Pluses and minuses of PC wargaming

[Patrick Carroll]

When the home-computer age arrived, I was thrilled at first. For one thing, I could now play the wargames I'd loved for years without having to go looking for opponents or settle for playing both sides myself. But in recent years I've noticed there's a downside to PC wargaming. Here's how it looks to me:

Upside:
You always have a ready AI opponent, and the Internet links you up with distant human opponents as well. Leaving a game set up is no problem; just save it and reload it later. Setup is instantaneous; you don't have to spend an hour sorting out cardboard unit-counters. The computer remembers the rules and does the number crunching. "Fog of war" is doable. And as icing on the cake, today's multimedia features can enhance the wargaming experience with impressive audio/video/textual effects.

Downside:
Maps are typically much bigger than monitor screens, so you have to scroll around and/or resort to an inset map. Lack of documentation (or the user's laziness in reading documentation) means many of the rules & mechanics are hidden in the programming; you don't know the exact effect of woods on movement or just what formula is used for combat resolution. Also, the AI is lightning fast and the interface tends to spoil a player, making him less thoughtful than he'd normally be; sloppy experimentation takes the place of real planning. Finally, the rules are fixed; unless you're a programmer with access to the source code, you don't get to tinker with the rules.

What other pluses and minuses do you see in PC wargaming versus board wargaming or miniatures?

 

[chrisvalla]

More pluses (for me):
-variable AI level in some games
-random maps in some games make for virtually unlimited gameplay
-game playing time
-training missions in some games to help learn the rules and way it operates

minuses:
-locked AI level in some games (too hard early on or too easy later)
-steep learning curves when the designers 'think' you should have advanced elements 'figured out' already
-poor AIs who fall for the same 'tricks' repeatedly (kinda fun but gets old)
-patches to fix stuff that should have been working when it shipped (play-balancing patches I can understand, but critical fix patches... no excuse, it should have been right the first time)

 

[hillchurch]

A big plus that i see is the ability for Real Time play. Miniature gaming is ruled by turns. Chaos is a big factor in real time. The best laid plans can go down the toilet in ten seconds.

A downside here is the predictible AI after some play time. Then the best laid plans will last at least 60 seconds.

However, matching wits with a real opponent in real time is spectacular.

 

[Patrick Carroll]

Originally posted by hillchurch
A big plus that i see is the ability for Real Time play. . . . Chaos is a big factor in real time. The best laid plans can go down the toilet in ten seconds. . . .

Hmm--I was going to list real-time play as a minus, for exactly the same reasons.

 

[hillchurch]

Originally posted by Patrick Carroll
Hmm--I was going to list real-time play as a minus, for exactly the same reasons.

I really like the chaos factor. I really like having to think on your toes all the time.

But, don't get me wrong, chaos can reign in turn based strategy games as well. A defeat in a key area can put a damper on your plans as well, forcing you to think on your toes. :thumb:

 

[Patrick Carroll]

Originally posted by hillchurch
I really like the chaos factor. I really like having to think on your toes all the time.

I'm no good at thinking fast on my feet. But I guess I know what you mean. I was impressed with Sid Meier's Gettysburg & Antietam. I felt it gave me a whole new sense of what battlefield command is like. You go to where you're most needed, give orders, then move on to the next hot spot. And you have to pay attention to what's going on everywhere, putting it all together in your head without wasting any time.

OTOH, I didn't care for the Warcraft demo I tried several years ago. It was an impressive-looking game alright, but it wore me out. Made me miss turn-based games.

Other real-time games I've tried are Red Baron and Lemmings (a non-wargame). RB was one of my favorite computer games for years; I actually went out and bought a joystick just to play that game--and I never do that kind of thing because I'm too old for video games. Lemmings was cute, but it got on my nerves after a while; I don't really like puzzle games. Oh--I played Wolfenstein 3D too, just to sample the FPS experience. It was OK, but I wasn't tempted to buy any sequels or spinoffs.

Real-time games have always been just a change of pace for me. They're too much like sports, and I've never liked sports.

 

[rahamy]

For me I just think of the positives...

I never have to look for an opponent...I easily know over 50 guys I can get a PBEM game going at any time in almost any time period I'm interested in, and count on a good game because I really know them and know they won't dissapear on me.

I can adapt my gaming to fit my schedule, no blocking off an entire weekend just to get some good gaming in...I can keep a dozen games going at any given time and fit turns in as time permits. :banana:

Fog of War :thumb:

No setup/tear down, no pets to mess things up, no conflicts with other members of the family for the dining room, etc.

I could continue, but for me computer wargaming is the only way to go. :toast: