Luck or Skill? - Questions on Valley of Trouble - ** Spoilers **

[Guest Robert Hall]

****** VoT Spoilers ******

.

.

.

.

.

A couple or three questions I have not seen answered/discussed elsewhere:

1. What is the effect of the 'rough ground' tile in VoT? I presume it slows up movement and provides more cover than open ground. What is the level of this cover? Less or more than Scattered Trees, Light Woods? Does rough ground provide anything else as there is strangely just the one rough tile in VoT.

2. Having just finished my first blind game of VoT and now read some of the previous spoiler posts, there seems a lot of discussion of using the +% factor for the Germans. Does this not suggest luck, rather than skill, is a major factor in the outcome of this scenario? Perhaps this 'luck' is having one or several significant weapons taken out, or not, as the case may be.

3. Using the % factor to improve force numbers and therefore superiority of AI performance (or human performance) means you receive random increases of some units. This clearly can give some very strange combinations and does provide even greater replay value for the demo scenarios when you do not know the exact composition of the forces you are facing. So this brings up another question on scenario balance, should scenarios be designed specifically for either vs human or vs AI play to get the best out of them?

I do realise the demo scenarios are really excellent 'demonstrations' of some of the capabilities of the full game we are eagerly anticipating in a couple of weeks and give you an excellent 'feel' for CM. Those of who used to play the beta demo extensively can see and really appreciate many of the significant improvements made to the game in recent months.

In a small scenario such as VoT where there are lots of 'one-offs' of the significant weapons ie. 1 x 75mm AT bunker, 1 x 150mm Infantry Gun, 1 x Panther, the loss or otherwise of just one of these units, which could be, not will be, due to luck, strikes me as potentially having a very significant effect on the outcome of scenario. Excellent for quick, fun battles, but I wonder if perhaps luck, rather than skill, often seems to significantly determine the outcome on these smaller scenarios rather more than it should do?

Hopefully, larger scenarios or Operations where significant weapons can be at least duplicated will change this luck factor and mean skill will become a much more significant factor. Any views, especially from beta testers who have designed and played larger scenarios?

Robert

[Guest Walter R. Strapps]

I have to agree that the question of luck vs. skill on such maps has to be asked. And I have to agree that luck plays a pretty large role when the number of 'big guns' is very limited. Setting the Americans at +50%, I've won a convincing major victory as the Axis because, basically I got lucky and took out Shermans left, right and center (almost literally ). On the other hand, I've been defeated by the Americans achieving a major victory without and additional troops because they took out my bunker and IG very early on. And this was done with the default placements in each case. I guess, just like in real life, a few lucky breaks can totally change the way things happen

Cheers,

Walter R. Strapps

[Webs]

Skill is the art of presenting luck with the opportunity to act on your behalf.

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

Laurie Nyveen a.k.a. Webs, member of the WarBirds training staff

___________________

Editor, Netsurfer Digest - http://www.netsurf.com/nsd/index.html

101 Sqn opus-in-progress - http://101.warbirds.org/

[Guest Scott Clinton]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>1. What is the effect of the 'rough ground' tile in VoT?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am hoping that there is some sort of listing where at least the hierarchy of covers types is listed. I mean, which gives better cover to infantry: "Scattered Trees" or "Rough"; "Scattered Trees" or "Stone Wall", etc. What about concealment?

It is easy enough to guess at this in real live and I have my own ideas on how they rank. But as much as we all like the 3-d engine in CM it isn't real life and a clarification would be nice.

Just to re-state: I am NOT asking for 'hard' numbers, just a hierarchical ranking of cover and concealment types. Maybe a tester could give us some insight if it is not in the manual.

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

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

[This message has been edited by Scott Clinton (edited 05-26-2000).]

[Knaust]

Napoleon liked best LUCKY generals!

[Guest Captain Foobar]

I think that you bring up a good point, that with these low number of pieces on the field, the battle can turn on a dime, and that it totally realistic in this context, IMO. And I agree that the larger fields will provide more stability for creating "balanced" scenarios.

BUT, I am constantly finding new ways to "tweak" the odds in my favor *before* trading fire on the small maps. Hull-down, trp's, interlocking fields of fire, etc. Of course luck still plays a large role, but you can do a LOT with just a few well placed units, at the right moment.

[Moon]

Scott - yes, the manual has a section talking about terrain and the different effects with regard to cover and concealment. Rough provides slightly better cover than "scattered trees", but less than "woods" IIRC.

[Guest Robert Hall]

Moon, thanks, that is where I was guessing 'rough' to be. Good to know that this sort of thing will be in the manual too. Strange though, IMHO, to have just the one tile of rough on the whole map and I was curious if this was significant.

Any comments anyone who has done scenario design on whether there may be an advantage to having scenarios specifically designed for play against humans and separate versions for play against the AI?

Robert

[Guest Big Time Software]

Hi Robert,

Scenario balance is a tricky thing. As you rightly pointed out, luck is a big factor (even if you have multiples of the same thing). I think Webs made an excellent point that I would like to add to. Not only is "skill is the art of presenting luck with the opportunity to act on your behalf" but it is also the art of overcoming BAD luck in order to obtain an overall positive outcome. In other words, if do everything right and have luck go against you, your ability to overcome the bad luck is the strongest statement of skill possible. This is why I like being outnumbered and on the defensive, because I find that it is often the most challenging position to be in.

As for scenario balance, this is a tricky one. The sceanrios you have played so far were all designed by myself and were all balanced in such a way as to be a good fight (as is) for either side no matter who is playing each. Since the AI is not as smart as a human this is very difficult to do.

You will find some scenarios better vs. a human than the AI, or ones that are better played from one side against the AI. So it is obvious that someone could make a battle that would be a cake walk for one human player vs. another, but a hard slugging match vs. the AI.

The cool thing is that the editor allows you to do whatever it is you want. And the Quick Battle random game generator can also be set up with great flexibility.

Steve

[Guest Robert Hall]

Steve

Thanks for the reply and I hasten to add I am a great believer in creating your own 'luck' whatever sphere of life we may be talking about, not just in CM. And you are so right about the art of overcoming bad luck. One thing going against you, however big, should not lose the day for a skilful player if he can think creatively and generate opportunities out of the situation.

Robert