Extreme Challenge Demonstration Game

[FlashfyreSP]

I almost hate to chime in on this, but I have to:

Vahauser, you are mostly correct when you say a Cat I should not play a Cat II; under standard circumstances, this is true. But, if one or the other agrees to try the opposite play method, good gaming can result. Also, I believe most players don't comfortably fit into either category completely; I am mostly a Category I player, in that I prefer the historical context for my forces and the use of specific tactics according to the nation I choose.  However, I also will play a hypothetical battle, with a-historical forces, to test my own grasp of tactics.

The trouble most of us here have in understanding the Category II category is, Why play a complex wargame like SPWAW if the main goal is just to win? You could do that so much easier with Chess, or Risk, or any other highly-abstract combat game. Using this game, with its myriad of units and subtle differences in weapons, makes your gaming experience more complicated, doesn't it? If you (the player) aren't interested in the history of the units, and the strengths and weaknesses of them to be exploited or overcome, then why expend the effort learning the intricacies of the gameplay if winning is paramount?

I don't say that as an attack on your (or your friends) playing style, but out of curiousity. I, too, like to win, but "winning" in the traditional sense doesn't really fit this game; many times, I have "beaten" an opponent, but my own losses were enough that any impartial observer would claim that the battle was a stalemate, or even a strategic loss for my side. Winning in this type of game can be more than just "getting the high score", or eliminating every unit on the opposing side; it can be an heroic effort to stem the advance of a superior force, or a successful defense of an objective, at the cost of most of your force.

I completely understand the syndrome, though; I had a high-school friend who played ASL much the same way. Always played the Germans (because they had the best equipment), always wanted to be on the advance (because the Germans were blitzkrieg machines), and always attacked straight on (because he didn't have a tactical bone in his body; he still ended up in the Air Force). Until the day I defeated his Tiger attack across a river with a couple of old British Churchills; the first Tiger crossed the bridge, I fired from a concealed Churchill, struck his tank with a critical hit and killed it. He blew a gasket, swept the counters from the gameboard, and refused to ever play ASL with me again. His "pre-conceived notions" about the Germans and how to fight them overrode any burgeoning tactical sense he may have had; he was truly a Category II player, because winning was the only reason he played the games. He went on to do MMRPGs and RTS games, and, last I heard, had moved up to FPS games because he "could win them easier".

I suppose the troubling part of your Challenge setup, Vahauser, is that you aren't really handicapping yourself as you might think. You use the Germans, why? Not because they are a weaker army overall, which would require extreme care in handling to achieve the same results. Not because they have less choices in equipment, requiring use of obsolete gear through much of the campaign. And certainly not because they have negative National Characteristics, which they don't. But because the AI can't perform "German tactics". It can't perform US tactics, either, so why not play as the US? Nor can it perform accurate British tactics; yet you don't play as the British.

The Challenge would be a better showcase if it could be used with any nation's forces, not just the Germans.

[vahauser]

Flashfyre,

I appreciate your input.

Alas, I don't think I have the ability to give you the insights you desire regarding the workings of the Cat2 mind as it pertains to SPWAW. I've had this dialogue many times before, and never with a satisfactory result. Every time I've tried to explain, the result has been anger and frustration. Seems to just make the situation worse and not better. With that caveat, are you sure you want me to try to explain?

Regarding my German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge.
I'm a Cat2 player (as ruthlessly dedicated to winning SPWAW games above all other considerations as you are ever likely to meet).
[Special Note: I am only talking SPWAW here. I real life I am a vegetarian, a left-wing liberal (not joking), a pacifist (following the teachings of Ghandi and Martin Luther King), and a believer in the saying "make love not war". Indeed, many of my friends call me their token hippie. Perhaps SPWAW gives me an outlet for whatever pent-up competitive aggressions I have inside me so I don't release them out into the real world--but that is a question for the psychologists. . .]
Anyway, here is my point. My German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge was developed by Cat2 players (me and my friends) specifically to make it as challenging as possible. All I can do is keep repeating what I have said several times before on this, and other threads. Cat2 players use every trick and every exploit available. And if Cat2 players find this campaign extremely challenging, then you can take it to the bank that it IS extremely challenging.
Is it impossibly challenging? No. Nobody I know would play it if it were impossibly challenging. But if on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is impossible, then this campaign format is an 8 or 9 for sure (8 if you are an expert Cat2 player, 9 if you are not, and perhaps a 10 if you aren't a skilled veteran player of SPWAW).
Knowing now what Riun T and Erwin helped give me insight to yesterday morning, I think Cat1 players will hate this campaign format. Alas. That truly makes me sad because I had hoped that any SPWAW player (who enjoys serious challenges) could get enjoyment out of the campaign.

I say that because, as far as I know, it is the only campaign format in existence that can truly give comparable scores from any players wherever they are. Meaning that you could run a tournament and the scores would be valid for all participants.

Also, as far as I know, it is the only campaign format in existence that incorporates build points between battles as the primary generator of total campaign score. I personally think this is the most revolutionary and cool aspect of the entire campaign format. And now I realize that it is only available to half (or less) of the SPWAW gaming community.

So, yes, I am sad.

[Riun T]

Whats really Truely SAD,,,,is that your continually nameing and catigorizing and making referances to everyone on here to only two TYPES, I've got a group of friends of approximately the same size as yours {0nly 4 because u can play 4 participant battles LAN on the generator} and WE all set no more rules of play than to all use the defaults for the settings on except C&C, we each took a side of the map and all pushed toward the centre,,, U should HAVE seen some of the forces my buddies came up with,  One Greg suggested AAALLLLL italian Alpinei squads skying across the bauld grass plains as our map, SCott took as many warframme40's with AALL the flamerockets, as he could buy with default WWII campaign start of 1st battle core purchase points for the germans, Vange took ALLL US Army A&P squads and I took as many british MAM har II's with the 6pounder as I could buy,,,,,,,, we all rushed and defended an octagon of end of battle victory hexes in the exact middle, who do u think WON??? and how hilarious was the fight????? I"M definately not type one all the time and think its ALL in what the partisipants agree to and what your in the MOOD for and excuse us for not being so predictable or catigorizable.
I usually try to play some simularity to a condition of reality in the sence that i may not use a unit of the same nationality in my core,but do make the unit similar to its regular functionality, and don't put any charicteristics or QUALITIES above what can be expected for that years technoligy,and the nation I've selected from. In short I rarely do hypathetical "holy cow man theyd NEVER have had that on the field" scenarios but I'm also not above useing some "WHAT IF" when the battle merrits it. RT

[Riun T]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Flashfyre,

I appreciate your input.

Alas, I don't think I have the ability to give you the insights you desire regarding the workings of the Cat2 mind as it pertains to SPWAW. I've had this dialogue many times before, and never with a satisfactory result. Every time I've tried to explain, the result has been anger and frustration. Seems to just make the situation worse and not better. With that caveat, are you sure you want me to try to explain?

Regarding my German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge.
I'm a Cat2 player (as ruthlessly dedicated to winning SPWAW games above all other considerations as you are ever likely to meet). [Special Note: I am only talking SPWAW here. I real life I am a vegetarian, a left-wing liberal (not joking), a pacifist (following the teachings of Ghandi and Martin Luther King), and a believer in the saying "make love not war". Indeed, many of my friends call me their token hippie. Perhaps SPWAW gives me an outlet for whatever pent-up competitive aggressions I have inside me so I don't release them out into the real world--but that is a question for the psychologists. . .]
Anyway, here is my point. My German Long Campaign Extreme Challenge was developed by Cat2 players (me and my friends) specifically to make it as challenging as possible. All I can do is keep repeating what I have said several times before on this, and other threads. Cat2 players use every trick and every exploit available. And if Cat2 players find this campaign extremely challenging, then you can take it to the bank that it IS extremely challenging. Is it impossibly challenging? No. Nobody I know would play it if it were impossibly challenging. But if on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is impossible, then this campaign format is an 8 or 9 for sure (8 if you are an expert Cat2 player, 9 if you are not, and perhaps a 10 if you aren't a skilled veteran player of SPWAW).
Knowing now what Riun T and Erwin helped give me insight to yesterday morning, I think Cat1 players will hate this campaign format. Alas. That truly makes me sad because I had hoped that any SPWAW player (who enjoys serious challenges) could get enjoyment out of the campaign.

I say that because, as far as I know, it is the only campaign format in existence that can truly give comparable scores from any players wherever they are. Meaning that you could run a tournament and the scores would be valid for all participants.

Also, as far as I know, it is the only campaign format in existence that incorporates build points between battles as the primary generator of total campaign score. I personally think this is the most revolutionary and cool aspect of the entire campaign format. And now I realize that it is only available to half (or less) of the SPWAW gaming community.

So, yes, I am sad.

your implying that catigory 1 players can't be as cutthroat and schemeing and dastardly coniving??? you don't Know SPIT about What THIS PLAYER WILL DO TO WIN!! sorry getting Kibitzy again but u've SHOWN US ONE BATTLE EXAMPLE, AND told us 60 times how challenging it is,,, and yet the #'s your starting with definately don't make you the underdog from the start???? and we still have to guess what your final campaign score would be later in the campaign,IF and ONLY if your cutthroatedness got you DV"S so FUGGEN prove it to us SONNY[8|] P.s. once the enemy go threw enough battles to equal your experience base the DV's will get further and further away.

[h_h_lightcap]

Catagory I, CatagoryII, BAHHH!!!
Quit with all the Foreplay and get down to the SEX!!!!
PBEM PBEM PBEM!!!! Vahauser vs RuinT----and Vahauser if you lose to a "CatagoryI" player then you should be REALLY embarrassed--i guess.......Ruin and if you lose to an ahistorical "catagory II" then, well, gasp----


HH

[Alby]

PBEM... PBEM... PBEM.....
listen to that crowd!!!!!!!
[X(]

[azraelck]

Riun, I believe the challenge is not suppossed to come from the limits set on the core, but the limits set on rebuilding and upgrading. A limited core doesn't matte, as more eloquently noted by Gunny, because the AI's force is based upon the value of your own. So having 3 companies of Tigers backing 3 companies of SS will have the same relative strength to face as if you had 1 section of Panzer IIs and a lone Platoon of infantry. Of course, in a lnog campaign, anything less than a reinforced company, means that it takes forever to reach all the hexes, and some units may not even see combat at all through several battles. That's why I don't play a lnog campaign without a much larger core; it's not as fun to be running platoons around trying to find something to shoot.

My problem with Va is not his campaign rules. It's him trying to force every player into two distinct and inflexible categories. One cares only about winning, one cares only about the history. That is insulting and demeaning to those who fit in neither category; as it implies we are not players, but just pond scum who happen to float on the lake of SPWaW. It's also completely ignoring the versatility and variety that the SPWaW engine offers, while leads to the diverse players, with entirely different mindsets, reasons for playing, and style of play.

I also don't believe his post about a "category I" player not being able to play PBEM with a "category II" player. That's just a simple cop-out, saying he doesn't want to play PBEM, because he's afraid he'll lose. So long as everything is agreed upon before the match starts; then no player has a right to complain about anything; save if they noted numerous messages noting security issues. I've played PBEM in other games with an incredibly diverse number of players, with entirely differing play styles and strategies. While not a one of those games is of the scale of SPWaW ; it remains the same; all of us had fun, and no one complained. Closest was when one computer would go down, then that player who held up the game would complain about themselves holding up the game. So, from experience with PBEM, his entire thoughts on that is without basis in reality, and is only a rudimentary defense, to excuse himself from accepting a challenge from another player. Since we're all "Category" whatever players, and not of "his" kind, that excuse will "work".

I guess it doesn't matter. After all, I'm just "kibitzing"; my opinion and thoughts and experiences are irrelevant. If Va wants to pidgeon hole everyone into two kinds, ignoring every fact he can; and then hide behind a cheap excuse that "his" kind doesn't play well with "that other kind" when challenged; go ahead. I've said all I will on the matter, as if he'd actually read any of it to begin with anyways.   

[vahauser]

Riun T,

I accept your challenge to play a PBEM game against me.

PBEM vahauser vs. Riun T

Let's get this PBEM game started, Riun T.
I am ready.
Tell me your starting conditions.
I'm willing to let you choose the year and the map and which country you want to play and whether you want to be Player1 or Player2.
What year do you want?
What nation do you want?
What map do you want?
Do you want to be Player1 or Player2?
Let's go.





azraelck,

You want a piece of me, too? Oh, I forgot. You don't play PBEM at all. Which is a shame because I'd love to give you an opportunity to teach me a serious SPWAW lesson.

[Riun T]

I still wanna see the conclusion of your extreme campaign challenge and then maybe I'll consider your challenge valid,,, { in honesty I'd like u to devulge more of those intricate play secrets like smoke shields and heavy armour when the enemy ain't got it and don't think you'd like the victory conditions}he he am I still worthy of playing you?? [:'(]

[azraelck]

I think my email is in my profile, but incase it isn't; azrael4h@yahoo.com. Given Yahoo's less than stellar record with attachments; I may have to pop up with my GMail. [:-]

[vahauser]

Riun T,
 
I thought you challenged me to a PBEM game.
I accepted your challenge.
Are you saying that you didn't challenge me?
 
 
 
azraelck,
 
I'll make the same offer to you that I made to Riun T.  You can choose the year.  You can choose which nation you want.  You can choose the map.  You can choose whether you want to be Player1 or Player2.  We can negotiate the other conditions after you make your choices.  I am ready right now.

[Riun T]

GOOD afternoon,fellow Forum MUCKLICKERS, VA,the rest of the guys have been PMing me all week threw this silly thing and I feel that we've both probably been letting THEM forecast and insite a few course feelings.
On reviewing ALLL the posts that I've sent,quoted, and screenshot, I have done nothing,said nothing,and pointed out nothing but actual physical indescrepincies with the games abilitys,{or lack there of}and your assumption that the qualities settings coupled with the "rarity off ", and historical ratings off, charicteristis ON,AI advantage ON and picking the VERY powerfulest nation for beginning of a CAMPAIGN,and doing one battle out of a whole campaign,{all the while spouting how cool and great the system is and how stupid or singleminded we are because we are critical of its start and anal about the starting #'s which AZ and I both posted example beginning battles we did that had historic rates,much less experience,morale,and on my russian outnumbered severly,and I still managed a draw trying an EXIT victory conditions finish,,,was your example an EXIT TYPE FINISH??? so excuse me and others like AZ  and GUNNY for pointing this, and POLISH capabilities in your example out}I can show u,[because I keep the saves] or play u, because I've done nothing but point out the odvious, and havn't taken any of this more seriously than the game it is  I'll come up with a PBEM for u and me to play when u go back and answer all the posts in reply to many questions that I hope you can use the quote and BOLD for and actually not tell us "free to ask any questions" and mean it.PS. I think since AZ pushed his E-mail adress he'd like the first match. BUT I'll be here and workin so keep me posted aswell cause sure I'll play ya buddy,Its only a game!! 

[Riun T]

ORIGINAL: h_h_lightcap

Catagory I, CatagoryII, BAHHH!!!
Quit with all the Foreplay and get down to the SEX!!!!
PBEM PBEM PBEM!!!! Vahauser vs RuinT----and Vahauser if you lose to a "CatagoryI" player then you should be REALLY embarrassed--i guess.......Ruin and if you lose to an ahistorical "catagory II" then, well, gasp----


HH

h-h-lightcap,I"M nota catigory I player most of the time, LOOK at what my core posting to gunny in "heres the thing about long campaigns" for my marine core garagesale unhistorical core and sucesses.

[vahauser]

Riun T,

Finally, after a week of trying to figure out what in the world you were talking about, I realize what you are going on and on about.

A Long Campaign will NEVER generate an "Exit" type game. 

So, you are talking about something that CANNOT happen. 

The ONLY two kinds of victory hexes that a Long Campaign game will generate are end-of-battle and points-per-turn. 

All of the other kinds of victory hexes are possible only in a human-designed (using the SPWAW editor) scenario.

I am very surprised that you did not know this.  Why did you not already know this? 




azraelck,

I am eager to get our PBEM game started.  I am ready right now.  Let's go. I'm waiting for your response to my previous post.

[Riun T]

since your on why don't you catch up on others posts like I did with h-h-lightcap?,and look at the experience# that the beginning battles russians in my earlier posts had to contend with or how outnumbered the finns had me?? or ANSWER in AZ'es earlier posts asking with our examples of core force numbers of QUALITY and firepower limited formations weren't a little more challenging??u still didn't tell me why in your example with the polish fight, that u stacked so much laterdated availablity{rarity off}pzrMkIVc's against a few light AC's and tanks and didn't play it too withdrawing???? my russian WWII long campaign gave me a delay and I got enough points from the units that I got off the field to keep what should have been a defeat from lost/destoryed units of mine's points was called mearly a draw,,, I can also show u where I only got just over 400 points fore "MY fix all that didn't even fix enough of my core to have 60% of my core left to fight the next battle. but u can see if u'll settle down enough to let me post further battles from the "CAMPAIGN that my formate got me threw the WHOLE campaign,WHICH HAVE SAVED AND WAS originally compareing FOR gunnies benifit to show that a little diversity of play of even a historical formations aspects of OOB's QUALITIES, chariteristics,and maybe even some downfalls your expecting us to believe without showing us the whole thing buddy   

[FlashfyreSP]

After re-reading the Extreme Challenge thread, and these other collateral ones, I dawned on me what the problem might be: The interpretation that this Challenge campaign is for everyone. Let me try to explain what I see as the problem.

This campaign system is designed to allow two human players to compare how they play the campaign, without actually facing each other. In other words, Player A plays this campaign against the AI, as does Player B, and when both are done, they compare End Results to see who is the better player. The restrictions imposed are designed to "level" the field not for the AI, but for the individual players. And this system is best used in a tournament-style challenge, where 2 or more human players wish to know how they rank against each other as "campaign players", not PBEM players.

Unfortunately, most players out here don't really care how they "stack up" against another human when it comes to playing against the AI; they want to know who's better at H2H meetings, with no AI involved. And this campaign does not do that; result, most players don't see it as a challenge for the player against the AI.

A true Challenge Campaign, against the AI, without involving other players, would require the use of the following settings:

AI Advantage - ON
AI Level - 200
Reduced Squads - ON
Reduced Ammo - ON
Weapon Breakdowns - ON
Vehicle Breakdowns - ON
Mines - ON
Command & Control - ON
Use the Hardx2 setting for all battles
Select one of the 6 major nations for your HQ, but then only buy allied equipment (if British, only buy Indian, for example)
Set Spotting to 70% for Player 1, 100% for Player 2
Use Historic Ratings as designed

There may be some other settings that would make the Challenge more challenging to veteran players, but these are most of the important ones.

[vahauser]

Flashfyre,
 
While you are here.  I've just finished some experimentation with the Enhanced FV.1 Long Campaign and there is a problem with the Soviets.  When playing the Soviets in an Enhanced FV.1 Long Campaign, they always deploy on the west side of the map and the Germans deploy on the east side of the map.  I think this is backwards.  Is there a way to fix this?

[Riun T]

excellant post Flash, I'm just trying to compare the same kind of thing and stating that the WHOLE campaign WOULD BE  MMMOOORRREEE challanging if shown in its making{per battle}if we can see more evolution of your core force progress.   

[vahauser]

Riun T,
 
Everything you have posted is based on Historical Ratings ON.  Fine.  Historical Ratings ON.  I agree with everything you have said about Historical Ratings ON.  Okay? 
 
I just happen to think that the Historical Ratings are pretty much all incorrect and non-historical and so I don't like to use Historical Ratings ON, because I think the ratings are wrong and that they are not historical.  Okay? 
 
But if you want to play with Historical Ratings ON in your solitaire game, then that is fine with me.
 
But I refuse to play with Historical Ratings ON in a PBEM game unless I am forced to (such as when playing Depot ACL PBEM games).
 
Now can we play our PBEM game?  I am ready to play our PBEM game right now.  Let's go.

[Alby]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Flashfyre,

While you are here. I've just finished some experimentation with the Enhanced FV.1 Long Campaign and there is a problem with the Soviets. When playing the Soviets in an Enhanced FV.1 Long Campaign, they always deploy on the west side of the map and the Germans deploy on the east side of the map. I think this is backwards. Is there a way to fix this?

Enhanced has nothing to do with which side of the map you get.
it is either a bug in the long campaign code, or because you are player 1 as Soviets.
same thing happens without Enhanced too.