Cpt Kernow Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 Something is commonly happening to me that is begining to grind slightly. I am at present to committed to cmbo PBEM to take on anyone at cmbb pbem so have been getting in games against tha AI. This means I must look through the scenarios looking for suitable games. This is made very difficult because the large majority of scenario designers neglect to state how best a given scenario should be played. I opened a scenario up (hornets nest), no indication of how it should be played, but given it dipictes a russian break through I made a geuss that it might be suitable for Axis v AI allies ( russians with loads of stuff etc etc ) However upon looking over the map I notice that some of the terrain is labeled "suspected german positions" I assume it hasnt been labeled as such for the sake of the AI. I also assume that it hasnt been labeled as such for the axis player as well he knows exactly where the germans are. It must have labled so by the designer for the sake of a human allies player. I should not be having to use so much conjecture to assertain the purpose of a scenario.This also means I have opened up this scenario and seen the defensive layout of the axis which basicaly ruins it if I want to play from the Allies perspective. I also prefer to play scenarios PBEM to QB as QB often turn into a battle about who has tweaked there QB purchases the best etc etc, scenarios are allways more fun played double blind. When opening up a scenario looking for a game against the AI, I am allways afraid that I am going to prematurley look at a map belonging to a ment for PBEM scenario that would have been an absolute classic. I have this fear because often the designer does not mention how he intended the game to be played. I know I can go over to the scenario depot and look it up there and at present this is what I do. Its a shame because an otherwise great scenario that has taken a great deal of time and effort to create can be spoiled by this one oversight. ------------------------------------------------- However we look at it, lets look at it in a way that means we get to eat the fruit. Reporter from Hithhikers guide to the galaxy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwxspoon Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 FYI - Hornet's Nest was designed as 2 player or Axis versus AI. You have a good point, the "Best Played As" should be annotated on the briefings. jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dd Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 /em Agrees with original poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 As a rule of thumb you should always play the attacking side unless the breifing explicity says otherwise. The AI is much stronger on the defense anyways and is therefore more challenging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerxes Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 Strongly agree about this. It's really bad when you PBEM a scenario that was designed to be played vs. the AI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 As a matter of briefing etiquette, it would be good to put the 'play as' recommendation first in the briefing of all scenarios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt Kernow Posted October 25, 2002 Author Share Posted October 25, 2002 Keith. Sometimes the scenario designer makes it the otherway round. He gives the AI a HUGE numerical advantage and you have to make an embattled defence with scarce assets. Playing these scanrios as PBEM really does suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harv Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 Just a quick note here...DO NOT follow the "Best Played As" or "Computer Should:" guidlines for most of the CD scenarios listed at the Depot. When I entered them only a few had these recommendations in the briefing, and as there is no "Unspecified" option (yet) I left most of them at the default setting in the parameters. I'm hoping to contact the authors next week and get this information entered ASAP. Harv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt Kernow Posted October 25, 2002 Author Share Posted October 25, 2002 JWX Having seen this: Looking mean I just want to say that if any mistakes have been made they are all probably, no definately my fault and I would also like to add that all your scenarios are fantastic however one chooses to play them. Hang on, whats that ruslting in my cheese plant no no arghhhhhhhhhh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwxspoon Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eden Smallwood Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 Originally posted by Harv: Just a quick note here...DO NOT follow the "Best Played As" or "Computer Should:" guidlines for most of the CD scenarios listed at the Depot.NOW YOU TELL ME????!?!?!?!?!?!? ahem... Is there anything ELSE you might like to tell me about listings at SD? OP: Said it before; complete agreement Eden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 Scenario briefings are all a matter of taste. Either you think they're overly long-winded history lessons, or you think they're too cut-and-dried with no flavor for the game. Either you think they didn't give enough info on the enemy or you think they gave too much. How can a person possibly write to please both extremes?! Answer is you write your briefing for your scenario to please yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt Kernow Posted October 25, 2002 Author Share Posted October 25, 2002 Mickey D. You should read the post that started this thread. I didnt draw attention to any the scenario attributes you raised only to the lack of information given by scenario designers about how best a scenario should be played e.g. Pbem v AI etc etc. This is not actually part of the briefing and is more concerned with actual game play mechanics rather than mission objectives and historical accuracy etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted October 25, 2002 Share Posted October 25, 2002 What is all this talk about a bad scent in your briefs? Shouldn't that be kept private? Admin! Admin! Lock this one up, quick please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts