Guest Turret Posted August 17, 2000 Share Posted August 17, 2000 I am running what amounts to a mini-campaign within the context of an organized tournament. I have 12 players each invited to play a German Company leader. Each week I design a scenario for them to play against the AI. After I get the results back I randomly pick one player to to be the historical "man on the scene" and that player's results are what I take in to consideration to advance the campaign to the next scenario. Basically, I think any one of a variety of leaders could be driving the action. The better the players do, the better the odds are that the campaign advances. The tournaments are about 4 scenarios long but can be longer depending on results. This round is a fictional German attempt at breaking through to an American Fuel Depot. In scenario one the players had to take a very well defended town called St Devote. 4 out the 12 failed, but the "man on the scene" (Lorak) did pull out a victory and the German advance continued. Next was defence of a hill they planned to use to recon the roads ahead. I gave them 4 Tigers as support to the player’s company. For the AI, I devised a well disguised pincer-like flank attack on the hill. The Tigers were awesome but usually lost few in the confusion (5 Shermans and 5 Stuarts). The few that remained typically cleaned up the mess. A victorious player (Lorak again!) won the draw and the German advance continues with excellent recon. Because of the recon edge they had won the next scenario was an ambush of hastily dispatched allied response to the loss of the hill and the town. In retrospect, this was an easy scenario for the players, but they never know what can hit them. Some played it conservatively in fear of something nasty happening to them (remembering the cruel artillery barage of St. Devote) . Others were aggressive and merciless. One player caused 157 casualies while suffering just 9 himself. I have a blast reading the AARs. Over the weekend I design the next round. So far the players are making good progress toward the fuel depot and this weekend I will design the final round of the campaign tournament. I can't wait. As a scenario designer I can’t imagine a better way to get feedback. I’ve started to get a sense of how the players think and I can give them custom challenges based on how they play. What results from all the playing is what I feel is a very historically accurate portrayal of a WW2 operation. The trials and tribulations are all there and make a difference. The players, who are commrades in arms, emotionally feel social pressure to succeed and would feel bad were they to be selected the week they lose. Others are counting on them as in reality. After the campaign is all over there will be memories of the great events of the operation. A tank that had 5 kills. A leader that rallied a broken squad and led them into storming a tank. The best thing is this is easy. I take about 4 hours to program the scenario. During my commute or holding my 2 month old son in the middle of the night I think about how the results are affecting the campaign and what would likely come next in the action. Each player takes about an hour to play the game. A few e-mails and we are onto the next phase. [This message has been edited by Turret (edited 08-17-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterk Posted August 19, 2000 Share Posted August 19, 2000 Hmmm...no one's chimed in to say how much fun it's been??? I'm a little surprised to hear that this next battle is going to be the last one. You'll be starting another one right afterwards I hope? (And be a little more nasty in the next one!) p. [This message has been edited by Peterk (edited 08-19-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maastrictian Posted August 19, 2000 Share Posted August 19, 2000 This is a very cool idea! As someone who is frustrated by the delay of PBEM games this combination of interactivity and playing against the AI is very interesting. Need another player or scenario designer? I vastly prefer playing the Allies... want to figure out a way to do this type of thing for each side and combine the results? --Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spcwrnglr Posted August 20, 2000 Share Posted August 20, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maastrictian: T I vastly prefer playing the Allies... want to figure out a way to do this type of thing for each side and combine the results? --Chris<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Good call, Chris. I'm a huge allies fan myself. You know what would be really interesting is if you had a role playing type deal (similar to the meta-campaign that is going on on CMHQ) but have it with "Generals" who would be in charge of plotting units' movements on a board game type deal, you know the overall picture. Every time units clash, a battle gets assigned to the corresponding "field commanders" who do a PBEM. The PBEM setup is decided by the "Generals who end up assigning all the men, equipment, and the field commanders simply execute. The battles' results determine the outcome of the "master battle." I know, it would be complex, but it would be something else! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maastrictian Posted August 20, 2000 Share Posted August 20, 2000 I think the Generals idea is a good one, and very similar to what is being done with the combathq meta-campaign. Thing I really like about Turret has done is doing a cooperative type of thing with no PBEM. For imaptient people like myself --Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts