Which do you prefer?

Which do prefer to play?

  • Scenarios

    Votes: 14 66.7%
  • Dynamic Campaign Games

    Votes: 2 9.5%
  • Linked Campaign Games

    Votes: 5 23.8%

  • Total voters
    21

SoccerDJ

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Messages
552
Reaction score
6
Location
On your left flank..
Country
ll
Just wondering what you guys like to play? Personally I like to play scenarios against human oppenents via PBEM. But in terms of against the AI then I like the Dynamic Campaign Games cause there is that personal touch and it gives you a good range of battles, althought not always historical.
 
Last edited:

Prester John

Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
105
Reaction score
1
Location
Brisbane
Country
llAustralia
Does anybody play the direct connect games (with smaller scenarios so that turns don't take too long)?
 

Jason Petho

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2002
Messages
583
Reaction score
5
Location
Calgary, AB, Canada
Country
llCanada
I tend to spend most of my time playetesting scenarios, although I am constructing new LCGs.

Regarding online play - Drives me nuts as I find most of my previous opponents were wayyyy too slow. So even though it's a small scenario, with only 10 or so turns it still took a couple hours out of my day. Something I just can't afford. So, I limit myself to PBEM. I can whip up a turn in minutes and send it away.

Take care and good luck
Jason Petho
 

Big Ivan

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2002
Messages
166
Reaction score
0
Location
State of Ohio
Personally I like scenarios.
Either PBEM or against the AI. I find somewhat that the AI doesn't tend to make the same errors in a replay of the same scenario giving that added unknown flair. However, I notice the AI usually takes a beating so I play around with the advantage settings to get a meaner AI opponent.

I'm not setup to do direct play so I can't really comment. However, I feel as Jason does in that taking a couple of hours out on my schedule is tough for me do do.

Big Ivan
 

Sir Richard

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Location
Lafayette, CO USA
Country
llUnited States
Disclaimer: I would like to start by saying that these games are played for entertainment, and (except where one's entertainment comes from harming others), there is no right and wrong way to be entertained.


As my stories in the AAR section indicate, I prefer to play a scenario with a touch of imagination to give it a bit of personal flavor.

Dynamic campaign games were fun for a while, but became a bit boring. The scenarios represent a far wider range of game types. Even if a game fits within a rather traditional game type, the scenario is set up specifically for the objectives in that scenario, making the game a bit more interesting.

However, playing scenarios against the AI has a significant drawback as well -- the computer does not respond well to a somewhat innovative strategy. I look at a scenario, look at what I am expected to do, and do something else.

(For example, the flanking maneuvers I reported in "First Blood Part I" and "The Battle of Mokra", and the pull-back and consolodate options I used in "The Road to Pabianice" and "Action Along the Bzura".)

So, I am thinking about getting into the PBEM gig (while still writing my stories), so that I can deal with intelligent responses to different strategies. Yet, PBEM has two significant drawbacks as well:

(1) I like to think of my units as people, not as counters on a board. This tends to put me at a significant disadvantage when I go up against players who will sacrifice a platoon with the same indifference as a chess player sacrificing a pawn. In other words, I lose a lot of games.

(2) The time limit adds a bit of absurdity to the game. In a 15-turn game, the player with the most victory points on turn 15 wins regardless of how fragile his position is and how much damage the enemy can inflict on turn 16. When I play a scenario, I will increase the number of turns so that I can see if a technical victory accomplished on the last turn turns into a defeat a few turns down the road. If it does, I consider this a defeat.

(Note: Readers can see examples of this in "First Blood, Part I" where I discuss the loss of an engineer platoon in one of these after-official-game-end turns, and in "Action Along the Bzura" where I did not know how strong the enemy force was that had retreated into the forest, so I played a few extra turns to find out.)

This problem is worsened for me through ladders and similar mechanisms that increase the emphasis on point scores.

My ideal game, I think, would be PBEM with a like-minded individual -- a person who begins a game by looking at the scenario description and objective hexes to determine his orders, then turns these features off and tries to come up with a way of executing his orders without undue loss of life. A player who would consider having a technical point victory at the end of the last turn significantly less important if one is in such a terrible tactical position that one would not be able to hold onto those gains.

I would then like to write a story about THAT game.
 
Last edited:

SoccerDJ

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Messages
552
Reaction score
6
Location
On your left flank..
Country
ll
Sir Richard said:
(1) I like to think of my units as people, not as counters on a board. This tends to put me at a significant disadvantage when I go up against players who will sacrifice a platoon with the same indifference as a chess player sacrificing a pawn. In other words, I lose a lot of games.

(2) The time limit adds a bit of absurdity to the game. In a 15-turn game, the player with the most victory points on turn 15 wins regardless of how fragile his position is and how much damage the enemy can inflict on turn 16. When I play a scenario, I will increase the number of turns so that I can see if a technical victory accomplished on the last turn turns into a defeat a few turns down the road. If it does, I consider this a defeat......
This problem is worsened for me through ladders and similar mechanisms that increase the emphasis on point scores.

My ideal game, I think, would be PBEM with a like-minded individual -- a person who begins a game by looking at the scenario description and objective hexes to determine his orders, then turns these features off and tries to come up with a way of executing his orders without undue loss of life. A player who would consider having a technical point victory at the end of the last turn significantly less important if one is in such a terrible tactical position that one would not be able to hold onto those gains.

I would then like to write a story about THAT game.
Sir Richard,

So your saying that you would want to play a game as if you were actually in the field commanding your troops and trying to perserve them becasue you still have the rest of the war to fight? Also you would'nt want to report the game on the ladder? I might be interested in a game like that. You would have to explain a little more thought. Would I need to do any writing for the AAR if you wrote one?
 

Sir Richard

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Location
Lafayette, CO USA
Country
llUnited States
SoccerDJ said:
Sir Richard,

So your saying that you would want to play a game as if you were actually in the field commanding your troops and trying to perserve them becasue you still have the rest of the war to fight? Also you would'nt want to report the game on the ladder? I might be interested in a game like that. You would have to explain a little more thought. Would I need to do any writing for the AAR if you wrote one?
Hmmmm . . .

Well, when I play a scenario, I do play as a field commander trying to accomplish my objectives while mindful of the fact that I have human beings under my command. My interest in preserving them rests not only in the fact that I will need them in future battles, but also in preserving their morale.

As far as reporting a game on a ladder, this doesn't really concern me either. My only objection here is that it aggrivates the point-hunting behavior that leads to absurd moves, particularly in the last turn of a game. I would have no objection if somebody wanted to post the score as it was on the official last game turn. The other ladderians, on the other hand, may not find it appropriate -- particularly given the fact that my style of play may inflate an opponent's score.

And, no, I would not ask an opponent in such a game to do any writing. Certainly, when I play the computer, it does not do any writing. That I know of. (spooky thought)

To "explain a little more" . . .

Have you ever played a game against the computer AI and wished the AI was just a little more intelligent? Or ever played against a human opponent and wished that the opponent was less interested in harvesting points on the last turn and more interested in the type of maneuvering that one might expect on a real battlefield?
 

Jason Petho

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2002
Messages
583
Reaction score
5
Location
Calgary, AB, Canada
Country
llCanada
Sir Richard

If you're seeking an opponent to engage in combat as you describe, drop me a line. I'd be happy to be the "bad guy" in your stories. ;)

Hope all is well
Take care and good luck
Jason Petho
 

SoccerDJ

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Messages
552
Reaction score
6
Location
On your left flank..
Country
ll
Sir Richard said:
Hmmmm . . .

Well, when I play a scenario, I do play as a field commander trying to accomplish my objectives while mindful of the fact that I have human beings under my command. My interest in preserving them rests not only in the fact that I will need them in future battles, but also in preserving their morale.

As far as reporting a game on a ladder, this doesn't really concern me either. My only objection here is that it aggrivates the point-hunting behavior that leads to absurd moves, particularly in the last turn of a game. I would have no objection if somebody wanted to post the score as it was on the official last game turn. The other ladderians, on the other hand, may not find it appropriate -- particularly given the fact that my style of play may inflate an opponent's score.

And, no, I would not ask an opponent in such a game to do any writing. Certainly, when I play the computer, it does not do any writing. That I know of. (spooky thought)

To "explain a little more" . . .

Have you ever played a game against the computer AI and wished the AI was just a little more intelligent? Or ever played against a human opponent and wished that the opponent was less interested in harvesting points on the last turn and more interested in the type of maneuvering that one might expect on a real battlefield?
I understand, thanks for the explination. I would be interested in playing a game like that if you would like. Just let me know. I think it would be neat to see an ARR written about a game that I participated in but with the cool personal touch that you add. So just let my know with email or PM.
 

Sir Richard

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Location
Lafayette, CO USA
Country
llUnited States
Okay, like I said, I need to play the 4 Winter War scenarios for the next story:

(1) The Long Walk Home
(2) White Death
(3) Frozen Hell
(4) Cracking the Line

I believe that the German army is about to transfer Mr. Schmidt to Finland to observe Soviet battle tactics. This means, I will need to play Finland against a Soviet opponent in order to fit these into the story.

Note: Scenarios (1) and (2) require some element of surprise, so they require an Allied player who is not familiar with the scenarios.

I have never played PBEM before, so I do not know what types of issues or problems we might run into. I have Talonsoft's East Front II version 1.03.
 

SoccerDJ

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Messages
552
Reaction score
6
Location
On your left flank..
Country
ll
Sir Richard said:
Okay, like I said, I need to play the 4 Winter War scenarios for the next story:

(1) The Long Walk Home
(2) White Death
(3) Frozen Hell
(4) Cracking the Line

I believe that the German army is about to transfer Mr. Schmidt to Finland to observe Soviet battle tactics. This means, I will need to play Finland against a Soviet opponent in order to fit these into the story.

Note: Scenarios (1) and (2) require some element of surprise, so they require an Allied player who is not familiar with the scenarios.

I have never played PBEM before, so I do not know what types of issues or problems we might run into. I have Talonsoft's East Front II version 1.03.
Well I've never played any of these scenarios except "The Long Walk Home" so I play any of the other three with you but would prefer to play "White Death". Just let me know and who has the first turn? Oh and what is your email address so I know its you when you send me and email, because I've been getting strange emails from people I don't know so I've just been deleatin them so it will be good to know you email ahead of time. You can PM if you want. Looking forward to the game
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
297
Reaction score
0
Location
Hewitt, New Jersey
Country
llUnited States
Scenarios by email. Never played directly online, but seems like it would be way too time constraining. I have played "team" emails, where two of us split up our allied units and two split up axis. Allied player A would make his move and send to Allied player B without ending the turn. Allied player B would make his moves, end the turn, and send to the axis where they'd do the same. Kind of fun.
 

SoccerDJ

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Messages
552
Reaction score
6
Location
On your left flank..
Country
ll
Gnrl Confusion said:
Scenarios by email. Never played directly online, but seems like it would be way too time constraining. I have played "team" emails, where two of us split up our allied units and two split up axis. Allied player A would make his move and send to Allied player B without ending the turn. Allied player B would make his moves, end the turn, and send to the axis where they'd do the same. Kind of fun.
I just finished playing a big 3v3 team EFII scenario and it was alot of fun. You just have to have teams that are enthusiastic and won't quit half way throught. Also it real helps to have a good turn rate. But I thought I was one of the best CS gaming experiences that I've ever had.:cheeky:
 
Top