triggers again - sudden strike style multiplayer

[permanent666]

about 11 years ago my first ww2 strategygame was sudden strike. the best thing about it was multiplayer. i really enjoyed the dynamic gameplay where capturing zeppelins triggered new reinforcements.

i hope this kind of multiplayer could be introduced in combat mission games. while not that realistic it was fun to play, because you had to attack and defend at the same time.

what do you think about it?

[Marc Anton]

Hey permanent ! Iam a sudden veteran too (playing it to this day - but the RWM Mod).

CM would benefit a lot, even from a 2vs2 MP with WEGO or RT but i guess it will never succeed with this engine. (poor performance etc.)

[Pak40]

about 11 years ago my first ww2 strategygame was sudden strike. the best thing about it was multiplayer. i really enjoyed the dynamic gameplay where capturing zeppelins triggered new reinforcements.

i hope this kind of multiplayer could be introduced in combat mission games. while not that realistic it was fun to play, because you had to attack and defend at the same time.

what do you think about it?

God, I hope not for two main reasons:

1. As you said, this is not realistic. CM series is built to be as realistic as possible within the confines of BFC's budget. A true wargame, not a game about war. This would alienate their fanbase, in effect BFC would be "selling out" to the RTS twitch crowd.

2. Over the years, there have literally been dozens and dozens of RTS games with unrealistic engines and features like you describe above. However, there have only been a small handfull "realistic" wargames and then an even smaller number that would be considered good. PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, JUST LET US KEEP COMBAT MISSION IN THE REALM OF REALISTIC GAMING.

[Erwin]

+1 to that. permanent's post was scary.

There are SO many other games like Sudden Strike out there for players who like that genre. It's makes me tremble to believe that anyone would want the CM series (designed for a completely different market) to go in that direction.

[George MC]

Dear god no...

[permanent666]

no reason to be scared

if triggers will show up in a combat mission game and one can trigger reinforcements than no one can stop me creating this kind of multiplayer maps - you do not have to play them anyway

one of the best things about sudden strike was the scripting in the editor

[Erwin]

IIRC CM doesn't offer triggers.

[Pak40]

*IF* triggers ever show up in a Combat Mission game you can bet your sweet ass it wont be from stupid blimps. Where's the logic in that??? What's next Permanent, are you going to lobby for tank power-ups? Just roll your Sherman over the power-up and shazam, your tank gets a 76mm upgrade

[Vinnart]

Glad to see some other former Sudden Strikers here too. I was a big time Sudden Strike multiplayer back in the day. Although it was gamey there were some interesting concepts that made the players rely on teamwork to win which was a big part of its popularity. I still consider it some of the most fun I have had gaming, despite whatever shortcomings the game had. I always thought the zeppelins were a bit campy. I would have rather just a colored flag in the ground for capture objectives. For a game like CM I couldn’t see the amount of reinforcements from SS. For CM I could see just getting some extra ammo for a mortar, or something. I don’t think that is unrealistic. Like scrounging from another battalion.

I do dream of the day when CM will offer say 3v3 with 1 observer slot per team for RTS. The observer slot added a whole new dimension to that game in that one player could take on the role of commanding and coordinating the team during the battle.

[Chek]

OMG where's my pills...gasp,gasp.

[Vinnart]

For those not familiar with the Sudden Strike multiplayer concept it went like this. The two armies (teams) would battle for colored flags, which were signified by the colored zeppelins. Flags would be either singles, or in pairs, or even triples. What that meant was that the team had captured all the flags of that color to get reinforcements. Different flags, or flag groups gave different reinforcements. The amount of reinforcements varied from a few units to as much as a battalion. A teammate could be getting pounded on one section of the line, and another could capture a flag to help your buddy with reinforcements. Keep in mind the scale for Sudden Strike maps was much larger than CM. Generally a line would form across the middle and the battle would progress from there working with your flank mate to break through in the line, and to capture flags. For CM that same flag concept for a 3v3 CM RTS could work, but with different reward such as extra ammo, or even just points. The observer mode was very cool to sit back and watch the real time action from your side’s perspective. I played in an organized league with voice coms during play. It was a lot of fun. I had always wished it were more like CM though in realism.

[Chek]

Sorry don't mean to offend Vin,just having a bit of a laugh.

Am familiar with online multi players and they can be a lot of fun.

Way back in the late 90's I played santa heads WW2 mod for Myth 2.We played a game called junkyard with a whole lotta tanks that kept re spawning.Ridiculous,hilarious and a ton of fun.

[Vinnart]

No offense taken at all Chek. Sudden Strike is a good game to study for RTS wargame development. Imagine a future CM game that allowed a 3v3 +1 observer slot per side RTS play on maps that are huge like Sudden Strike size Perhaps 5 - 20k square? Big enough units canit see across it from the start. I think 3 is the magic # as 3 platoons makes a company ect.. A typical battle would be battalion to regiment size. Each player commanding a company to battalion size force. Each player chooses a color for their unit icons to tell each other apart. The map has colored flags, or flag groups as capture objectives. Objectives would be shown as realistic colored flags on a pole, not whimsical blimps. You can only capture once, and reap the rewards once. Your team is awarded points, and say some ammo, or a reasonable amount of CM type reinforcements which the game gives now anyways. Flags can change hands which means the opposing side gets those rewards too. To capture flags it was as exactly as in CMx1 in that you did not have to be right on it, but close enough and with enough force. Objectives have to be held for a certain amount of time before they are considered captured. Easy concept to follow: example we capture the 2 dark blue flags and we get 200 points + an ammo truck section. Points are also gained for the side in kills. Kills are worth their purchase price in a QB. In the end flags, and kills are an ends to a mean in that the player must use good tactics to win, and in this case TEAMWORK. Imagine also to be able to just watch the battle, as well as play. All on voice coms, coordinating and working as a team. If such a game ever came to for wishing it would open the game to a whole other dimension. This would be so awesome! This would be the dream RTS experience of this genre and gents we would be in grog heaven.

[Erwin]

We tried to do team play on each side in CM1. It was cumbersome and very time-consuming as players play at different speeds and could not be relied upon over a period of time.

CM2 is even more detailed and complex, so I extrapolate that what you envisage would (unfortunately) also collapse under its own weight.

[noxnoctum]

Haha seeing you guys flipping out is a bit funny

Really though, triggers could be immensely useful for scenario making.

Example: When certain total point value of enemies enter an objective zone (Say a town), it triggers reinforcements for the other side. This would be great for more precise timings for things rather than relying entirely on just "30 minutes have gone by" (which is how it's done right now correct?)

[Erwin]

I agree re triggers. There have been many threads about that. IIRC, I think there are programming challenges that may be beyond current BFC capabilities.

[Vinnart]

We tried to do team play on each side in CM1. It was cumbersome and very time-consuming as players play at different speeds and could not be relied upon over a period of time.

CM2 is even more detailed and complex, so I extrapolate that what you envisage would (unfortunately) also collapse under its own weight.

Erwin, I agree trying team play in WEGO is not practical. What I describe above would be for real time multiplayer play only.

[Erwin]

In that case, it's recommended that every such player over 40 be provided with blood pressure monitors, nitro-glycerine tablets and portable heart defibrillators.

[Chek]

In that case, it's recommended that every such player over 40 be provided with blood pressure monitors, nitro-glycerine tablets and portable heart defibrillators.

Unfortunately I think I'd fall within these parameters...ahh where'd did all the time go.

Oh that's right playing dang wargames!

[jojo18]

Hello to all sudden striker

Here is the new Sudden Strike multiplayer IP exchange for all sudden strike series

====>> URL removed <<==== (copy this adress and put in your internetbrowser)

The Sudden Strike multiplayer IP market has been expanded somewhat. You can now subscribe to the player database for games of the Sudden Strike series to contact like-minded people. With predictable games you can soon enter you into the game.

Furthermore, one can call the Stock Exchange on the scissors in a separate window to keep track.

Check it occasionally back in and carries you into the same database. For this purpose, you must be logged.

Have fun on the battlefields!

[kensal]

Conditional AI triggers would be great for scenario design. I would like for example to be able to trigger an AI counterattack for a scenario, if, but only if, the player reaches a particular objective.

Similarly I would like to be able to trigger an AI withdrawal from a particular defended position if the AI defenders take a certain level of casualties.

I don't think at the moment either if these things are possible?

[sburke]

Conditional AI triggers would be great for scenario design. I would like for example to be able to trigger an AI counterattack for a scenario, if, but only if, the player reaches a particular objective.

Similarly I would like to be able to trigger an AI withdrawal from a particular defended position if the AI defenders take a certain level of casualties.

I don't think at the moment either if these things are possible?

Nope, the only thing your pixeltruppen care about is the time. They check their watches, check their orders and then maybe they will do what they were told to do.

[Combatintman]

sburke

I nope your nope - conditional AI triggers would be great for scenario design - takes the pain out of designing a scenario to challenge players of differing abilities or levels of aggression when coming up with an AI plan (such as working out where somebody will be in an hour or trying to plan a decent AI screening plan in advance to contact scenarios). Triggers increase replayability and other good stuff and might encourage more people to get into the game of designing scenarios which would benefit everybody.

[sburke]

sburke

I nope your nope - conditional AI triggers would be great for scenario design - takes the pain out of designing a scenario to challenge players of differing abilities or levels of aggression when coming up with an AI plan (such as working out where somebody will be in an hour or trying to plan a decent AI screening plan in advance to contact scenarios). Triggers increase replayability and other good stuff and might encourage more people to get into the game of designing scenarios which would benefit everybody.

My nope wasn't a nope I don't want them or whatever it was you thought I was going off the deep end suggesting. I was simply responding to Kensai's question as to is it possible. On the contrary I would love if they were able to include them. It would also allow for making longer scenarios without worrying about the AI plan being totally out of sync.