The Best Version for Solo Players

[KG Erwin]

The silent majority of SPWaW players play solo vs the AI --this has been proven . Speaking up for those of us in the silent majority: Mike is working on some new tweaks, but I can attest that the beta version of 8.5 is looking really good. You guys will be very pleased with the next patch. Time frame for release is unknown.

Keep the faith, my friends. All good things require patience. [;)]

[Puukkoo]

That's good to hear. It can't but improve.

I noticed one day while playing SPWW2 that the AI tends to select different attack route if it faces too angry reception committee at one location. This sounds brighter than it really is, for usually the AI gets bogged down even more.

[Alby]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

The silent majority of SPWaW players play solo vs the AI --this has been proven . Speaking up for those of us in the silent majority: Mike is working on some new tweaks, but I can attest that the beta version of 8.5 is looking really good. You guys will be very pleased with the next patch. Time frame for release is unknown.

Keep the faith, my friends. All good things require patience. [;)]

8.5 along with Depot Multi Mod 2 is great for long campaigns...or pbem
[:D]

[VikingNo2]

If its silent how has it been proven[&:] And so what if it is a majority [&:]

[Puukkoo]

ORIGINAL: VikingNo2

If its silent how has it been proven[&:] And so what if it is a majority [&:]

You don't have to consult exact sources while stating it that way. [:D]I believe that the long campaign is what people play in SPWAW for the most. No one has made yet made a poll about gaming customs.

[Goblin]

Actually, Glenn did do a poll awhile back about it, and more people voted for AI play than email play. This is what he is referencing.

Glenn, what scares me is the KG curse... Whenever you claim You guys will be very pleased with the next patch, things don't go well...[;)][:D]


Goblin

[Alby]

ORIGINAL: Goblin

Actually, Glenn did do a poll awhile back about it, and more people voted for AI play than email play. This is what he is referencing.

Glenn, what scares me is the KG curse... Whenever you claim You guys will be very pleased with the next patch, things don't go well...[;)][:D]


Goblin

I been testing it too...so far so good...the tank assualting problem is gone
as is snipers being able to assualt tanks with sniper rifles...LOL
I feel/hope more will implemented in a further build.

[KG Erwin]

ORIGINAL: Goblin

Actually, Glenn did do a poll awhile back about it, and more people voted for AI play than email play. This is what he is referencing.

Glenn, what scares me is the KG curse... Whenever you claim You guys will be very pleased with the next patch, things don't go well...[;)][:D]


Goblin

Well, in the past, the "KG curse" has come back to bite me on the butt, without a doubt. This time around, though, NO OOB changes are involved. My input is restricted to testing only. This is Mike Wood's baby -- Alby and I are just involved to give feedback and offer encouragement.

So, I'm happy with sitting back, enjoying the show, and once in a while shouting "OOH-RAH"! [:D]

BTW,

[Goblin]

I believe I will!

[ravinhood]

I've always known solo play was more popular than mp for just about all games for quite a long time. (pats self on back). (now runs and hides from the mp groupies) haha

[VikingNo2]

Ok I still don't get it, ofcourse more players play solo, thats how you have to learn plus many just prefer it. Whats the point of the thread? What changes are being made?

I play the long campaign, are they going to allow for expanding the core ?

[Puukkoo]

400 units is not enough for you? Setting the battle points from the preferences screen allows you to buy more units if those 6000 points meet nobody's requirements.

[FlashfyreSP]

I think VikingNo2 is refering to increasing your core force during the campaign, by adding extra formations. The SPWW2 and SPMBT games allow you to do this, IIRC.

[Puukkoo]

I see.

[KNomad]

What I'd like to see is the AI to have the ability to manage small forces. I like to play with about 1000 points for the core (1 infantry company + 1 AFV platoon) and all I ever seem to draw for missions is Delays. Luck of the draw can't be that consistently bad, there has to be a reason. I'm guessing that the only way AI can get enough points for purchase is to take Advances, as that allows her what, 1500 points?

[Puukkoo]

If AI used infiltrators and other nasty surprises it could endear me to play the long campaign again.

[cadmus]

KG/Alby ...

Glad to hear your enthusiasm for 8.5. What does it do with regard to spotting? 8.4 feels like it's virtually impossible to spot enemy infantry until you're in the adjacent hex and they've opened fire on you, and, usually, caused heavy casualties. I don't want it to be too easy but now it seems unrealistically difficult.

[Alby]

ORIGINAL: xeno

KG/Alby ...

Glad to hear your enthusiasm for 8.5. What does it do with regard to spotting? 8.4 feels like it's virtually impossible to spot enemy infantry until you're in the adjacent hex and they've opened fire on you, and, usually, caused heavy casualties. I don't want it to be too easy but now it seems unrealistically difficult.

actually the spotting was INCREASED in 8.4
It made it next to impossible for infrantry to move next to a tank from any direction..
what do you have your spotting preferences set to?

[KG Erwin]

ORIGINAL: Alby

ORIGINAL: xeno

KG/Alby ...

Glad to hear your enthusiasm for 8.5. What does it do with regard to spotting? 8.4 feels like it's virtually impossible to spot enemy infantry until you're in the adjacent hex and they've opened fire on you, and, usually, caused heavy casualties. I don't want it to be too easy but now it seems unrealistically difficult.

actually the spotting was INCREASED in 8.4
It made it next to impossible for infrantry to move next to a tank from any direction..
what do you have your spotting preferences set to?

Yes, realistically speaking, in 8.5 the tendency to spot infantry has been reduced. The big bugaboo was the ability of snipers to close-assault tanks -- they can NO longer do this.

You gotta remember that tank-hunter infantry teams were meant to do just that -- this is why it is so essential to have covering infantry for advancing armor. Even without the close-assault teams, you still have to face hidden ATRs/bazookas and ATGs. Without the supporting infantry, the tanks are just half-blind armored elephants. Many of us have had to learn this simple common-sense tactical lesson the hard way. [8|]

[KG Erwin]

Now, back to my original point: the OOBs in the 8.0 series were meant to be compatible (as best we could manage) for existing scenarios and the MCs, which are by default meant for solo play.

Many PBEM players prefer Panzer Leo's H2H, which was designed specifically for human vs human play. I think it's great, because no OOB set can really be a be-all and end-all. My philosophy for OOB design has always been that at least TWO separate OOB sets needed to be constructed -- one with the AI formations for solo play, and the other for PBEM play, with additional choices in units/formations without regard to AI selection. The official Matrix OOB teams opted for a middle ground, which, to my mind, was unsatisfactory for both needs. Subsequent individual revisions have attempted to reconcile these differences, but , as of yet, no definitive "vs AI" as opposed to "vs human" OOB sets have been issued, except for H2H.

However, I would venture to say that the final 8.3 Matrix OOBs were leaning in favor of solo players. Michael's subsequent tweaks to the game engine were/are also geared with this in mind.

Thus, the old complaints about impenetrable smoke and such need to be construed within the context of giving the dumb AI any advantage it can get -- I'm sorry if it's unrealistic, but it does help for a more challenging game.