Judging Good play

[Andrew H.]

I used to play ASL, and, even leaving aside the fact that CM is 100x simpler to play, CM is a better game in almost every respect. CM's handling of infantry is more realistic than ASL's, its handling of armor is much more realistic, its handling of morale and firepower and movement and armor penetration and, well, everything is more realistic.

But, more than that, CM has fog of war. In ASL, your opponent can see all of your counters and he knows what you are moving where - even when they are completely out of LOS. And the kludgy "concealment" counters - while making the game more realistic - still don't make it realistic, or anywhere as near realistic as CM is. I mean - "ooh, here's a stack moving toward my position covered with a giant question mark...I can't examine it, but I know it's coming..."

[Mad Russian]

Originally posted by Andrew H.:

But, more than that, CM has fog of war. In ASL, your opponent can see all of your counters and he knows what you are moving where - even when they are completely out of LOS. And the kludgy "concealment" counters - while making the game more realistic - still don't make it realistic, or anywhere as near realistic as CM is. I mean - "ooh, here's a stack moving toward my position covered with a giant question mark...I can't examine it, but I know it's coming..."

Sometimes even more important than knowing where things are is knowing where things aren't. Fog of war takes care of all of that.

I still have hundreds of dollars worth of ASL. Don't know that I'll ever get rid of it. Every so often I do a complete research an old ASL scenario and convert it over...

[slysniper]

Your correct, Panther Commander. For me CM puts ASL to shame, I really am not saying otherwise.

What I am trying to say is that ASL has many aspects that it still is the only game in town that approached them. Beach landings, calvary, motorcycles. Maps with buildings with more than 2 level. The Japs, the Chinese and the list can go on.

Also if you as the players did not like the way the rules approached a topic, it was agreed apon and changed. Any rule could be adjusted.

There is a aspect that CM will never give. I would love to be able to set my own point values for purchasing units in CM.

If ASL was my favorite game I would not be selling it, You are most correct.

[NameUsedBefore]

Ugh.

All that I said was to take place if both people had played the scenario before. If you're going to qoute and pick at one of my posts at least read the disclaimer however subtle it was.

[chiavarm]

Originally posted by slysniper:

For me, the the perfect situation is a good Scenario design with a interesting mix of weapons, a battle that allows the players some options on how to play it so that it is not a gareentee as to what the opponant will be doing. And the last point, a game that neither man has seen or done so that both are making decisions for the first time, just like real life.

DITTO

[MOS was 71331]

One option I haven't seen discussed is to play both sides of a scenario with the same opponent. While you will have complete knowledge of the forces you're facing, you won't know how your opponent is using his axis and allied units. If you beat his allied force 62 to 38 while he defeats your allied force 66 to 34, his play (or luck) has been a bit better than yours.

In duplicate bridge, the same hands are played at each table, so all the East/West and North/South partners have faced the same situations. The E/W scores on each hand are ranked, and a partnership gets one point for each E/W score they beat and one/half point for each E/W score they tie. [Obviously, the N/S partnerships are scored similarly, and the best N/S result on a hand is the worst E/W result.] This approach eliminates the luck of the deal from the scoring. (A lot of luck still remains: you want to get simple hands against the best opponents and difficult hands against the worst opponents.)

[Peterk]

In ASL, your opponent can see all of your counters and he knows what you are moving where - even when they are completely out of LOS. I can't examine it, but I know it's coming...

But you've got all this in CM too. It's called a sound contact. And firing on a ? counter is pretty damn close to area fire on something in CM that you don't have an ID for yet. And seeing ? on the map at game start can be seen as the results of preliminary recon before the battle starts. It's not _that_ gamey and is actually kind of elegant.

The one type of scenario where ASL shines compared to CM, IMHO, is when one player has to handle a fixed defense where not too much will be moving around. In CM, there might not be much to do if the set-up is sound; is ASL the defender still has to call the shots and is quite active.

And as for playing against the AI - hate to say it but defending against the "AI" using solitaire ASL guidelines can result in a much better game than defending in CM against the AI.

Different games each with their own strengths. It's kind of futile to compare them.

[Mad Russian]

Originally posted by Peterk:

But you've got all this in CM too. It's called a sound contact. And firing on a ? counter is pretty damn close to area fire on something in CM that you don't have an ID for yet. And seeing ? on the map at game start can be seen as the results of preliminary recon before the battle starts. It's not _that_ gamey and is actually kind of elegant.

The one type of scenario where ASL shines compared to CM, IMHO, is when one player has to handle a fixed defense where not too much will be moving around. In CM, there might not be much to do if the set-up is sound; is ASL the defender still has to call the shots and is quite active.

And as for playing against the AI - hate to say it but defending against the "AI" using solitaire ASL guidelines can result in a much better game than defending in CM against the AI.

Different games each with their own strengths. It's kind of futile to compare them.

How can a sound contact be compared to an ASL "?" with any real sense of accuracy? In ASL I can see the entire map. I know exactly where your units aren't. In CM the sound contact can be coming from the wrong direction and you have no idea where the real unit is.

With a "?" stack I know exactly where they are. There may not be anything in there but I know where they are to fire at them with pinpoint accuracy.

Yes, very different games. Neither of them is perfect. The dividing line is whether or not you like CM better than ASL. For me, CM does a better job of doing what I am looking for in a tactical WWII combat game.

[slysniper]

One option I haven't seen discussed is to play both sides of a scenario with the same opponent. While you will have complete knowledge of the forces you're facing, you won't know how your opponent is using his axis and allied units. If you beat his allied force 62 to 38 while he defeats your allied force 66 to 34, his play (or luck) has been a bit better than yours.

This method is a good way to test true skill against two opponants. If and only if both games are played together at the same time, if one follows the other it alters the second game because of knowledge gained from the first playing.

The problem with this method is then you do have that perfect knowledge of the units in play for both sides. Thus in the name of fairness you have eliminated one of the most important things CM has managed to add. Uncertainty

This factor takes away a aspect that I beleive you should not remove from competative play.

[Peterk]

<quote>In ASL I can see the entire map. I know exactly where your units aren't.</quote>

Yes and no. HIP and lots of dummies create doubt.

Honestly sometimes (most times even) in CM there's too much fog. I'm playing a RB scenario in ASL right now. There's a couple of houses and rubble locations close to the front line that I know are unoccupied. In CM I wouldn't know (I've played a Red Barricades campaign in CM too).

But the thing is...if my guys have been sitting on the front line for most of the day looking accross the street...they SHOULD know more or less where the enemy is (and have some contacts on the map on turn 1) before they take their first step into the open.

Pinpoint accuracy? I wouldn't call a 50% penalty on your firepower pinpoint accuracy.

[NameUsedBefore]

Originally posted by Peterk:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />In ASL, your opponent can see all of your counters and he knows what you are moving where - even when they are completely out of LOS. I can't examine it, but I know it's coming...

But you've got all this in CM too. It's called a sound contact. And firing on a ? counter is pretty damn close to area fire on something in CM that you don't have an ID for yet. And seeing ? on the map at game start can be seen as the results of preliminary recon before the battle starts. It's not _that_ gamey and is actually kind of elegant.

The one type of scenario where ASL shines compared to CM, IMHO, is when one player has to handle a fixed defense where not too much will be moving around. In CM, there might not be much to do if the set-up is sound; is ASL the defender still has to call the shots and is quite active.

And as for playing against the AI - hate to say it but defending against the "AI" using solitaire ASL guidelines can result in a much better game than defending in CM against the AI.

Different games each with their own strengths. It's kind of futile to compare them. </font>