30% in TACOPS. If I use "real world settings" like NO OPFOR thermals, and regular OPFOR ATGMs, then I can get down to the 15-20% range. Sometimes better depending on the scenario.

[ December 13, 2002, 11:19 AM: Message edited by: Carter ]

[Redwolf]

Randall,

I think the answer to your question is that they are trying hard to come up with plans that reduce dependency on luck, or failing that have an alternative in the event. Not speaking from own staff work, but currently reading material dealing with exactly this issue.

After dependcy of luck has been reduced as much as possible they seem to drop thinking about it to get their heads clear for the mission.

[MajorH TacOps Developer]

>But do planners, at least in exercises, ever go out on a limb

>and say "this plan will work but we need a healthly dose of luck"?

No. Military plans are based on analysis of friendly and enemy capabilities and include planned alternate responses to contingencies.

[tar]

But do planners, at least in exercises, ever go out on a limb and say "this plan will work but we need a healthly dose of luck"?

I would imagine not. Unlike trying a fancy trick play in a football game, in warfare if it doesn't work you won't be around next season to try again.

I would venture to say that all great military leaders have a high regard for the men under them and will not undertake operations that will needlessly expose their men to high risk of death or injury. The essence of operational level warfare is to set up unfair fights that you will easily win. Such unfair fights make for lousy games, but excellent warfighting.

[ December 13, 2002, 03:28 PM: Message edited by: tar ]

[BobDennis]

<<Goran noted that luck played a factor in his 0% casualties in Kincaid. Do miliartary planners factor luck into their plans? If so, how?>>

As stated above by others, No planner (Battalion or above) would bring the word "luck" up in a plan. There is a hope and so forth, but "luck" is not planned for, "bad luck" may be planned for/compensated. We take 5 helicopters instead of only 4... "bad luck" is also compensated for by putting the company commander and executive officer or 1st sergeant in different vehicles.

At the platoon, squad or team level, "luck" may be used in a spur of the moment plan. i.e. lay a base of fire and I'll (you'll?) cross the road and get behind the bad guys machine gun... This is a different kind of luck and it could mean that you are lying in the road and in a "football" analogy, you don't get to play the next down and perhaps your game playing career is over for good, meanwhile a new "leadership problem" has been presented to the survivors.

[Thermopylae]

I've done under 10% before, on one of the mobile defenses (I forget which) but it was only because my opponent was really stupid.

[Coyote]

You never depend on luck but you always plan for it the same way, maintain a reserve. If you have bad luck you can commit your reserve to shut it down. If you get good luck you use your reserve to exploit it. Good or bad, luck favors the most prepared.

[minmax]

In my limited experience luck was a matter for those at the pointy end of the stick.

There were 'lucky' aircraft in squadrons during the Gulf War. Grunts would say a fire team or a platoon had luck. No one plans on it but I knew of commanders who would view success as luck and send those units into more difficult situations.

The nature of combat in my view is such that you do get supersticious (sp?) like wearing a luck charm on your person. One realizes that it is all a matter of percentages. If the threat to you is 2% percent per mission you realize mission #10 has a 20% percent chance for something bad.

I wholeheartedly agree with the others planning is

"hope for the best and plan for the worst."

[Stoffel]

Hi randall,

I played Tacops 3,0 since 1998.

I cant recall which human player it was but I beat someone that bad in PeterJohn.

I had 0 losses (according to my pc)in that event,but a synchron bug hit us(early test for 4.0)my opponent said he knocked out 1(!) M1

Needless to say I was happy with that result