MGO Exclusive Developers Diary For Combat Mission Barbarossa to Berlin

[Vanir Ausf B]

Steve, excellent idea. I was becoming a little despondent about VR until your last post as I cannot imagine myself ever buying something more than 5% or so over base cost. This looks to be a good compromise between the current system and the binary "in or out" system myself and others preferred.

Now if Charles can rework how the game is setup to foil the restart monkeys it will be perfect. I'm sure it will be a piece of cake...

[ May 10, 2002, 07:33 AM: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Juardis]

Originally posted by Big Time Software:

More answers:

And vice versa, something cheap can become super expensive as the numbers at the front dwindled.

Steve

So a Pz-II in 1944 would be at a 200% premium (for example)? I understand that because it's rare in numbers, but I don't think you'd have to put a premium on them to keep people from buying them. However, in the case of the Ferdinand, yes, I could see increasing the cost in the latter years since many were KO'd at Kursk and they were potent tank killers. So anyway, is that right, the "mainstay" units that are obsolete would have the same premium attached to them as the rare units?

[WineCape]

It still AMAZES me that BTS takes the time to answer - and indulges - this lot of us on this board to such an extent as done here in this thread.

May the gods bless CMBB to be a roaring success. They deserve this.

Kind regards,

Charl Theron

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Wolfe:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by KwazyDog:

so if players keep starting in an attempt to get a cheap Tiger their opponent is probably recieving a nice cheap SU-152

Dan, if I read this right, you're saying that there is no extra turn to send to prevent people from continuously restarting 'til they get the rare unit they want? I would welcome an extra turn if it would alleviate any possibility of trying to cherry pick by re-starting. It wouldn't be much of a burden on the players since the file would be a once-a-game send, and would be very small. It would eliminate any suspicion of tinkering with the game. The variable rarity system sounds very nice; I can't wait to try it out. And I do know to try to play trusted opponents, but this one extra turn would help immensly, IMO. Thanks.

- Chris</font>

[Smiler]

Originally posted by Big Time Software:

So Charles and I decided to add a sort of "wild card" draw. What that means is that 99% of the time it will work as it does now, but 1% of the time (or whatever low number we decided works) the system will ignore its parameters and discount it much more than it would otherwise.

Steve

Yup, I like this a lot. I had originally wanted something more along of random restriction of unit availability, but the current proposed VR system is better. Nicely done, BTS.

And Winecape, I agree 100%!

[Puff the Magic Dragon]

Originally posted by Brian:

Mmmm, raises an interesting question, perhaps one some people might not like to contemplate. How dependent is BTS on Charles's expertise at programming? What would happen if he (heaven forbid it) dropped dead, tomorrow? Would BTS be able to survive and move forwards?

Drop dead? How about a big cheque from 'someone'?

[ May 10, 2002, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

[Scipio]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

Now if Charles can rework how the game is setup to foil the restart monkeys it will be perfect. I'm sure it will be a piece of cake...

Player A prepares the setup

The QB is send to Player B, and Player B starts with the purchase.

Or am I thinking to simple?

[ May 10, 2002, 01:38 PM: Message edited by: Scipio ]

[Battlefront.com]

Steve, excellent idea. I was becoming a little despondent about VR until your last post as I cannot imagine myself ever buying something more than 5% or so over base cost. This looks to be a good compromise between the current system and the binary "in or out" system myself and others preferred.

Er... then you should still be a little despondent What this wild card change does is not all that significant. It just makes a very rare item affordable once in a Blue Moon. It will likely not change things very much at all. But the 1 in a 1000 times you can buy that Jagdtiger for close to cost... hehe...

So a Pz-II in 1944 would be at a 200% premium (for example)?

If it were still available (I don't think it is by then), correct. What I mean by that is that we still have introduction and discontinuation dates built in. If a PzII was officially "off the books" by 1944 (nearly certain it is), you won't be able to purchase it even at 1000000% cost

So anyway, is that right, the "mainstay" units that are obsolete would have the same premium attached to them as the rare units?

The system has no concern about if something is obsolete or state of the art. It simply concerns itself with how many were in use on that month relative to that nation's equipment total. If an obsolete light tank, for example, was still found in the hundreds or thousands years after they became little more than steel coffins, the rarity factor would be low. However, I am unaware of any obsolete vehicle that remained in service for long and in large numbers after it was proven crap. Either the numbers dwindled through losses before being removed from inventory, or the vehicle was removed from inventory prior to dwindling losses.

And thanks for the bunches of thumbs up

Steve

[Ichthys]

Player A prepares the setup

The QB is send to Player B, and Player B starts with the purchase.

Or I'm I thinking to simple?

This sounds too simple to me. Consider...

Player A does the setup...

if the rates are fixed immediately then he can open player B's file (password hasn't been set yet) and see what is cheap and what's expensive.

if the rates are randomized each time B opens the file, then player B now can keep restarting until she gets what she likes.

To fix this would would need the following sequence:

Player A creates game and sets his password

Player B appoves settings and sets her password, and player A's costs get calculated.

Player A chooses forces, and player B's costs get calculated.

Player B chooses her forces

[Vanir Ausf B]

Smiler's system is much better than nothing as it does make an extra hurdle for the cheater to jump through, but Mare's system is what is neccessary to eliminate it. Mare's system would also have the added benefit of eliminating the current map-peek cheat.

1. Player A creates game and sets his password

2. Player B appoves settings and sets her password, and player A's costs get calculated. (The map is generated)

3. Player A chooses forces, and player B's costs get calculated.

4. Player B chooses her forces

5. Player A sets up his forces on the map

6. Player b sets up her forces on the map

Steps in italics were added by me. As far as I can tell this system is cheat-proof except for possible hacking of the PBEM file which is beyond the technical skill of most people.

[ May 10, 2002, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Zitadelle]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

[QB].... Mare's system would also have the added benefit of eliminating the current map-peek cheat....

QB]

I think I will still be able to look at a Quick Battle map if I so desire. Hell, I'll even be able to create the map; remember the bone from February, 2002:

....Now then that about wraps up my overview on what CAN be seen in this picture. How about what CAN'T be seen? Well, for starters Dan is kicking my face in during this nightime December 1944 Quick Battle and I even have intimate knowledge of the map too...Yup, in fact I created this map myself..Yup, sure did, some time ago in fact..Way before me and Dan played this QB last night...

Now some of you are probably smiling and the other 99.8% are wishing I would get on with it...So, why are those select few so happy?

Well because the only way I could have seen this map before I played a QB is if we have allowed custom made maps to be loaded into Quick Battles...Guess what? WE HAVE ALLOWED CUSTOM MADE MAPS TO BE LOADED INTO QUICK BATTLES.

Yup! You can build your own map in the editor, save it and then next time you want to play a QB with your friends and neighbors you can load IT instead of having the computer make one for you. Right now, the computer will create new setup zones and victory flag locations and I am not sure if we will be able to be carried over or not from the pre-created map but I think Charles is going to try to make that work.

Even so, just the ability to finally play a QB on a pre-created map is really cool.

Well, that about wraps it up, chew slowly, I wouldn't want you to choke on this bone...

Enjoy!

Madmatt"

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by Big Time Software:

Er... then you should still be a little despondent

What this wild card change does is not all that significant. It just makes a very rare item affordable once in a Blue Moon. It will likely not change things very much at all. But the 1 in a 1000 times you can buy that Jagdtiger for close to cost... hehe...

Well, if it really is only 1 in 1000 for all rare stuff then I don't see the point. The reason I was looking forward to VR is that I wanted rare stuff to be rare, but not so rare that you never saw or used it. My concern is that the disincentive to buying highly rare units is so great that there is little practical difference between it and fixed rarity. After all, if I won't buy anything more than 10% over base cost, it makes little difference to me if it is + 30% or + 200%.

I think the wildcard idea would work well as long as you don't make the chances so small as to rival winning the lottery. I'd say 1 in 200 games would be fine for something as ridiculously rare as a Sturmtiger, while the Jadgtiger would be more like 1 in 100. The KT could be 1 in 50 and the Tiger 1 in 30 (these are rough numbers just to illustrate the idea). Of course, this assumes different units have different wild card chances.

[ May 10, 2002, 03:11 PM: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Sarge Saunders]

Thought I would chime on with the PBEM setup/cheat thoughts. I realize that people want to have a game that opponents cannot gain unfair advantage of them by cheating. But the steps described by those above seem to be cumbersome.

This reminds me of the "one bad apple spoils it for everyone" syndrome. OK, there are cheaters. So what. Should it mean that I have to trade files 6 times before I get to see the map? Or 8 times before both sides can get their forces moving?

I could see it going something like this for your example 5 turn per week PBEM player:

[e-mail 1] Hey you up for a rematch?

[e-mail 2] Sure. Prefer 1500 pts, any side, city map

[e-mail 3] Here is the setup....

....(5 or so days later after numerous exchanges) Wow what an ugly map. Any chance we could generate a new one?

Ridiculous.

In the current system, A setup can be done easily and 24 or so happy hours later both sides have begun their manuevers. Simple and easy to get a game started quickly to get into the good stuff.

Just my opinion

-Sarge

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

Thought I would chime on with the PBEM setup/cheat thoughts. I realize that people want to have a game that opponents cannot gain unfair advantage of them by cheating. But the steps described by those above seem to be cumbersome.

I don't think it's as bad as that. As is, the first player starts setup on the 2nd file transferred, under the proposed new system he would start on the 4th. That is only 1 extra cycle (each player sends 1 more file than currently). If doing it in 3 steps takes 24 hours I don't see why doing it in 5 would take 5 days.

Think of it this way: you are playing a guy for the first time who you don't know. You are using VR. 10 turns into the game you see he has a Jadgtiger. What goes through your head? For me, and I'm sure a lot of people, a logical question to ask one's self would be "Is statistically more likely that he lucked out and got one 1 in 1000 games where he could afford it, or is it more likely I just ran into one of those rare people who would cheat to get it?"

If I ever did luck out and get an affordable Jagdtiger, I would probably pass on it just so my opponent would not be suspicious of me. Eliminating any possibility of that suspicion is worth 2 extra files per game IMO.

[ May 10, 2002, 03:28 PM: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by Zitadelle:

I think I will still be able to look at a Quick Battle map if I so desire. Hell, I'll even be able to create the map; remember the bone from February, 2002:

No. Read this part:

WE HAVE ALLOWED CUSTOM MADE MAPS TO BE LOADED INTO QUICK BATTLES.

Yup! You can build your own map in the editor, save it and then next time you want to play a QB with your friends and neighbors you can load IT instead of having the computer make one for you.

I'm talking about randomly generated maps, not pre-made maps. Obviously pre-made maps will have been seen by the guy who made it, at least...

EDIT: Ok, I see what you're getting at now. I would certainly hope there is some indicator on the game setup screen that a custom map has been used instead of a random one.

[ May 10, 2002, 03:38 PM: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

If I ever did luck out and get an affordable Jagdtiger, I would probably pass on it just so my opponent would not be suspicious of me. Eliminating any possibility of that suspicion is worth 2 extra files per game IMO.

Wow. I need to play you then. Giving up such a deal because of what your opponent might think. I'd say the problem with 2 extra turns (or 3 or 4) is that it is silly to have a PBEM turn where ALL one does is set a password and send it back. And this to eliminate the possibility that your opponent could open YOUR file and cheat by observing purchase point values.

Why we in the CM community have been playing games with purchase rules (short 75, Panther 76, etc.) for some time now to enforce a sort of rarity. This has been all done on the honor system and it works fine.

Even now under the current CM system I can generate auto-pick force QBs and see not only the map but all my forces before I even generate my opponents turn files. If I want better units or a better map for my side only then I could just do it again. This is an even bigger cheat loophole by your standards but I don't think it has been used that often to gain unfair advantage in a PBEM game.

My point is that players work out amongst themselves to use the honor system and I don't like to see it enforced new CM:BO coding and processes.

-Sarge

[Ron]

KwazyDog wrote:

Now, let see how variable rarity effects some of these figures if I start a new battle (and note that each side is somewhat wieghted against the other with regards to rarity, so if players keep starting in an attempt to get a cheap Tiger their opponent is probably recieving a nice cheap SU-152 ).

If true, I think that would alleviate some fears of 'cheating' with Variable Rarity. Like computer-generated forces now in CMBO, if I received a Panther I can usually(!) expect something on the other side to counter it.

Ron

[ May 10, 2002, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: Ron ]

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

Thought I would chime on with the PBEM setup/cheat thoughts. I realize that people want to have a game that opponents cannot gain unfair advantage of them by cheating. But the steps described by those above seem to be cumbersome.

I don't think it's as bad as that. As is, the first player starts setup on the 2nd file transferred, under the proposed new system he would start on the 4th. That is only 1 extra cycle (each player sends 1 more file than currently). If doing it in 3 steps takes 24 hours I don't see why doing it in 5 would take 5 days.

Think of it this way: you are playing a guy for the first time who you don't know. You are using VR. 10 turns into the game you see he has a Jadgtiger. What goes through your head? For me, and I'm sure a lot of people, a logical question to ask one's self would be "Is statistically more likely that he lucked out and got one 1 in 1000 games where he could afford it, or is it more likely I just ran into one of those rare people who would cheat to get it?"

If I ever did luck out and get an affordable Jagdtiger, I would probably pass on it just so my opponent would not be suspicious of me. Eliminating any possibility of that suspicion is worth 2 extra files per game IMO.</font>

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

Why we in the CM community have been playing games with purchase rules (short 75, Panther 76, etc.) for some time now to enforce a sort of rarity. This has been all done on the honor system and it works fine.

No honor system. If someone violates the short 75 or Panther 76 rule it will be pretty obvious during the game at some point.

Even now under the current CM system I can generate auto-pick force QBs and see not only the map but all my forces before I even generate my opponents turn files. If I want better units or a better map for my side only then I could just do it again. This is an even bigger cheat loophole by your standards but I don't think it has been used that often to gain unfair advantage in a PBEM game.

Yep, it is a big loophole, and it is one of the reasons I will not play computer pick against someone I don't know well. They can screw you bad. I only play on large maps (2000 pts medium or larger) to make it more difficult to get a map that is uniformly favorable to one side or the other.

My point is that players work out amongst themselves to use the honor system and I don't like to see it enforced new CM:BO coding and processes.

CM already has it enforced in the coding. That is why you are not allowed to setup the same turn you buy your forces. You could cut 2 file transfers off the setup if you did and went to an honor system.

For me, personally, wondering if everything is on the up-and-up detracts from the enjoyment of the game. 2 extra files per game is a small price to pay for peace of mind. At least for me. I understand this is a subjective thing.

[ May 10, 2002, 04:03 PM: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Smiler]

A few random thoughts:

Re: the chances of getting the "blue moon" special on a rare unit. If I were king of the world, I'd like to see something that gave a breakdown roughly similar to this:

- 40%. All units in game are fairly common for their type (maybe a few slighty rare things at a slight premium).

- 35%. All units in game are common or slightly rare.

- 20%. Some rare units, though nothing like a Jagdtiger.

- 5%. At least one uber-rare unit available at a good deal. This is a lot different than seeing a JT 1 in 20, anyway, because in CMBO the rare units are available at cost every battle and I generally don't see them now.

The point is that Jagdtigers didn't show up in 5% of all battles, but I don't really want to re-enact every battle in the war to see everything, either. The fact of the matter is that everyone has a personal preference here. Some people want to see roughly historic frequencies here, and some people (like me) would rather see more rare units, but still mostly biased towards actual forces. If there were some parameter used to tweak how often rare units were seen it would fix this, but at the cost of adding yet another parameter to battle setup. Again, I'm curious if most folks want more or fewer rare units than me.

Regarding cheat prevention, I think it's nice to have the computer eliminate even the notion of cheating. It's human nature to start wondering when your enemy gets lucky (how many "Tiger accuracy is worse than Sherman!" posts have we seen?). The extra step in the setup would be burdensome, but worth it. Also, if BTS has had time to eliminate the extra step during main game play (3 mails for 2 turns), then overall PBEM games will proceed more smoothly, anyway.

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

No honor system. If someone violates the short 75 or Panther 76 rule it will be pretty obvious during the game at some point.

This is true. No argument there.

For me, personally, wondering if everything is on the up-and-up detracts from the enjoyment of the game. 2 extra files per game is a small price to pay for peace of mind. At least for me. I understand this is a subjective thing.

It is a subjective thing. I remember playing a ladder game a while back that we agreed on short-75 rules. A few turns into it, I saw a mis-IDed Tiger? sitting way back on a hill. Not only did my Sherm think it was a Tiger, but he bounced a shell off of it and there it was sitting back there at long range doing exactly what a Tiger should. My first thought was not "Hey he is cheating". It was actually "Maybe he misunderstood the purchase rules." So I said in my next e-mail "Hey, did we choose short-75 or what?". He brought me back to reality and reminded me of FOW.

The moral is that I don't have a....please don't take this the wrong way....paranoia about someone cheating in a PBEM game. So if it falls to BTS to decide to make a system stricter to close cheating loopholes then they MUST weigh playability concerns too (like too many turn files to get started on a PBEM). Let's face it, it is a simulation/game not a Banking application!

Cheers,

Sarge

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

The moral is that I don't have a....please don't take this the wrong way....paranoia about someone cheating in a PBEM game. So if it falls to BTS to decide to make a system stricter to close cheating loopholes then they MUST weigh playability concerns too (like too many turn files to get started on a PBEM). Let's face it, it is a simulation/game not a Banking application!

Your aren't paranoid if they really are out to get you

I know cheating in CM is rare. I also know it does happen and I would just prefer not to have to worry about it. I guess it comes down to how much a bother you feel the extra 2 files would be. For me, it would be nothing. I'm never in that big of a hurry.

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

Your aren't paranoid if they really are out to get you

I know cheating in CM is rare. I also know it does happen and I would just prefer not to have to worry about it. I guess it comes down to how much a bother you feel the extra 2 files would be. For me, it would be nothing. I'm never in that big of a hurry.

**grin**

Well you make some good points VaB...I just wanted to chime in as BTS has been involved in this thread and it's good for them to know that there are different opinions on this.

Nice discussion. Very civil. I wish some of the debates around here wouldn't get so heated so others would feel comfort in joining in!

Best Regards,

Sarge

[Battlefront.com]

Well, if it really is only 1 in 1000 for all rare stuff then I don't see the point. The reason I was looking forward to VR is that I wanted rare stuff to be rare, but not so rare that you never saw or used it. My concern is that the disincentive to buying highly rare units is so great that there is little practical difference between it and fixed rarity. After all, if I won't buy anything more than 10% over base cost, it makes little difference to me if it is + 30% or + 200%.

You either haven't read what KwazyDog wrote, or you don't wish to believe it. Spending even up to 50% is not as horrible as it might first appear. Sure, you might give up an armored car or a light tank to do this, but that sort of tradeoff might be perfectly worth it.

Again, this gets back to the heart of the issue that I have had to argue about since day one. The rare stuff must forced into being hardly ever purchased or there is NO POINT in having a Rarity system. 99% of the resistance to this feature has come from people that either don't want Rarity at all (Ladder folks for the most part), or those who GENERALLY want realistic force mixes but want to reserve the ability to buy rare stuff fairly often. For these people I suggest playing some games with Rarity and some without, but not expecting us to water down a system to accomodate exactly what it is designed to prevent.

In the end if people are bitching at us that they can't buy a Jagdtiger often enough, then we can sit back and chalk up another entirely successful game feature

I think the wildcard idea would work well as long as you don't make the chances so small as to rival winning the lottery. I'd say 1 in 200 games would be fine for something as ridiculously rare as a Sturmtiger, while the Jadgtiger would be more like 1 in 100. The KT could be 1 in 50 and the Tiger 1 in 30 (these are rough numbers just to illustrate the idea). Of course, this assumes different units have different wild card chances.

No, there is no unique chance per unit. It will be blanket. The chances of getting SOME rare vehicle of SOME type cheaper because of this system won't be all that bad. Probably one or more every bunch of games for sure. The thing is you can not count on a particular Rare vehicle being discounted like that. Meaning, you might "luck out" and be able to purchase some rather uninteresting, but Rare, vehicle as your "lucky role". In other words, when you hit pay dirt you might get a less expensive armored car rather than a Jagdtiger.

Now the other thought is did he cheat to get it, or did he get that lucky 1 in 1000 chance to buy it at not a REALLY high price but at an only slightly inflated price.

Examine this logic again. Let us say that it is even a 1 in 100 chance of getting a Jagdtiger. That means, in theory, the other guy would have to open and close up the game at least 50 times or so before getting a decent chance of affording that Jagdtiger. Dose anybody REALLY think someone is going to do this? And if it is a TCP/IP game, don't you think the other guy is going to notice that it took 2 hours to set up the game?

Honestly folks, this is an issue true enough, but I think you guys are overly worried about it.

The fact of the matter is that everyone has a personal preference here. Some people want to see roughly historic frequencies here, and some people (like me) would rather see more rare units, but still mostly biased towards actual forces.

Bingo And we, meaning Charles and I specifically (I can't speak for anybody else), designed this to be more towards roughly historic, not sorta historic with a good chance of silly stuff being included. Stutmtigers, for example, fought on the Western in one battle, making a combat appearance once or twice (something that small). If such a vehicle even appeared 1% of the time it would be too much.

If there were some parameter used to tweak how often rare units were seen it would fix this, but at the cost of adding yet another parameter to battle setup. Again, I'm curious if most folks want more or fewer rare units than me.

If someone wants to play with super rare stuff, turn Rarity off or play premade scenarios. Doing this means that you are assured of super rare stuff being purchasable, no problem. And if you generally want to play historical, then play your other 19 out of 20 games with Rarity on. Seems pretty simple to me

Steve

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by Big Time Software:

You either haven't read what KwazyDog wrote, or you don't wish to believe it. Spending even up to 50% is not as horrible as it might first appear. Sure, you might give up an armored car or a light tank to do this, but that sort of tradeoff might be perfectly worth it.

I have read what KwazyDog wrote, and I believe he meant every word of it. I just can't see me paying 50% extra for anything. Maybe I'm just weird like that. I have never bought a tank more expensive than a Tiger I in a game anyway, so I'm probably a cheapskate.

What I was really hoping for was more differentiation between fixed and variable rarity. We already knew rare stuff would be nearly impossible to get in fixed rarity, so I was hoping for something more than next-to-impossible with VR.

No, there is no unique chance per unit. It will be blanket. The chances of getting SOME rare vehicle of SOME type cheaper because of this system won't be all that bad. Probably one or more every bunch of games for sure.

I'm not sure how much a "bunch" of games are. Probably more that 1 in 1000 or even 1 in 100.

We probably won't be able to form a strong opinion of the system until we've had the chance to play around with it.

[ May 10, 2002, 08:38 PM: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]