lassner.1 Posted November 14, 2002 Share Posted November 14, 2002 So I guess that the question is: what percentage of the new scenarios will be for single player; what percentage will be for multi-player? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lassner.1 Posted November 14, 2002 Share Posted November 14, 2002 All of mine are recommended single player, multiplay at your own risk and I am not interested in how you will fare. I am no longer interested in designing for multi-player balance. . . [From a later post] . . . Conclusion - achieving balance for everybody is a forlorn hope, so I can as well not bother I must respectfully disagree with you Andreas; not only do I believe that balance for multi-player is achievable, but it is something that I value extremely highly in a scenario. I would agree, however, that it is much more difficult to make balanced multi-player scenarios (if that was perhaps what you intended to say). I should also add that I do quite like single-player oriented scenarios. But multi-player scenarios are where CM:BB really shines, at least in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott B Posted November 14, 2002 Author Share Posted November 14, 2002 Originally posted by lassner: So I guess that the question is: what percentage of the new scenarios will be for single player; what percentage will be for multi-player?It is a bit too soon to tell exactly. I would loosely estimate that of 25 scenarios, 15 are primarily intended for two players, and 10 are primarily intended for play against the AI, although there is some overlap. The Library, for example, will come in two versions, one for vs AI and one for multiplayer. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted November 14, 2002 Share Posted November 14, 2002 Lassner, you are welcome to try going for multiplayer balance. My statement reflects my opinion, and and really should be read in conjunction with 'and I don't care any longer about it'. I just can't be bothered anymore. Case in point (again): I consider 'Into the East' a perfectly balanced scenario for multiplayer. If someone gets their ass handed badly, it is their mistakes, and/or general ineptitude that made it happen, not my design. That is the measure of my confidence. Now read the reviews and/or play it PBEM, and come back and comment please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted November 14, 2002 Share Posted November 14, 2002 Originally posted by Andreas: Case in point (again): I consider 'Into the East' a perfectly balanced scenario for multiplayer. If someone gets their ass handed badly, it is their mistakes, and/or general ineptitude that made it happen, not my design. You neglected to include "style of play". It IS possible, difficult as it may be for you to imagine, for perfectly competent players not to fare well at one of your craftings while at the same time not being the fault of crappy scenario design and/or poor grasp of how to play the game. Some players simply have different styles that will pay dividends in some situations, and cause them to lose badly in others....yet another dilemma for the scenario designer and his testers. Then again too, there is the problem of chance, or luck, rearing its head in some of the equation also. It doesn't always have to come down to "the player who rated my scenario must have been a git...."....does it? [ November 13, 2002, 07:37 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lassner.1 Posted November 14, 2002 Share Posted November 14, 2002 You neglected to include "style of play". It IS possible, difficult as it may be for you to imagine, for perfectly competent players not to fare well at one of your craftings while at the same time not being the fault of crappy scenario design and/or poor grasp of how to play the game. Some players simply have different styles that will pay dividends in some situations, and cause them to lose badly in others....yet another dilemma for the scenario designer and his testers. Then again too, there is the problem of chance, or luck, rearing its head in some of the equation also. It doesn't always have to come down to "the player who rated my scenario must have been a git...."....does it? Indeed Michael, I heartily concur. My statement reflects my opinion, and and really should be read in conjunction with 'and I don't care any longer about it'. I just can't be bothered anymore. Case in point (again): I consider 'Into the East' a perfectly balanced scenario for multiplayer. If someone gets their ass handed badly, it is their mistakes, and/or general ineptitude that made it happen, not my design. That is the measure of my confidence. Now read the reviews and/ or play it PBEM, and come back and comment please Andreas, I certainly understand if you are simply not interested in designing two player scenarios anymore – to each his own. Previously I have enjoyed your scenarios, and I am sure that I will try out your newer “one-player” ones as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luis J Posted November 15, 2002 Share Posted November 15, 2002 Where will the SP be available? At Boot's n'Tracks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted November 15, 2002 Share Posted November 15, 2002 And Der Kessel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwxspoon Posted November 15, 2002 Share Posted November 15, 2002 6th Army Probe is designed for 2 player, or Axis against the AI. My City of Ruins is designed for 2 player. jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grisha Posted November 15, 2002 Share Posted November 15, 2002 Balance in gameplay while certainly is sought after should not be confused with historical gameplay. In war, balance is something the defender seeks and the attacker tries to deny. When balance occurs in war one has a stalmate, a slugging match, a stagnant situation. When a scenario is designed from an historical perspective the intent is mainly one of investigation, followed by education. It's a learning experience. This was the origin of wargames, a teaching aid in the art of war. Like Andreas, I prefer to create wargame scenarios from an historical perspective, because if done correctly it can illuminate the conditions those commanders were placed in long ago and therefore bring a proper appreciation of the situation, both physically as well as psychologically. Before the advent of the personal computer back around the late 1970s and early 1980s, wargames were complicated affairs, requiring extensive rulebooks and long hours of participation. Units were either miniatures or small 1/2" counters one pushed across a map, slowly resolving issues of movement and combat as they arose. This sort of activity was not for the average person, but required someone with an intense interest in both history and military art or science. Because of this, players who would meet in simulated battle were looking for historical simulations that while balanced to a degree would enlighten or offer insight into the conditions of the battles or campaigns of those times. And this was not merely 'flavor,' but a deeply thought out consideration and attempt to simulate the conflict represented. When computer gaming arrived, the wargame went through a quantum leap in terms of time and commitment. The ability of the computer to discern all ruling judgements lifted the player from having to thoroughly read pages of rules, often with complex wording that approached law school technicality. Now, anyone could play a wargame, if they were so inclined, without the 'hassle' of spending so much time with rules or game preparation. Unfortunately, this created another problem: as wargames became more accessible to the average person, that average person started to make demands or suggestions that while valid in a strictly gaming sense, really had no place in wargaming. Which is where we are today, game balance vs. historical accuracy. At this point in time it would be foolish to deny each their own, since it's been over two decades since the emergence of computer gaming. Each side, the Gamer and the Wargamer (Grognard or "Grog," is, in fact, an old wargamer term [edit: well, it's a Napoleonic term, but you get my drift ]), have valid concerns and they should be respected. However, one should not mistake one from the other, and because of that scenario design will always diverge in two main directions. Gamers see the game (or in this case, the wargame) as the vehicle they must ultimately attempt to perfect. Wargamers see the game as a vehicle to better understanding the military art of the time. We all like to win, Gamers and Wargamers alike. But how we go about that and what we learn from it differ between the two groups. I'm a wargamer, and my scenario designs will reflect that. A Gamer may not appreciate that, but that's fine, because my focus is the wargame and the wargamer. [ November 15, 2002, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: Grisha ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John O'Reilly Posted November 15, 2002 Share Posted November 15, 2002 Andreas, I'm a bit confused by your reaction to reviews for your "Into the east" which you seem to have selected as an example of how difficult it is to please people when it comes to balanced play. On the depot there are 26 reviews of which, by quick count, only 4 are negative. The rest are not just positive but glowingly so. I must admit that, for myself I prefer "historical" scenarios above all else, I don't mind force imbalance at all so long as it is not glaring. It will always come down to the reading of terrain and the formulation of cunning plans in the end,.... John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadHunter Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 I'm really looking forward to this! Thanks for all your hard work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrold Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 Dittos This scenario pack is second only to the upcoming patch in download desireability. Thanks to all involved for the efforts. BDH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Tondu Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Oh Golly! Could it be true? Will "The Last Stalingrad Pack" really be released tomorrow??? At what time will it be available? One minute after midnight or some time in the morninbg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Axe_ Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 Surely to God it's tomorrow somewhere on this planet already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott B Posted November 19, 2002 Author Share Posted November 19, 2002 Originally posted by Axe2121: Surely to God it's tomorrow somewhere on this planet already! The board time says it's still Monday. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Axe_ Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 Curses! Foiled by a North American-centrist calendar. BTS - fix or do somefink! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrold Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 So it should be ready in about 2 and a half hours? Jeez I have to finish a report on Carrier Hotels and Server Farms by class tomorrow night. Better make some coffee. BDH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott B Posted November 19, 2002 Author Share Posted November 19, 2002 Originally posted by Axe2121: Curses! Foiled by a North American-centrist calendar. BTS - fix or do somefink!Haha. You know, if I'd thought about it more, I'd realize that it's already November 19th at Volgograd. Oh, well. We picked the date of November 19th for this thing back in late July. It can wait a few hours more. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imported_Hiram Sedai Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 I will struggle to not have my "ass handed badly" as Andreas said. All of that "ass handing" can be quite disconcerting. Waiting with bated breath over here, boss. Edited because I was unsure where I should sit during the "Handing of the Ass" ceremony. [ November 18, 2002, 11:22 PM: Message edited by: Hiram Sedai ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 You could also have corrected 'baited' while you were editing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts