Random Battle Generator?

[yobobo@TH]

Colonel_Deadmarsh mailed me about what sounds like a great idea.

The plan is to have a random battle generator.

Player A and B decide to use it for there next game. Player A goes to the random battle page and inputs his/her username, password and opponent, hits submit. The generator then randomly prints out all the details(Like the daily results page) of the battle. Side, force size, date, weather, map details etc.. We can have a few different generators with certain types of restrictions. Like with or without snow and night. Battle size crap like that.

Large project for me to do, but can do it if there is interest?

http://tournamenthouse.com/CM/

[Soddball]

It's a nice idea. I would use it.

How would you set algorithms for weather? Based on time of year? (ie no snow in summer)

[yobobo@TH]

Anything can be done at this point. I think adding a dropdown list of options would be a good idea? No snow, Size of battle, things like that.

[Frenchy]

I think its worth a shot. I'd use it. You may want to consider an option to allow players to choose the "short 75 rule" , etc.

Gyrene251 at TH.

[Wreck]

Wow, I had practically the same idea the other day. Here was what I wrote up about it.

It is a given that the CM computer-picking algorithm can (and often does) produce bad results. Another problem with CM is the lack of a rarity concept. Combined with the practical difficulty of getting all unit costs exactly right, this leads to only a handful of unit types being favored for any human-bought forces.

It has occured to me that these problems can be addressed, right now. We don't have to wait for CM2. Here's how.

First, we create a database of units. Each unit would have a price, a rarity, and a type (inf/gun/vehicle/armor/artillery). To start we might use the prices from the game, but we are not required to do that. We can raise or lower prices in this DB as we see fit. (As it turns out it will be a good idea to only lower prices, I suspect.) Similarly we might initially use ASL-type rarity factors, but we can also adjust those. Changing the type might be a problem so we should just copy that from the game.

We then make a front end to this DB, which will be used by actual players. This front end basically does one thing: given a seed integer, a force-type for both sides and an input level of points, it generates two lists of units: a list of German units and a list of Allied units. These lists are generated deterministically with the input information. This algorithm would then be used to replace the computer-picks algorithm built into CM more or less.

There would be two ways of using the front end. One would be to check the units after a game is played. You put in the seed for the game and the points, and then you can see what units the opponent was supposed to have bought.

The second way to use the front end, is to generate the units for a game. The key thing here is that you do not want either player to know the seed (else he could find out what the opponent's units were). To handle this, both players would need to connect to the server and authenticate somehow. Both would be able to declare the intent to start a game, filling in fields for (a) which side (axis/allies) ( point level © proposed opponent. Once the server got matching information from two players, it would generate a (secret) seed and generate the lists of units, showing each player only the picks for his side. The players would then play their game, using Human picks for the quick battle but only selecting the units on their list. Only when one of the players declares a loss (or draw) to the server, would it hand out the seed for the game to both players.

After each game, it would be possible automatically tweak unit prices based on which side won and which lost. Combined with a database like the TH database for ranking players, and a lot of games, it would be possible in theory to find out what units "really" are worth (on average) automatically. Of course this would only be true of the exact parameters used in the QB generation.

[Wreck]

As for a proposed algorithm to replace that currently in use, try this one:

When buying units, if the unit Type is infantry and there is a larger unit (platoon &lt company &lt battalion) which is still affordable, buy the larger unit instead. We could also add in tank platoons for this, for larger battles.

[ 05-04-2001: Message edited by: Wreck ]

[Lempereur]

Good idea. Perhaps you could pick based on campaign locations as well. So if you pick Arnhem you might wind up with British Paras.

[aka_tom_w]

this sounds like a GREAT idea but is sounds like alot of work and I'm not really sure how it is all that much different than using a computer pick in CMBO.

BUT it does sound like a very welcome idea.

-tom w

[yobobo@TH]

You will be able to buy your own units with this. But it will set the guidelines for the battle. A few optional dropdown fields for players that do not like playing in snow, or at night. Point size(small, med. large). Also rule set if any.

It would print out randomly side you will play, year, weather, map type, forces, anything we want. Can also join it to the logger we have now.

[Michael Dorosh]

The addition of a rarity factor is a FANTASTIC idea and heartily recommended. I look forward to seeing this project come to fruition.

[FinnN]

I know this would be a much bigger task, but I expect at least some people here remember Close Combat 2. I think that prior to CMBO this was probably the best WW2 game of its type (I enjoyed, but wasn't as impressed with its sequels). There were a series of battles going on simulateously and you had to carefully judge who was going to get which supplies and when, as well as where the 'rare' units were best put. If the CMBO save game file format was decodable then you could hang an engine on the top similar to the one talked about above, but which maintained all the damage and casualties etc.

Have fun

Finn

[yobobo@TH]

Bump!

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by yobobo@TH:

You will be able to buy your own units with this. But it will set the guidelines for the battle. A few optional dropdown fields for players that do not like playing in snow, or at night. Point size(small, med. large). Also rule set if any.

It would print out randomly side you will play, year, weather, map type, forces, anything we want. Can also join it to the logger we have now.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK!

Cool

Are you working on it?

It sounds PERFECT for the CAL?

is that correct?

good luck

it sounds like hard codeing work

but it WILL be cool if you do it right

thanks!

-tom w

[chuckle]

This sounds like a great idea.

It will be MUCH better than computer picks, which is great in theory - but just unsatisfying i find. Parameters are the thing - i would so like to be able to do random picks within set parameters, pretty please that you get this running!

ben.

[Patton_71]

YESSSS.. the main thing that has put me off about the online games in CM is the abusive tactics with force selection (the million Stuart tactic) which never even came close to taking place historically duriong the games timeframe.

A good generator with the rarity factor included sounds great. why not give each vehicle a rarity facor value as well?...

an example of say 10 points per side, with common counting 1pt, uncommon 3pts, rare 5 pts and very rare like 10 points...

for a reference point i recommend the chapter H stuff from ASL

anyway..will look forward to sdeing this start

Patton_71

" Dont let it end this way. Tell them I sadi something!" Poncho Villa on his deathbed

[Abbott]

A very good idea Col_Deadmarsh. I would definitely give it a try if Rob built one.

[Stalins Organ]

Me 3!

[yobobo@TH]

Wow!

Ok, what are we talking about here lol.

Something that will pick the game params, or all the units for us?

The idea originally was to have params like weather, map type, points, side to be played, terrain, date, rules if any(shot 75 etc.), meeting, attack..., and so on to be picked and logged for the player A and B randomly. Then they would have to play it out.

Are we now talking about actually making a TH puter pick thingy with rarity factors in place?

Oh mama!

[WineCape]

Brilliant idea Gentleman!

A generator for the game paramaters will be good and *WELL* used on this forum with the different rules (viz. panther-76, recon rule etc.)

With regard to a battle generator for force selection, give this a pass. (For the time at least)

Although nice, I think time/program energy will be better spend with the former, unless this can be done at the same time (it seems these programmers are QUITE capable here anyway )

All IMHO of course!

Sincerely

Charl Theron

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by yobobo@TH:

Wow!

Ok, what are we talking about here lol.

Something that will pick the game params, or all the units for us?

The idea originally was to have params like weather, map type, points, side to be played, terrain, date, rules if any(shot 75 etc.), meeting, attack..., and so on to be picked and logged for the player A and B randomly. Then they would have to play it out.

Are we now talking about actually making a TH puter pick thingy with rarity factors in place?

Oh mama!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh?

Perhaps like some other folks here I thought this random battle generator was desireable because if two players agreed to "short 75" then they could play random forces and your th-random pick genrator would pick the units, BUT that has a problem because it relies on BOTH players to honestly select in CMBO the forces they were asigned by the CAL random unit picker.

I thouhgt what we were cheering about was the possiblilty to have a random selection of units that would be fair for both sides because it could be dedicated by Fionn's Rule set for the CAL?

BUT that does sound like a GREAT deal of codeing work.

oh well

-tom

[Kingfish]

Just curious,

How different is this to say a third party setting up a scenario for players A & B?

[Robert Olesen]

The ability to set up random game parameters is a great idea and a big enough task in itself. Go with that first, you can always add unit selection later.

Make it CAL complient, or have an option for that.

[Monty]

I use random Battles allready

I use DICES to make the choices

Monty aka Moose

[Wreck]

Tom_w:

If you read what I proposed carefully, you can see that the issue of cheating in the force selection is minimal. There is a way to find out exactly what forces the opponent was supposed to choose, although neither player will be able to do so until after the battle is reported. My solution still leaves the problem of a player buying units which he then uses and exits... but that is going to be pretty hard to gain serious advantage of, assuming there is a point limit on the buying and it is mostly filled with things that a player cannot credibly exit.

Regarding CAL or other rulesets, it would be almost trivial to extend what I proposed above to make them pick CAL-compliance forces. However, that does not seem like the most fun way to use the thing. To me the whole point of any random picking scheme is to bring into play a wide variety of units.

The problem with any human picking scheme is simple: that there will inevitably be bargains. They may be universal bargains, that is to say, price problems. An example of this is the use of VGs at TH. The price for what you get is unbeatable, so you should always take VGs if you can -- thus narrowing your effective choices if you are playing to win. Or take short-75. The M8 (for 58 points) can beat all the permitted German tanks, frontally, and costs 1/2 or 2/3 what they do. I predict the winning CAL players will be using fleets of these guys; I see little benefit in a Sherman over two M8s.

(A side note on M8s: somehow I have started to think of them as cockroaches, scuttling about blowing away my poor infantry... if you expose them to bright light, say, a hetzer, they scuttle back... and even if you do squash one, there are two more where it came from and killing them all seems endless.)

But let's assume that somehow, some way, we managed to come up with the perfect cost for every unit, in every situation. This still would not lead to a wide variety of units in battles, I suspect, since part of the utility of a unit is the player's ability to use it well. So you would find people that concentrate on one set of units, and rarely play anything else. They might see a lot of variety in half the units they see -- the other guys' -- but not their own.

Back to CAL, though. The entire reason for CAL (as I understand it anyway) was to make a more balanced playfield for CM games. If the computer picks algorithm is good, it should do this itself (at least over the long run) without needing any limits on possible units at all. You will, from time to time, play King Tigers. But mostly it will be Stg, PzIV and Shermans, which is how it should be.

[chuckle]

hehe, i did think you meant it would print a list of actual units for the game, then we would buy these 'manually'.

oh well, no harm in hoping...

ben.