Iron Mike USMC
Member
Re: Board Gaming
Conan the Barbarian. Don't know where he got it from.
Board Wargames vs PC Wargames
- Thread starter Jim H. Moreno
- Start date
raydude
Recruit
Re: Re: strengths
Again, your fire chart is great, nice, streamlined. But that still (to me) is harder than coding it into standard routines for the CPU to process and then giving me back the results.
Never said it couldn't. I've also read your article. It looks great, however, I couldn't help but notice that those bookkeeping details (marking for straggler recovery, consulting the fire combat table, straggler table, morale table) could be done "under the hood" of a computer game engine.
Again, your fire chart is great, nice, streamlined. But that still (to me) is harder than coding it into standard routines for the CPU to process and then giving me back the results.
Tom DeFranco
Member
Re: Re: Re: strengths
I don't know, I've been playing computer wargames since 1982 and sixteen years ago I went back to board wargaming and computer gaming. I enjoy computer games because there are scenarios that most boardgame designer won't touch, like PTO invasions, but other than that, a computer game gets stale pretty fast. Plus, maybe I'm just lucky, but I have a plethora of opponents including the designer of many of the games in the system I described in the article, Dave Powell. You can talk to your human opponent and get a response, different opponents have different ways of approaching you across the board, and you can go out for dinner and/or a beer afterwards and discuss the postmortem of the game and whatever else. To me it's worth the paperwork involved. Plus, I'm an accountant, so the extra paperwork is nothing like some of the spreadsheets I've worked on.
BTW, somone was actively engaged in creating a computer version of the games I described, nothing yet though.
And thank you for reading my article. I appreciate it. If you'd like to comment on it, there is a thread in Board Gaming below.
To each their own, but I don't see what is so darn hard about recording casualties. For instance, in the games series I described in my article, if one of your opponent's units is firing at your unit and he says that you suffer one hard casualty and one straggler you simply mark your unit's line with an "x" in the first box, followed by a "/" in the next box. I know the charts as copied from my scanner are hard to read, and there is a degree of a learning curve involved with working the charts, after two games or so, the charts become second nature, and not time consuming at all if you roll 6 or 8 d6 together and then check the charts.
I don't know, I've been playing computer wargames since 1982 and sixteen years ago I went back to board wargaming and computer gaming. I enjoy computer games because there are scenarios that most boardgame designer won't touch, like PTO invasions, but other than that, a computer game gets stale pretty fast. Plus, maybe I'm just lucky, but I have a plethora of opponents including the designer of many of the games in the system I described in the article, Dave Powell. You can talk to your human opponent and get a response, different opponents have different ways of approaching you across the board, and you can go out for dinner and/or a beer afterwards and discuss the postmortem of the game and whatever else. To me it's worth the paperwork involved. Plus, I'm an accountant, so the extra paperwork is nothing like some of the spreadsheets I've worked on.
BTW, somone was actively engaged in creating a computer version of the games I described, nothing yet though.
And thank you for reading my article. I appreciate it. If you'd like to comment on it, there is a thread in Board Gaming below.
trauth116
Webmaster: hist-sdc.com
While I don't play boardgames all that much any more - time/space all sorts of considerations; I am pretty familiar with them... as it was my main hobby in the 80's.
The biggest weakness of PC games - is the 'under the hood' aspect. At least with me- I like to know and understand the systems - instead of hopping in and 'playing' - without really knowing what is going on.
That being said - it -of course, depends on the designer.
The thing (and I must be getting old here) -is that in the 80's wargames were mainstream. What happened to all of these people.
I don't particularly buy into the 'its too hard, and needs to be done for me' theories. (An assessment of accumulated stuff I have seen on a number of boards)
The biggest weakness of PC games - is the 'under the hood' aspect. At least with me- I like to know and understand the systems - instead of hopping in and 'playing' - without really knowing what is going on.
That being said - it -of course, depends on the designer.
The thing (and I must be getting old here) -is that in the 80's wargames were mainstream. What happened to all of these people.
I don't particularly buy into the 'its too hard, and needs to be done for me' theories. (An assessment of accumulated stuff I have seen on a number of boards)
raydude
Recruit
Re: Re: Re: Re: strengths
Plus it doesn't help that my friends are in fields which require PC aided computation as well. Every time I try to get them to play my boardgames they come up with "you know, it would be so much easier if we coded this on a PC. Then we wouldn't have to remember the rules. The computer would let us do it or not do it."
I wonder if our respective professions have colored our biases then. I'm an aerospace engineer and most everything I've done required computer simulations and lots of iteration over equations. Can I do it by hand? Sure! I know the equations and the physical forces behind them. Do I want to? No, not really.
Plus it doesn't help that my friends are in fields which require PC aided computation as well. Every time I try to get them to play my boardgames they come up with "you know, it would be so much easier if we coded this on a PC. Then we wouldn't have to remember the rules. The computer would let us do it or not do it."
I think, like you said, it's just a bias based on personality and environment (for lack of a better word). While I appreciate both types of play, board and PC, I rarely have time to devote to board games, and I have a limited pool of opponents. It's much easier to just play it on the PC. Plus, I have a fairly extensive background in computer programming, which means I look at overly complex rules (which is a matter of opinion) and say, "This isn't worth the realism for the trade off in playability, if I'm going to do this, why not automate the process?" If the process for determining some result in the game requires no input from the player other than looking through the charts and making the proper markings, why shouldn't it be simplified and done on a computer?
On the other hand I do a lot of research and often deal with large amounts of data by hand, so I don't necessarily mind the board games.
Overall I think that "it's not that hard to do by hand" is about as valid an argument as "it's too hard to do by hand." There are a lot of factors involved and I think most other arguments between the two are far more telling (being able to actually talk with your opponent over the board, not having the time to devote to a board game, etc).
On the other hand I do a lot of research and often deal with large amounts of data by hand, so I don't necessarily mind the board games.
Overall I think that "it's not that hard to do by hand" is about as valid an argument as "it's too hard to do by hand." There are a lot of factors involved and I think most other arguments between the two are far more telling (being able to actually talk with your opponent over the board, not having the time to devote to a board game, etc).
Patrocles
Member
Yeah, same here! I found ASL to be a blast b/c of the comraderie of fellow players (and being in the same room helps!). These days its easier to find opponents online or against the AI.
I think MMP (Multi-Man Publishing) has bought the rights to reissue ASL? you may want to check them out.
Tom DeFranco
Member
BigMik1
Member
I think that Combat Mission does have alittle ASL in it. With Combat Mission Barbarossa to Berlin there are ASL scenarios made for it and they worked out okay. I am just glad all the math and other calculations is handled by the cpu, so my opponent and I can focus on the battle. Also Combat Mission is like playing minintures also.
But to the question, I was rasied on board games. My first wargame was AH Submarine in 1978. From there I had many AH wargames (Squad Leader, ASL, Flat Top, Panzer Leader, Rise and Fall of the Third Reich and others). But then the pc came and it took me away from the boards, with the math and calculations being taken care of and then the dawn of the internet and PBEM.
PC Wargames like The Operation Art of War, Close Combat, Steel Panthers and then Combat Mission stired my wargaming soul. And I left the board games.
But lately I want to go back to board gaming because I miss the face to face and meeting new people. So I have joined a ASL group here in Houston, but as you said Sarge it's hard to find the ASL stuff. On ebay it's a fight to get stuff and a rule book can get expensive.
BigMik1
PC Games gets my vote...simply because in many of them you can sit down and find an opponent or play against the AI. Table top gaming is good to, but it takes alot more dedicated time to really be able to enjoy it as often as you would like to.
hogdriver
Member
PC games do have several advantages, but there's just something about pushing markers around a map - takes me back to my days with the 28th Bomb Wing Alert Staff.
Patrocles
Member
I hear ya, man, about lack of time! It seems the only time I have for gaming is in the middle Friday night!
After reading all these posts i'm getting sentimental about boardgames! I think I may have to check out the local wargaming club in the Seattle area.
freightshaker
Member
Too many pros and cons to both. I'm a truck driver so playing on my computer is my only option, can't imagine trying to keep a board of ASL counters on the bunk going thru Louisiana. I still like to fire up a game of Russian Campaign or ASL when I'm at home, albiet solitaire. Computers handle all of the mechanics much better and take up much less space (SSI games) but there nothing quite like seeing your opponent when your Sherman rolls a critical hit on their Tiger. Board games cover a wider variety of conflicts and are usually alot more in depth (seen the ASL rulebook lately?). I still consider myself one of the few board gamers left out there but will have to admit a preponderance of my time is spent on the computer. I suppose even at home since I have the grandaddy of all board game weapons; a cat.
CodeTalker
Member
I started out board gaming, and still have a few. However, PC is the only way to go for me. No set up, don't have to worry about getting an opponent (where I live that is a consideration).
I love the Combat Mission series because not only are there thousands of scenarios to choose from, but there is a quick battle feature where you pick the parameters and in less than a minute you have a battle to fight. But the sweet thing about CM is its editor. Very easy to use, and you can duplicate just about any battle in WWII (excluding Pacific). Or you can make up your own battles. Right now I'm fighing against the Ruskies on a map that very closely resembles my home town.
I love the Combat Mission series because not only are there thousands of scenarios to choose from, but there is a quick battle feature where you pick the parameters and in less than a minute you have a battle to fight. But the sweet thing about CM is its editor. Very easy to use, and you can duplicate just about any battle in WWII (excluding Pacific). Or you can make up your own battles. Right now I'm fighing against the Ruskies on a map that very closely resembles my home town.
BigMik1
Member
Code Talker, I would love to challenge you to a battle of PBEM one day. Do you have CMAK??
BigMik1