Alternate end turn - why?

[Geier]

The demo is a fantastic piece of work and I love it. Please remember that.

What is the reasoning behind implementing the alternate end turn?

Since I've only played the demo once (late last night, Velniya Stare) and don't recall reading much more about it other than it was created to stop "gamey flag rushes at the end turn". It seems (I was barely awake the last eight turns) to me that what it does is always give the attacker an extra chance?

That is, when it occurs.

I know that this is a feature and that I very probably easily can turn it off somewhere but the reason I'm posting is to find out what I'm missing here. Since BTS/BFC hasn't made one single bad game design decision previously I'm more interested in getting enlightened than bitching.

As an example (you saw this coming didn't you), on turn 25 (the not so last turn as Germans in Velniya Stare) I had two mg's (god how I love them) left, both with an ammo count of 2. My other squads were in the 2-5 range and my reserve were around 20-30. I would say that that is pretty good ammo economy. Normally.

The commies had four T-34's left but they weren't very useful for him (dead guys in tank) and his small rabble of rallied troops (Co and Pl HQs and mg's) were contesting one minor victory location, I possessed the major and one minor, uncontested, my men there weren't even being fired on.

But since the game decided to run for seven (could have been anywhere between 5-7 really, I was almost unconscious and just hit Go in frustration) more turns, I ended up with all units except some flank protection on Low ammo and the AI was now close assaulting with close tank support and contesting the major VL. In the end I got one point better than a draw.

This is a realistic result in a way I suppose. I was not in a position on turn 25 to continue defending succesfully. 2-3 turns, yes. Not for 5-7 turns. But honestly, if it was to be totally real, the battle would have continued for a further 8-10 turns until all my units were wiped out or surrendered. But if the battle had been designed for 40 turns I would have planned and executed my defense differently yeah?

And since the attacker always has more assets than the defender (duh), if he can count on (can he?) a few more turns if he is close enough ... Well, I don't see the good thing with that.

And I really want to see the benefit of the feature, not remove it. Hence my post.

Did I say I love the machine guns? Well I do.

Johan

[Kuma of Finland]

I think it adds more realism to the battle. You can't know when the battle is really over so you have to prepare for a longer battle. It might end earlier, but just might.

It can prevent the "flag rush tactics" but it also prevents "defend to the last man" tactics where ammo and men are cheap (ie. wasted happily without worry of tomorrow).

With "Alternate end turn" option you have to plan your operation more carefully. I think this brings the operation type of fighting into scenarios, too.

Happy about it is me

/kuma

[Panzer76]

I like it. You get rid of flag rushes, which is really annoying in human vs human games. Other than that, it keeps you on the toes, both as attacker and defender, cos you really dont know when its all over. But, as I said, the greatest benefit would be when you play humans.

[DrAlimantado]

The only real problem that I see with this feature as I see it, is that it only adds more turns and never subracts. In ME's this is not a problem, but in any type of attack/defend scenario it gives somewhat of a advantage to the attacker. The feature makes it harder to do gamey flagrushes, but it also gives more time to the cautious attacker. But I am pretty sure that BFC has a good explanation to why this feature was implemented in this particular manner, an explanation that my feeble mind cannot figure out for the moment.

M

Johan, did you say that you loved the machineguns? You were not entirely clear on that point.

[Geier]

Originally posted by DrAlimantado:

The only real problem that I see with this feature as I see it, is that it only adds more turns and never subracts. In ME's this is not a problem, but in any type of attack/defend scenario it gives somewhat of a advantage to the attacker.

Agreed. I am presently unable to see how the defender could ever benefit from more turns. The attacker has more time to rally his troops, troops that were Broken when the battle was "over".

I'm sure someone will be along shortly and sort us out though.

Johan, did you say that you loved the machineguns? You were not entirely clear on that point.

Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight? Or, failing that, fired 1000 rounds of god-given 7.62 mm fmj with tracers in three-to-five-second bursts under the pale light of ten starshells? Well, have you?

It's a bit like religion. With CMBB, everyone will become Believers. Can you gimme halleluja?

Uhm, yes, I kind of like the machine guns.

Johan

[Boris Balaban]

I like the random ending for now we will have to get a different mine set on when the game will end and how to use our resources.

I would say in real life like the battle or firefight does not end on the tick of the clock but on orders as the commander in the field sees fit.

I have played many of a games like Panzer Blitz where the whole game is a snails pace until the last turn or two where the attacker makes a rush to the edge of the board or a town.

[WWB]

Once planned for by designers, it does not favor either side necessarilly.

WWB

[Lindan]

Originally posted by wwb_99:

Once planned for by designers, it does not favor either side necessarilly.

WWB

If I might add: ALL scenarios with variable endings which are on the CD are consciously designed this way.

[Thin Red Line]

Originally posted by DrAlimantado:

it also gives more time to the cautious attacker.

1) Not really, because you the attacker doesn't know when the game will finish. It can be next turn so will he jeopardize the victory by being more cautious ?

2) The defender may use the opportunity of additional turns to launch a counterattack.

3) If that is still really a concern, just setting the lenght to a few turns less that the 'ideal number' is a good deal.

[Geier]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

I like it. You get rid of flag rushes, which is really annoying in human vs human games. Other than that, it keeps you on the toes, both as attacker and defender, cos you really dont know when its all over. But, as I said, the greatest benefit would be when you play humans.

I don't agree. I would rather become more inclined to flag rush on the "possible" last turn if I believed there was a chance that those presently pinned/broken troops lying and cowering could follow up with a second wave three turns later when the defender has used up all his ammo. With a result like I had last night, troops who were completely out of it (at turn 25) were giving supporting fire and even assaulting six turns later.

If there is a chance that the game ended prior to the turn number I would agree with you. Except for that "when you play humans" bit, which I don't understand.

It doesn't feel quite right to start a whine thread at a moment like this. I would however be very interested in learning the reasons for creating the feature. If this has already been posted somewhere, I would appreciate a link.

Johan

[ September 04, 2002, 07:59 AM: Message edited by: Geier ]

[jwxspoon]

The thing to remember here is that the variable turn ending is an OPTION. The scenario designer can opt for the more conventional ending or can use the variable.

Personally, after having played dozens of games of CMBB, I prefer the variable ending. To me it introduces a random ending that ensures that a last turn flag rush will, in all probability, simply extend the game for long enough that the real side controlling the flags will win.

jw

[DrAlimantado]

Originally posted by Geier:

Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight? Or, failing that, fired 1000 rounds of god-given 7.62 mm fmj with tracers in three-to-five-second bursts under the pale light of ten starshells? Well, have you?

Last time I danced was after 500 SEK of Gin & Tonic, cannot remember if the devil was involved, but I know that there was a monkey who poured diesel in my mouth when I was asleep later that night.

As for me having fired a mg, what do you take me for? Good god, you have met me, and did you actually believe that I did the military service?

[ September 04, 2002, 08:08 AM: Message edited by: DrAlimantado ]

[Geier]

Originally posted by Thin Red Line:

2) The defender may use the opportunity of additional turns to launch a counterattack.

So you are saying that more turns are good for the defender? I thought that it was supposed to be a feature for "even" games? If I as a defender have the capability to launch a game-winning counter-attack on the last turn just because the game decided to go for five more turns, why is that a good thing?

3) If that is still really a concern, just setting the lenght to a few turns less that the 'ideal number' is a good deal.

I am not interested in removing the feature. I am not interested in A Solution To A Problem. I am interested in why it is a good game design decision. I have never said that it wasn't, only that I fail to see it.

Johan

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Geier:

I know that this is a feature and that I very probably easily can turn it off somewhere but the reason I'm posting is to find out what I'm missing here. Since BTS/BFC hasn't made one single bad game design decision previously I'm more interested in getting enlightened than bitching.

You can't turn it off in a scenario... that is set by the scenario designer. What it does is add some uncertainty. It MAY add turns, but not necessarily

[Geier]

OK, thanks for the replies from the beta testers and others. I would like the discussion to continue though, so here's one: Is there a limit to the turns added and are the original number of turns taken into account?

I think it added six turns (possibly seven) on me last night, which turned a 25 turn game into a 31 turn game. Does this mean a 50 turn battle can go for at least 62 turns?

Johan

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Geier:

And since the attacker always has more assets than the defender (duh), if he can count on (can he?) a few more turns if he is close enough ... Well, I don't see the good thing with that.

Yes, the attacker probably will have (or at least should have) more assets, the defender can and usually should stockpile more ammunition, which would allow him to stay in the fight a bit longer than the attacker, who only has what he can bring with him.

Michael

[Thin Red Line]

Originally posted by Geier:

So you are saying that more turns are good for the defender? I thought that it was supposed to be a feature for "even" games? If I as a defender have the capability to launch a game-winning counter-attack on the last turn just because the game decided to go for five more turns, why is that a good thing?

I was answering the specific point raised by DrA who said that it could give an advantage to the cautious attacker (by giving him possibly only more turns so he can develop a careful tactic).

I'm just stating that the defender can benefit from it as well.

I am interested in why it is a good game design decision. I have never said that it wasn't

I've never said you said that it wasn't

[Ligur]

Originally posted by jwxspoon:

The thing to remember here is that the variable turn ending is an OPTION. The scenario designer can opt for the more conventional ending or can use the variable.

Personally, after having played dozens of games of CMBB, I prefer the variable ending. To me it introduces a random ending that ensures that a last turn flag rush will, in all probability, simply extend the game for long enough that the real side controlling the flags will win.

jw

I think this exactly why it was added. I craved for that featuer in CM:BO after too many last round rushes I would have beaten back if given a minute or two.

[Chad Harrison]

To answer the original question, I think the addition of a random turn end will put a stop to a big amount of 'gaminess' that would happen before. In CMBO, especially in a QB ME, a lot of players would set up their troops for a last minute dash for the flags. This way, if they could hold all flags in dispute, and have destroyed more opponent's points, they win. Works great

Now in CMBB, that will no longer be possible. Now if you tried to run for the flags at the end, all the sudden, they are all these extra turns where your sudden advance can be checked and expelled. And if you wait too long, the game ends on the correct time because nothing is being disputed.

I like it alot and think that it helps to bring in some more realism that before was not present.

Chad

[Michael Emrys]

Now if the map would only redraw during play to eliminate that gamey "edge of the world" effect...

Michael

[Warphead]

Usually a random ending will result in 3-5 turns added. Sometimes a lot more but that is rare. And there is no connection to the overall game length.

I usually subtract a few turns from a QB length when I enable random ending (eg. 26+ instead of 30). Just a matter of taste and current mood...

[Chad Harrison]

Originally posted by Michael emrys:

Now if the map would only redraw during play to eliminate that gamey "edge of the world" effect...

Michael

If there was one thing that I would wish for outside of the ability to have paratroops fall from the sky in CM2, it would be no map edge (from it redrawing). Wishing

Chad

[Goanna]

The correct answers are YES and YES.

Well, at least I think what Berli was doing could be called dancing.

The mgs now are reminiscent of the real thing for me (M60 anyway). A great feeling throwing that much lead downrange that was only surpassed by the live LAW rocket I got to shoot into an old APC. Whoosh!!!

BTW I really could use some of those great HMGs on you in or game.

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Geier:

Agreed. I am presently unable to see how the defender could ever benefit from more turns. The attacker has more time to rally his troops, troops that were Broken when the battle was "over".

the advantage to the defender is this...

If, in CMBO, a scenario were designed for 30 turns, in CMBB you make it 25+ not 30+. Therefore it can go a bit longer than required or a bit less. Make sense?

[jdmorse]

Like Berli (man that sticks in my throat!! ) I look at it as essentially a 30 turn battle that may end earlier or go longer