Mark IV Posted July 30, 2001 Share Posted July 30, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by blindseye: ...frequently while waiting for the opponent's move, I will select the same force, let the AI select its own force and play the "same" game against the AI...I just like to practice with the force that I have selected. Is that gamey or bad manners?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Nope. It's exactly analogous to a unit training back in England, or Fort Knox, or wherever, for the upcoming real thing in Normandy... or wherever. You simulate the OPFOR as best you can, try to duplicate the actual conditions, and enemy tactics as you understand them, and drill and learn from practical experience everything you CAN learn without getting shot at. Training in Germany in the late 70s (Hohenfels and Graf), they used to line up a tank battalion and roll right down a valley to simulate Soviet tactics, right at our tentative leapfrogging tank companies-in-training. There were some pretty funny radio conversations between the training generals and the commanding LTCs of the simulated Orange forces, trying to get a US battalion to storm through the open like that, in violation of everything they had been taught. It gave the defending troops a taste of what the real thing might be like, and made sure that they wouldn't be trying everything for the first time. Think of what CMFG (Combat Mission: Fulda Gap) could have saved the taxpayer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radar Posted July 30, 2001 Share Posted July 30, 2001 Ahh, but the terrain was at a training center. A scenario game would be 'the real thing', IMHO. Its one thing to pull up TOE and work 'em to get experience on handling your force, but it would be like reading the punch line of a joke before it was told to go through a scenario with no question of what was going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louie the Toad Posted July 30, 2001 Share Posted July 30, 2001 I agree with MarkIV. I see nothing wrong, while you are waiting between PBEM turns, to reconstruct a tactical problem similar to one you are facing in the game by using the AI in order to practice. This would be analgous to training back in the 'States'. Well trained Toad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted July 30, 2001 Share Posted July 30, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Radar: Ahh, but the terrain was at a training center. A scenario game would be 'the real thing', IMHO. Its one thing to pull up TOE and work 'em to get experience on handling your force, but it would be like reading the punch line of a joke before it was told to go through a scenario with no question of what was going to happen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Dunno if you've been reading the whole thread, but: Playing the same scenario that you're about to play against a PBEM opponent (against the AI) IS gamey & very poor etiquette, Playing a similar scenario (QB or setup with similar parameters) against the AI is NOT, because it does not reveal any particulars about the force mix. It only exercises a given force mix in similar conditions to those anticipated in the upcoming scenario. The hypothesis is that this is similar to the training you would receive before facing enemy fire, plus nebulously simulating the scuttlebut and street wisdom you would acquire from being at the front. How long does it take before a Reg 81mm smoke mission in damp weather yields an effective screen, and how long will it last? I think a lieutenant or captain in western Europe might know this; with an assault to time, it is vital information with a very small window of error. Simulating it in an exercise with the AI goes a small way toward intuiting what that RL lieutenant spent months in training and in theater learning, formally and informally. An infantry officer would know after half a day how long it takes a squad to cross bocage, even if he had never seen it before. If I am suddenly required to do that in a PBEM, running a sim against the AI in a QB is legit, and only gives me the same insight that the guy on the ground would have had. I suppose if you are simulating true Day One Green-ness, that too would be a little gamey... But running the actual scenario in question is bad/bad/bad, IMO, because now we're talking time machine- lots of scenarios, and RL tactics, derive their magic from the appearance of more force than there really is. Playing the actual scenario in advance of a PBEM opponent completely destroys this psychological reality, and turns it from chess to checkers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holien Posted July 30, 2001 Share Posted July 30, 2001 Hi Viceroy, it has been said multiple times and all I say here is why deprive yourself of the sweet terror of the unknown. :eek: If you are man enough to deal with the cold sweat during the game then you will be getting the absolute best the game has to offer. I am playing an operation blind against a chap at the moment (my first double blind Op.) It is absolute hell but god does it make it fun opening that file and watching the events unfold. If my opponent knew what I had it would be an unfair advantage and if he is only interested in winning then sure he could play the op before playing me. But life is not just about winning it is about the journey and how you get there. I am playing less and less QB's as the pleasure of playing a human in a game that someone else has designed outweighs a QB for pleasure by a factor of 10. IMO. So do as you wish but if you want to feel fear play blind. H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windopaene Posted July 30, 2001 Share Posted July 30, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Elvis: lcm1947, I don't know if you were around during the beta demo release but a bunch of us played the same 3 scenarios over and over and over and over (I think you get the idea). Because of that I found nothing is more thrilling than the tension of not knowing what is coming at you.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well I hate to spoil the fun, but what about chess? Is it boring and non-versitile because you always know the layout of the opponents units? I think part of what can make a game, (or scenario), great is that the opponents forces and/or positions ARE known. Thus the problems protrayed by the scenario are known and different "solutions" can be tried. As far as my experience, I've only played two PBEM scenarios, Vossenack a 2nd job and Hamminkelm - We Start Here. Both were lader games on the Rugged Defense ladder. In the Hamminkelm, I asked my opponent about this pre-game, and he didn't reply. I checked out his starting units but not his reinforcements. He eventually bailed when he was about to lose. The second, I don't recall whether or not we discussed it pregame, but early in the game, he mentioned that "I seem to recall you're going to be getting a Panther soon" or something to that effect, showing that he had checked out my forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted July 30, 2001 Share Posted July 30, 2001 just my opinion, i would like to play it for the first time against my opponet, and then if i liked the scenario, play it against the AI and go back to the SAME player and give him another shot. i like to be guessing as to what the enemy has and where it is. on a lot of scenarios, there position is locked and so that would give a lot of "intelligence" from the get-go. but hey, if both players had played it, and agreed to it, no one has the advantage! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvalle Posted July 31, 2001 Share Posted July 31, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Windopaene: Well I hate to spoil the fun, but what about chess? Is it boring and non-versitile because you always know the layout of the opponents units? I think part of what can make a game, (or scenario), great is that the opponents forces and/or positions ARE known. Thus the problems protrayed by the scenario are known and different "solutions" can be tried..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> There is no fog of war in chess! So what you are saying is only true if both you and the other player have BOTH played the battle. At that point, it becomes a different type of battle. As you are pointing out... more of a chess match. Its a "This time I'll move these guys over here." type battle. I think these are fun as well but what most people here are saying is that, for them, playing the battle for the first time is MORE fun since you don't know what is going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louie the Toad Posted July 31, 2001 Share Posted July 31, 2001 Windopaene ! Pllleeeez ... I suppose when you played STRATEGO you turned the unit faces toward your opponent ... Right?! Astounded Toad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts