UberFunBunny Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 Not sure if this has come up, but how about a "continue game" option if both players agree to it at the end of regular time? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFJaykey Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 Great idea!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Roxanne Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 I would welcome this feature. It could aid scenario designers and their playtesters too. Kris 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hat Trick Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 I strongly support this idea. I find most scenarios too short -- in fact, I find the general idea of a time limit artificial, at least in most circumstances. Battles rarely came to an end because "time ran out" -- they ended because one side gave up or because both sides didn't see the point of pressing on (whether due to low ammo, low morale, high casualties or simply a realization that further fighting would not be productive). Nothing is more frustrating than being in the middle of a fire fight and having the game end. And given the time scales involved, I just don't buy the argument that in real life commanders had to stick to schedules. The number of battles where objectives had to be achieved by a particular minute in time -- where even five minutes delay meant failure -- is rather small, and certainly not the case in the vast majority of CM scenarios. I understand (I think) the reason that time limits are in the game: so that once it becomes clear which side has won, the game need not drag on with little action. Providing a continue game option would allow time limits to stay, but give players the option to keep fighting when warranted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Bolt Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 I highly agree to the continue battle option. Most offensive scenarios - me attacking the AI - have one of two out comes: A. I move way too cautiously and the battle ends with me far short of the flags or, B. I charge the machine guns/AT guns with 2 or 3 turns to go. My troops/tanks get slaughtered and I'm lucky to eek out a marginal victory. I prefer the cautious method, throw in a few extra turns and I could win a few more scenarios. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 I've recently been doubling my QB time lengths for just that reason. Much to my surprise, instead of the games dragging on the AI has been opting for auto cease fire/surrenders at exactly the points in the battles where I thought it most appropriate to quit. BFC's made themselves one clever game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Alkema Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 If the scenario designer feels that time is not of the essence then he can set the number of turns to an extra high number and let the players call for a cease fire when they are done. If the designer feels that speed is important, set a lower number of turns. If it is important for the attacker to win in a hurry, he shouldn't be allowed to take his own sweet time and still be considered the winner. Besides, the only reason the defender would agree to extend the time would be when he was about to counter-attack you to oblivion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavlov Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 I'd certainly vote for it. In fact I've felt this way for a long time. I find the time limits to be very artificial. However, I think I would more often want to use it vs. the AI than PBEM because PBEM games can simply take so long as it is. Another thing to think about though; Combat Mission commanders don't have the same concern for the life and well being of their men that (most) real-world commanders do--it is much easier to send your troops to certain death when they are only virtual data (and not even fully modelled visually!!). So how do you replicate or enforce that sort of compunction in a game setting? I think the time limit does help limit excessive bloodbaths, if somewhat artificially. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFJaykey Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 Originally posted by pavlov: ....Combat Mission commanders don't have the same concern for the life and well being of their men that (most) real-world commanders do--it is much easier to send your troops to certain death when they are only virtual data (and not even fully modelled visually!!). So how do you replicate or enforce that sort of compunction in a game setting?...This kind of ties in with the "Conscience" thread. The game already rewards responsible handling of your troops to some degree: heavy casualties lower global morale, which reduces the effectiveness of your troops and can lead to auto-ceasefire or surrender. Increasing the effects of low morale on troops' tendency to pin, rout and surrender would probably be more realistic, but it is a game, after all, and has to be playable. As it is, green and conscript troops are already tough for the player to handle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Roxanne Posted June 24, 2003 Share Posted June 24, 2003 I think lower global morale DOES cause troops to pass through the "alerted-routed" stages faster. I believe it also increases command delays even for an "OK" unit if it is too low. I think global morale does just fine at ending battles naturally. Unfortunately, few scenarios are designed with enough turns for that to happen. What does lower global morale cause? 1) local morale declines faster (alerted-routed, troops are more brittle) 2) command delays increase 3) units more prone to surrender 4) auto-ceasefire request at 25% 5) eventual global surrender at 15% if enemy has four times that in global morale Combine these with the 'low ammo' induced involuntary call for a ceasefire, and you have a naturally ending battle. EDIT: Command delays are NOT increased by low global morale directly. According to the manual, recovery from fatigue is slower with lower global morale. Kris [ June 24, 2003, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: CrankyKris ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAT Posted June 24, 2003 Share Posted June 24, 2003 What I would like to see is that there be no game ending. Still use the turn number, but this number would represent the time that the attacker should have finished his business. If the game continues, then the points for the flag for the attacker would start to diminish. Take too long, and it won't be worth capturing the flag. If a flag is owned at least once, but lost, then if it is retaken, then the points reduction does not go into effect as long as the flag was owned once prior to this number. I say attacker as it might have to be a bit different for MEs, but maybe not. Leave all the auto-surrender/cease-fire etc. stuff. This is just a thought, but it seems doable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Bolt Posted June 26, 2003 Share Posted June 26, 2003 I haven't tried this, but, is it possible to save a game in progress, then edit the saved game. If you can then add 5 or 10 clicks the turn counter. I'm at work now, I'll give it a shot this evening. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbs Posted June 26, 2003 Share Posted June 26, 2003 Can't you already "continue" a game by the method of importing all of your units from one game into another, and using the same board? I'm fuzzy on the details, but perhaps one of you knows of what I speak? I have played a game where we did it in a QB. We did it twice, actually, and wound up with a 90-turn game (30+30+30 turns). When we imported the units, they started the new round with the same ammo they had left at the end of the old round. Maybe I'm leaving out something here? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFJaykey Posted June 26, 2003 Share Posted June 26, 2003 Originally posted by wbs: Can't you already "continue" a game by the method of importing all of your units from one game into another, and using the same board?....Maybe I'm leaving out something here? No, you're right, I've done it too in PBEMs. 1 downside is that you keep the original setup zones, so if you purchase fresh forces ("reinforcements") you have to agree with your opponent not to set them up in "gamey" locations, eg a fresh RPG team set up in cover right behind your Tiger... It's a viable workaround but a one-click, mutually agreed "Extend game?" option sure would be nice. Perhaps it could be triggered only when the score is close at game's end? [ June 26, 2003, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: SFJaykey ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.