Jump to content

Victory conditions/game outcomes


Recommended Posts

OK - I've just finished a PBEM in CMSF - 236 files - took over a year to play I rekon, in fact I can't really remember when we stated this scenario (Cane and Able - Brit Module) -

My opponent failed in all his victory parameters and auto surrendered - I succeeded in securing all my objectives - yet still lost :D

Now - I'm wondering - have the victory conditions been tweaked for CM:BN?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yer - my opponent got all his points from my losses - however he still failed as far this was concerned in his victory conditions, that is for the Losses section he "failed" as far as my losses are concerned, yet this was still more than double the points than I scored for securing all the victory locations and killing all but 1 of his troops - in other words he can completely fail - yet still win - anyway my point is - will this kind of thing still happen in CMBN?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yer - my opponent got all his points from my losses - however he still failed as far this was concerned in his victory conditions, that is for the Losses section he "failed" as far as my losses are concerned, yet this was still more than double the points than I scored for securing all the victory locations and killing all but 1 of his troops - in other words he can completely fail - yet still win - anyway my point is - will this kind of thing still happen in CMBN?

Since victory conditions are dependent on the scenario designer, I would say that such things are possible and unlikely that we will ever get away from such issues.

Case in point - CMSF scenario Afternoon Delight. Take any casualties at all and the Syrian side racks up more points than you can by taking all objectives and wiping the Syrians from the board. Rather galling to get a defeat by wiping the Syrians to a man, taking all objective points but losing because I had 2 wounded men. Don't know if this got fixed but the point is such weirdness does happen and it proves that scenario design is more art than science to get an exciting well balanced scenario. My hat is off to the many designers who do get it right and make good scenarios that are enjoyed by many.

As for casualty points, a fair number of scenarios in CMSF reflect the western armies aversion to casualty taking in the victory conditions. Different mindset from WW1 and WW2, where casualties were the norm and minimizing casualties was not high on the mission parameters of commanders of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BlackMoria is correct. CMx1 had some flags, some points, and a simple equation that determined who had more of what than the other. A predication of who would win a particular battle was, towards the end, was therefore a lot easier to do. Partly because the conditions were so simplistic, but also because they were the same for both players 100% of the time.

CMx2's system is, of course, vastly more dynamic in terms of the variety of victory conditions, the combinations used for any one battle, and the relative importance of each towards the overall standard for victory. On top of that, both sides need not use the same standards! Which means that by the end of a game it's pretty difficult to know who might win. We think this is a really good thing because it keeps players interested in fighting to the end instead of throwing in the towel after a flag has been taken or what not.

The downside of giving scenario designers so many "tools" and power over the outcome is that the more interesting/varied the victory conditions are more testing is needed to make sure the end results make sense. And that's difficult to do consistently.

As BlackMoria points out, Afternoon Delight is indeed a good "case in point". A scenario that a lot of people had much fun with until they got to the victory screen and realized that they lost. The reason? Because some revision of the scenario, probably to tweak something minor, somehow introduced a change to the victory conditions which caused the end results to not be what was intended. I know this for sure because I'm the author of Afternoon Delight :) And yes, it was eventually fixed.

I can't comment on the specific battle futon river crossing fought through, but generally speaking giving scenario designers more tools and more control means a greater possibility of goofs in any one particular battle played. On the positive side, the overall experience (across many battles) is much better than it otherwise would have been. So like most things in live, the bad must be taken along with the good. If the good outweighs the bad then everything is about as good as it can be.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can say is that in probably half of CMSF PBEM I've played the outcome has been WTF!! - Sometimes this has favoured me and others not...... I certainly take your point that the uncertainty can keep up your interest in what seems like a lost cause. So it looks like the answer to my question......... is yes :( In which case the scenario designers need to up their game :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can say is that in probably half of CMSF PBEM I've played the outcome has been WTF!! - Sometimes this has favoured me and others not...... I certainly take your point that the uncertainty can keep up your interest in what seems like a lost cause. So it looks like the answer to my question......... is yes :( In which case the scenario designers need to up their game :D

I wouldn't take those fulfilled/failed/acceptable etc results in the AAR too seriously... focus more on what the points were. A 100-point objective might be fulfilled and have the green light, while a 1000-point one might be failed or acceptable. Also, we (the scenario designers) have been getting more careful to spell out explicitly what the victory conditions are and what the point spread is, because I know how frustrating it can be to get a result you completely didn't expect. Afternoon Delight did that to me as well. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Krilly, go ahead, take the plunge. :) At least try the CMSF demo. The game could be looked at as a training aid to get your skills up to speed before CMBN gets released. How embarrassing for you if the release finds you unable to properly command your troops! I can think of some other reasons to give it a try, but the demo should be a good start.

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...