So did BTS have a plan (demo scenario selection)?

[Redwolf]

I wonder whether the scenario selection in CMBB reflects that BFC wanted to make a point.

Both scenarios are at a maximum of what many wargames "suffer" from, both scenarios require the mother of all attention spans, at least from the attacker. Both attacks can be very frustating, they require close looking, a lot of learning. Both require operational thinking much more than short-term tactical reactions. They are highly rewarding when things actually work out. But to reach this point you have to invest a lot of patience, patience that many people do not have.

Of all possible scenario ideas BFC chose to include these two in the demo. It occurs to me that this may be intentionally to make a point

about the desired audience for this game and I would like to hear other people's opinions about it. Note that I do not want to bash any of those people who enjoyed the quick-thinking CMBO infantry running around, there is nothing wrong with liking that style of play.

%%

More thoughts: so what are alternative scenarios to put into the demo?

- High-quality tanks going after each other, or tanks attacking into

tank hunter terrain.

- Two high-quality infantry forces with few HMGs, like a meeting

engagement of recon elements. Could also absorb some pretty fast

light tank action.

- City/factory fighting (Stalingrad).

- Extensive fortified area attacked by high-quality infantry, possibly

in dense terrain (Sevastopol, would also give room for Soviet naval

infantry and ship artillery).

- Low-quality masses attacking veteran defenders (in the demo).

- Fast blitzkrieg-style tank formations bogging down in moderate

quality deep AT defenses (in the demo).

- High quality units attacking and bogging in deep mud or snow with intense cold, lots of weapons not working.

So, overall, with the exception of the mod/snow/cold variant I think that BFC has chosen those scenarios which require the most effort from the attacker and go for the highest ratio of mental energy to be invested to get the (high) playing satisfaction. Coincidence?

[ September 13, 2002, 07:51 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[Pvt. Ryan]

Steve said they designed the demo scenarios to show off some of the new features and how CMBB differs from CMBO. Anything else is pure spekelashun.

[Michael Emrys]

The first thought that pops into my head (which is no proof of its truth content) is that you may be crediting BFC with more conscious planning than is justified. It strikes me as quite conceivable that Steve, who designed both scenarios, may have included them simply because he subjectively felt they were "cool". Obviously, there is considerable lattitude in different people's sense of what goes to make up a "cool" scenario. If you happen to more or less share Steve's sensibility, I would suppose you too would find these scenarios fairly "cool"; otherwise, you might (as you have) indicate some unease with them.

My hunch is that the sole concession to naïve players has been the Tutorial, which if nothing else is certainly easy to handle, yet provides enough of a challenge as to not become immediately boring.

Michael

[Zarquon]

I think Pvt. Ryan is right - the need to show where CMBB differs from CMBO.

Who will be the first ones to buy CMBB? Those who played CMBO a long time (us). So, to build up sales fast, you need to show the old players that they really get something new for their money.

[Redwolf]

My point is: Steve shows -very clearly- the CMBO players what is not longer possible in CMBB.

The two scenarios do not only show the new features and mechanisms, they also make an exceptionally clear point about CMBO stuff that is no longer possible in CMBB. It would have been no problem to find scenarios which would only show the new features, without alienating some of the CMBO players.

(Disclaimer for those who don't know me: I am not alienated, rather the opposite)

[KG_Jag]

I don't want to reargue the whole demo war again, but I am certain that at least 90% of us on this forum and at least 75% of those who download and play the demo will or have already bought CMBB. Even if this was only CMBO ver 1.12 taken to the Eastern front for four years with all the countries that were there, it would be a game worth paying $45 for. But it's more than that. I wasn't wild about the demo, but I will be shocked if I'm not knocked out by the full game. It's only after replaying Yelnia four times that the non-eye candy changes are beginning to sink in. I think the demo battles were designed to show off games changes, instead of game fun and excitement. I think both could have been accomplished with some changes, but we've been over that ground enough. For the most part Steve hit his target. The already much debated question is whether or not it was the right target.

[ September 13, 2002, 09:06 PM: Message edited by: jagcommander ]

[gunnergoz]

This was in a loooong earlier thread that was thoroughly answered by Steve for BTS. He made it clear that the scenarios he designed personally for the demo were intended to show off the new features at their best, to highlight the differences between CMBO and CMBB, and finally to show how a superbly crafted, accurate game about the Eastern Front could be fresh and different and not the same old stuff.

There will be no new demo scenarios, he also said.

I am taking the liberty of paraphrasing liberally from memory, so before Steve comes around and chews me out for misrepresenting him, please check him and the others out in the following thread:

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=000507

[MrSpkr]

Originally posted by redwolf:

both scenarios require the mother of all attention spans, at least from the attacker. Both attacks can be very frustating, they require close looking, a lot of learning. Both require thinking. But to reach this point you have to invest a lot of patience.

Not if you play against dalem.

[Ruthless]

*SPOILERS BELOW*

I wasn't going to get involved in the ongoing demo debate, but since it still hasn't gone away, I guess I will...

First, let me make clear that I am not "whining" for any new demo scenario. This is purely constructive, unbiased (I only "like" Combat Mission and think it is very good, I don't worship it) observations, which I hope will not come off as arrogant or disrespectful. I believe CMBO is a superior product, and CMBB will be, too, when it comes out. I, and everyone else here, appreciate the time BFC guys freely give to addressing our concerns on this forum. I will also start by saying something positive (or somewhat less negative at least): The scenarios are not that bad. Yelnia, as the Germans, is mildy interesting, as I've played it twice now, and am thinking about trying it again, to see how many tanks I can take out in the course of the scenario (so far, I've forced the Russians to abandon 3 tanks.) I will also say that I was planning not to comment because I don't believe BFC would redo their demo and perhaps others would like those scenarios better (and many do seem to enjoy them.) Now, the less positive:

I can say truthfully that when I first played the two demo scenarios, I made an offhand remark to my wife (who wasn't really listening) "Boy, they should have picked better scenarios for the demo for this game."

That was based on playing both scenarios as the Germans (I didn't actually finish either one because I got bored after awhile and in Yelnia scenario, I got frustrated that I couldn't do anything about the T-34's attacking me, so I had all my guys do a suicide rush at the Russians...which was comical and stupid and pretty well ended any hope of winning. I got bored trying to mop up the rest of the Russian defenders in Citadel in the first part of the map. I quit when one of my tanks made it to the bottom of the hill where it wiped out the Russian Company HQ.)

At any rate, I played Yelnia again as the Germans, and I did much better this time by placing my guns in a sneakier position (took out 2 tanks that way and a third was abandoned by the end of the scenario.) I was much happier the second time I played it. I haven't tried it as the Russians yet, but I have some idea of what it would be like, having read many accounts of it here and from having played the scenario as the Germans.

Now, I have no doubt that this was historically correct (BFC surely does more research than I do), but that doesn't mean it makes for an entertaining scenario. I think, objectively speaking, that Yelnia is balanced...if playing against the computer-controlled Russians. I am fairly certain that a human would have better luck taking out the Germans, since they have 6 tanks which are REALLY hard to take out (the only reason I could take out two with my guns is because I had played it against the AI already and knew what it would likely do, so I could position the guns where they could get close-range side shots at the buttoned tanks.) I could be wrong about this, however, since I haven't tried it from the other side. But the other point I would make about this scenario, which also applies to the Citadel scenario, is that the terrain, while probably historically correct, is not terribly interesting. For the defender, the terrain allows the attacker to come from anywhere, on a broad front, over open ground, so they pretty much HAVE to defend everywhere, spreading their forces thin. For the attacker, it appears that the only real choice to make is to move forward and engage whatever pops up.

In either case, there seem to be few choices for defenders and attackers alike due to force selections/terrain. I think that is why the scenarios are "poor" to some. As I said before, I don't think they are that bad, but in my opinion, it was an illogical move to put out demo scenarios at all. Since BFC surely knew that most of the people who bought CMBO would probably buy and enjoy CMBB, they had no real reason to entice anyone by putting out a demo. The screenshots show that the graphics are greatly improved. (The sounds are much improved, too.) Anyone not interested in the East Front will surely not be swayed by a demo. However, if they ARE to put out a demo, I would have recommended scenarios with more interesting terrain because, as I said, there seem to be few possibilities with such open, flat terrain.

Anyhow, that's just my two cents. Others feel the scenarios are great and that's fine. I just think the terrain is a bit dull. I don't want more scenarios, just some observations to bear in mind when releasing CM:The Next Generation or whatever you will call it.

[Ruthless]

Some other positive comments for BFC:

The demos DO show many of the differences in the engine between CMBO and CMBB. I noticed graphics improvements on a grand scale; the sounds are better, too, I think; Cool death clock (although it made my stupid gunners keep pumping shells into tanks that already had penetrations and I knew the crews would probably bail); cool supression from machine gun and rifle fire (that didn't really exist in CMBO); etc., etc....

All in all, I am certain the full version will be very cool indeed.

If BFC's goal was to highlight differences between CMBO and CMBB, they succeeded. However, I think the argument that they needed to do this to entice CMBO players to buy CMBB is pretty silly; how many people were clamoring to order it well before the demo came out? Anyhow, the demo isn't that bad, I just think the reasoning behind making a demo was a bit flawed and the scenarios could have been more interesting, but I don't think the scenarios will keep many people from buying the game who would otherwise have bought it. Do I think they should release a new demo or more scenarios? Not really; if they did, they would just give people more reason to complain. IMO, wargamers learn what games are good from word-of-mouth and good PR (reviews, etc.) anyway, so the demo really probably won't make the difference. There are a few fence-sitters out there who might be turned off by the demo, but if they can't reason that better scenarios will be included with the game, then we can't really help them, can we?

And to be honest, I wasn't that impressed by the demo for CMBO. I bought it due to all the stunning reviews I read.

However, like CMBO, I will be buying CMBB.

[Chad Harrison]

There sure has been a lot of talk about the scenario choices for the CMBB demo compared to the CMBO demo. I think that they just put those into the demo that felt right to them. Poor chaps sure has recieved a lot of flak for that decision.

What I find interesting though, is that most the flak (all that I have noticed) is coming from old timers who remember when the CMBO Gold Demo came out. I have yet to see someone who is new to CM post and say that they were too hard, not interesting enough, they lost interest, ect. Yes, that might be because they never bothered to post here. But, I truely feel that these scenario are fine for someone new to CM. I cant say that they wont scare away possible customers, but I dont think that they are that bad.

Anyways, the full version will be out soon and all of us old timers will get what we want and will find new things to complain about.

I can see it now: BTS fix or do somefink!

Chad

[Redwolf]

I have to admit I skipped the other thread, I usually ignore threads started by Scipio for health reasons

[ARRPEEGEE]

a maximum of what many wargames "suffer" from, both scenarios require the mother of all attention spans, at least from the attacker. Both attacks can be very frustating, they require close looking, a lot of learning. Both require operational thinking much more than short-term tactical reactions. They are highly rewarding when things actually work out. But to reach this point you have to invest a lot of patience, patience that many people do not have.

This is what makes us wargamers! we love boring stuff! Hooah!

I don't see that it's all that different than CMBO. I read someone's post that said to think of quality levels in BB as one grade lower than the corresponding level in CMBO, and I believe he hit the nail on the head! CMBO handles the same with lower quality troops, negating new weapon effects. Dosen't bother me much, because I always played with low-quality troops..The high quality ones were too Rambo for my liking.

One thing I think the demo did very well was not giving too much away. I can't wait to see T-34/85's and Panther G's go at it-but, I think it wold have taken alot of the fun out of the game to have a yawny tank fest scenario. The demo really made me want to see more of the game, i.e: buy it. heh..I already don't want to see another T-34 M40! LOL..those tincans.

[ September 14, 2002, 12:58 PM: Message edited by: mch ]

[Seahawk-vfa201]

Heya oldtimers.

After long inactivity I found the demo, played Citadel and pre-ordered.

Can't explain what exactly gave me the impression but the game is superior to CMBO. I felt it as a more realistic AI was in place.

I had all objectives under control at turn 31, the new commands for tanks are impressive. I did not spot any weird behavior and tanks felt like there was someone truly knowing what he was doing at the helm.

So far so good!!!!!

Anyway, of course BTS: FIX IT or DO SUMFINK