nonsuch Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 There appears to be a considerable amount of space in this forum devoted to the topic of play balance. I guess that ideally we would all like a simulation that reflects history, gives us a multitude of options and has scenarios that give both sides a reasonably even chance of victory. Well, I am new to this game but I have played a good few others (both electronic and paper based) and if such a beast exists out there I haven't found it. This one is as good as any I have seen. It is historical (for a strategic game), it plays well and the AI puts up a decent fight. For the record I have played it twice as Allies, twice as Axis on the zero and +1 settings and won reasonably comfortably - largely from reading this forum. It is challenging and fun but I guess the question is where do I go from here? Logically, it would be to play online against some of the venerable contributors to this forum from whom I have learned so much (and no doubt get to learn what a "comfortable victory" is like from the receiving end) Whilst I have no particular problem with this, it strikes me that as time goes on and strategies develop, it becomes almost like chess (i.e. if you don't know the key opening moves and how to counter them the rest is history) This is less of a problem if forces are evenly matched, as they are in chess, but makes a big a big difference when it comes to wargames. The proposed solutions seem to be centred around various tweaks to the game engine. Whilst I would totally endorse the alterations made in the last upgrade, in a sense it does not really fix the problem from a gamers point of view. Let me suggest a solution.... If we ignore historicy for a second, the key difficulty is initial deployment at the start of a scenario. Even with fog of war you know roughly where opposition units are - but what if you didn't? Suppose the scenarios had a random element that allowed the same basic mp per side but with randomised unit mix and locations. Therefore when launching a scenario you would not be sure what you were facing or where it was deployed - anyone who played Sid Meier's Gettysburg online will be familiar with how this works. Yes, you do get unbalanced scenarios at times but that is part of the fun. Experienced players lose to novices. The uncertainty is part of the excitement! Sure, this approach works better with tactical and operational games but even at strategic level it would add a new dimensio to the game. Because of the length of the scenarios, the better player would usually prevail but at least it would not be determined by who knew the "optimum" opening move. Without yet looking at it, I can guess that the scenario editor cannot provide this but on the evidence of what I have seen, our esteemed designer most definately can. Any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenfedoroff Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Originally posted by nonsuch: ...Suppose the scenarios had a random element that allowed the same basic mp per side but with randomised unit mix and locations..... I believe this idea is in one of the "SC Wish List" threads somewhere in this Forum. Many others would like to see more variables in SC. Sincerely, Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 nonsuch, you should read my thread about the Axis to strong vs the Russin's, Turn's out even though it seem's impossible, thing's can turn around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonsuch Posted February 7, 2003 Author Share Posted February 7, 2003 [ February 06, 2003, 09:43 PM: Message edited by: nonsuch ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonsuch Posted February 7, 2003 Author Share Posted February 7, 2003 Originally posted by Night: nonsuch, you should read my thread about the Axis to strong vs the Russin's, Turn's out even though it seem's impossible, thing's can turn around. Funnily enough this was the one thread I read before I posted. If you are talking about playing another then I cannot dispute this - it looks tough for the red army. Even against the AI it isn't easy but for me the key is supply. The Axis run out of it eventually. Building massed corps three or four deep will slow them down (even if the game statrs to resemble the Somme) and the same units can infiltrate later in the game to cut supply in the same way that the partisans do. I can't say how this will work against a good human opponent but the Axis can only build so many crack air and armoured units - eventually the number of small soviet units can be made to count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 I don't know if you read the whole thing or atleast the part about how it got turned around. I was probally just lucky since I lost one similar to this once before but still, thing's can happen if played right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonsuch Posted February 7, 2003 Author Share Posted February 7, 2003 Originally posted by Night: I don't know if you read the whole thing or atleast the part about how it got turned around. I was probally just lucky since I lost one similar to this once before but still, thing's can happen if played right. Yes. I just caught up with the rest of it. Great stuff! I don't think it's luck - it is a tough ride with the soviets and I would agree with all the postings to your thread - there is probably no ideal way to fight this but the basic principles work well. I was interested in the clustering approach that was mentioned way back in the forum. I tried it in the last game I played and it worked OK even if though it felt wrong. I guess that in the end we have to salute Mr Hubert for throwing us such a problem. Personally, I wouldn't have it any other way. Hang in there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Suppose the scenarios had a random element that allowed the same basic mp per side but with randomised unit mix and locations. The scenarios could be modified to remove some units and replace them with at-start MPPs. This at least provides players a choice to either build the historic OOB or try something different. For solo games against the AI, however, you have to settle for certain AI biases like building air units or HQs, and this may not work well in many cases. I would really like to see alternate setups provided for neutrals which could be randomly selected upon DOW. Something to provide a surprise occassionally for replayability. That will have to wait for SC2. For the opening move problem, most of that deals with initial 1939 scenario options. Either that scenario gets modified to restrict ahistorical strategies (which then tends to lock you into a historical rut) or you learn to deal with the various gambits. Or, start with the 1940 scenario which skips over the preliminaries and the gambits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaWolf_48 Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Okay, I like it Nonsuch, random scenario builder and unit builder. This would give endless challenges and types of games. Head to head play would be alittle iffy though. Welcome to the meat grinder. Some of the ideas here are great, some stink. But like eating chicken, eat the meat and spit out the bones. If you never stick your neck out on this forum, we might miss out on some brilliant ideas, the rest go out with the garbage. I've had a few diamonds, but more turds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John DiFool Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Originally posted by SeaWolf_48: Okay, I like it Nonsuch, random scenario builder and unit builder. This would give endless challenges and types of games. Head to head play would be alittle iffy though. A config file would be one such can of worms. Great for changing things like sub dive percentages and such, but also great for cheaters... John DiFool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDG Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 I'd just like to put my stamp of approval on random startups. Maybe every piece could start in one of three places, the program generates a random number, and the piece gets placed their. (Of course the capital would always have a unit). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonsuch Posted February 9, 2003 Author Share Posted February 9, 2003 Originally posted by SeaWolf_48: [QB] Okay, I like it Nonsuch, random scenario builder and unit builder. This would give endless challenges and types of games. Head to head play would be alittle iffy though. Thanks for the comments. I actually envisioned this kind of approach primarily for head to head play! John diFool in a later post raises the issue of less enlightened players using this as a cheats charter - I never thought for one minute that the players themselves would have control over how the random deployment works. My only experience of this was with Gettysburg and the players selected "random setup" when they played in IP mode. Depending on the size of battle selected, the computer would then deploy the troops. I see no reason why this wouldn't work in SC. Even something as simple as making the location and makeup of French units in 39 random poses a problem for an axis player working from and supposedly ideal plan. With Russia this works better still. If Hubert builds something into the code that allows random deployment (and unit mixes) with the same basic mp allowance per side this would eliminate some of the axis advantage early on. They simply could not afford to be so bold. At the same time anyone taking the trouble to work out optimum Soviet attacks on turn one of the 44 scenario would have the same problem. My thinking was that this feature could be turned on by a radio button in the same way that the major powers can have randomised probabilities for joining the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts