Which wargame has done it best?

[Michael T]

VASL is a pain IMO. I would much rather a FTF opponent.

For me the PC is for purpose built PC games. Vassal is just plain painful. Trying to debate a rule interpretation via emails is horrible.

But I believe any board game could be programmed. Why not?

It's just code.

The limit is time needed to build a PC version of ASL versus the payoff at the end. I would say that the only reason ASL has not been coded (apart from copyright) is that the cost to create it would not be recouped as it is so complex.

But I live in hope. Apparently Tigers on the Hunt is very close to ASL. Though I haven't tried it myself since it has no multiplayer capacity apart from hotseat.

[wodin]

PC ASL....hmm you never know😉

[MrsWargamer]

Sometimes that which is done in a board game must be done in the board game due to the reality of physicality.

A ? counter in ASL is required, otherwise you can see what's under it. In ASL if you move a unit at all, and it might trigger a response from the opponent, you must then wait for the opponent to respond. Tedius as hell of course.

It works for a board game, and if the opponent is sitting there sipping a beer while you take your actions, there is no need for concern "Nope, no reaction, next move". It's simple.

The trick for a computer game, is to have an AI capable of making as decent a choice as a human opponent. Will it react the the ? counter logically? If I move a unit and it looks like a sucker move, does the AI realize it?

ASL can be a nuisance managing all the stacks of counters. A computer game doesn't require tweezers and good hand skills. But no one wants to play a good game against an AI that's a total moron. "Oh wow, I beat the moron..... again..... how satisfying." Just because the AI never argues with you about the rules, doesn't make it a better option.

Some board games master some designs so much better than computer wargames, and I'm left to wonder "why haven't the computer designs at least done it as well as the board games?" In Advanced Third Reich, sub warfare in the Atlantic is abstracted. There's no obvious subs to see to cherry pick. So far, all of the grand strategy designs I have seen, make a complete mess out of simulating the war in the Atlantic. Why can't they at least equal A3R?

Computer wargames deal with FOW nicely. You don't see what you wouldn't know about. I've played double blind wargames before. Not impossible, but sure not easy once you get past 20 units. Computers certainly rule here nicely.

WEGO is the only really cool method of turn use I've seen over the years which I wish was used more often. Our computers are so much more powerful than we wargamers require in most cases. I wish it was used more often. I've seen some computer wargames which would have been massively better if done with WEGO. Battle Academy done as WEGO would be incredible. Panzer Corps as WEGO would totally rock. But as IGOUGO they are vulnerable to gamey tactics which are rarely simulations of realistic combat.

I don't know if something like Gary's designs can be WEGO, sooo many units to move. But it seems like some of our monsters manage it.

[sPzAbt653]

In Advanced Third Reich, sub warfare in the Atlantic is abstracted. There's no obvious subs to see to cherry pick. So far, all of the grand strategy designs I have seen, make a complete mess out of simulating the war in the Atlantic. Why can't they at least equal A3R?

Exactly ! And 3R even had Naval Interception, something I have not seen since then ! Even Global War [SPI 1975] had a Naval and Convoy System that worked, and it was simple! The three most recent Grand Strategy games I have purchased make me wonder what they were thinking because the Naval Models, sorry to say, are nonsense. At least one of them figured out how to make subs go under the water !!

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

The three most recent Grand Strategy games I have purchased make me wonder what they were thinking because the Naval Models, sorry to say, are nonsense. At least one of them figured out how to make subs go under the water !!

I know that one: Battle Isle 3

[asl3d]

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer
...
ASL can be a nuisance managing all the stacks of counters. A computer game doesn't require tweezers and good hand skills. But no one wants to play a good game against an AI that's a total moron. "Oh wow, I beat the moron..... again..... how satisfying." Just because the AI never argues with you about the rules, doesn't make it a better option.
...

To win a moron player, first this player has to be Intelligent.

Computers are not intelligent machines, although the solver that controls their style of play is mistakenly called AI. It's Artificial, yes, but not Intelligent. They are very good and fast calculating, but they are not intelligents, at least for now ...

Before the friends who are dedicated to programming computers get angry, I must specify my words. Humans design algorithms that simulate human intelligence, and this is very complex and difficult. So, how much more refined and complete the set of algorithms that govern a "seemingly" intelligent behavior, more intelligent the game style of the AI ​​will appear.

You have a testing ground in Heroes of Stalingrad. Play some of the scenarios of the "Heroes and Leaders mod" and tell me if the AI ​​is moron .....

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

The trick for a computer game, is to have an AI capable of making as decent a choice as a human opponent. Will it react the the ? counter logically? If I move a unit and it looks like a sucker move, does the AI realize it?

Totally not! It moves stack of doom to crush my lone scout while totally ignoring nearby stack.

[asl3d]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

VASL is a pain IMO. I would much rather a FTF opponent.

For me the PC is for purpose built PC games. Vassal is just plain painful. Trying to debate a rule interpretation via emails is horrible.

I have never played VASL, but reading what you say I imagine the worst.

I believe that Tigers on the Hunt and Heroes of Stalingrad are an admirable attempt to create a computerized version of ASL. Neither of the two games are an exact replica of ASL, but I have to admit that their designers have done a very worthy job.

But, to arrive at a good product always requires multiple intermediate attempts that come closer and closer to excellence. There's always a great work of multiple human teams. Here we will not have an exception.

For example, in Heroes of Stalingrad the phase’s system is ignored within a game turn. I am sure that many friends, who love ASL, will see this decision as an unforgivable sin.

However, I think that the decision to replace the phases with the impulses is an advance. I don't want to say that the phases system doesn't work, especially after more than 40 years of existence. But, despite this overwhelming fact, I still think that it is an unnatural mechanics, that moves away from the perception of how to develop a real combat with small tactical units. That's, it works, yes, but it isn't credible.

TotH and HoS simplify ASL, sometimes insolently, but not to the point of causing a catastrophe in the game system, and much less in the concept of the game.

I'm delighted with Heroes of Stalingrad, and that's why I voted Heroes of Stalingrad in this thread.

[RangerJoe]

Totally not! It moves stack of doom to crush my lone scout while totally ignoring nearby stack.

That is because, when properly used, the Scout is much more deadly.

[Zovs]

VASL is really not that bad at all, in fact is nearly identical to playing face to face when you use a voice program like Skype or Zoom. It has been what has sustained the ASL community for 20 years.

There will be no ASL PC game unless it was done and created by MMP the copyright holders of all things ASL.

I have seen Tigers on the Hunt and is is definitely NOT ASL.

I have played ASL for over 30 years, been to quite a few tournaments and to date only VASL is close as a supplement and aide.

If you doubt my assertion then you don’t understand the depths and complexities of chapter A-D let alone E, F and G.

ASL is a dynamic two person multi turn two player interactive war game.

No computer as of today has the logic and reasoning required to play the game. Some humans don’t even qualify, it takes one part OCD, one part geek, one part war gamer and two parts crazy, that is not even to master the game. But it’s fun as heck with two blokes.

[Michael T]

I have played SL/ASL since 1976, So I think I know something about it.

I think maybe you are confusing programing AI to play ASL with a PC ASL for two humans to play. That is what I desire, a PC ASL or a very close clone that allows to humans to play online. I have no interest in a ASL AI opponent.

I know the ASL rules. The problem is when playing is that not many people do know the rules. So you spend most of the time looking up rules to verify an action or rule an action illegal, rather than playing the game. This limits the ASL appeal to many potential players.

That is where the PC can help. It is programmed to know the rules. So the player is left with actions he can perform and the option to perform illegal ones is simply not available. So the players focus on playing, not rules lawyering.

And wow, the FOW advantages of the PC version would be awesome.

I think ultimately it will happen. Perhaps even a PC version of an ASL like game will emerge that may well even surpass the original ASL. And then the old paper version will gather dust on the bookcase like most of my other surviving boardgames.

[RangerJoe]

I have never played Advanced Squad Leader but I have played Squad Leader. Yes, it get complex and I agree that computerizing it would for a multiplayer game would make it more playable. Have adecent AI so players could learn the game.

As far as this goes:

If you doubt my assertion then you don’t understand the depths and complexities of chapter A-D let alone E, F and G.
.
.
.
No computer as of today has the logic and reasoning required to play the game. Some humans don’t even qualify, it takes one part OCD, one part geek, one part war gamer and two parts crazy, that is not even to master the game. . . .

I find those insulting. The first one, if they do not agree with what you are stating then they don't understand it? Maybe you find it difficult but maybe others do not. The second one indicates that in order to play decently one must be mentally ill. I would never want to have to be mentally ill just to play a game.

[sPzAbt653]

I was a big fan of Panzer Blitz and Panzer Leader, along with Kampfgruppe and Battlegroup [C64!], and while I know Squad Leader was a step above those I never got into it. But nobody has mentioned Campaign Series yet, and I thought that game had a good reputation and was similar in scale to PB and PL. It had been limited to the Middle East and it is tactical, so that might keep it away from a nomination here, but recently it is moving into Vietnam and WWII.

So nobody thinks the Campaign Series is good enough to be best ?

[Michael T]

Another thing about ASL is the errata. People may not realize you cannot actually buy an ASL rulebook that is up to date. So even to make sure you have the most up to date rules is an issue. You have to sift through literally dozens of pages of errata and spend hours and hours updating your rulebook. So you come across some guy and he says 'but rule so an so says this', but you respond 'well errata bla bla bla says this'. He says 'I was not even aware of that... these rules are brand new'.

The current rulebook is 2nd Edition. They (MMP) have more than enough material for a 3rd Edition. But I don't think a 3rd Edition is even on their radar.

[Zovs]

Just some notes:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I think maybe you are confusing programing AI to play ASL with a PC ASL for two humans to play. That is what I desire, a PC ASL or a very close clone that allows to humans to play online. I have no interest in a ASL AI opponent.

I know the ASL rules. The problem is when playing is that not many people do know the rules. So you spend most of the time looking up rules to verify an action or rule an action illegal, rather than playing the game. This limits the ASL appeal to many potential players.

That is where the PC can help. It is programmed to know the rules. So the player is left with actions he can perform and the option to perform illegal ones is simply not available. So the players focus on playing, not rules lawyering.

And wow, the FOW advantages of the PC version would be awesome.

I think ultimately it will happen. Perhaps even a PC version of an ASL like game will emerge that may well even surpass the original ASL. And then the old paper version will gather dust on the bookcase like most of my other surviving boardgames.

Yes on programming the AI. You may not like VASL but I would venture 95% of the ASL community uses VASL and that is just the way its been for over 20 years.

Again, I know that no ASL PC version will be available unless it's produced by the copyright holders, which is MMP (Multi-Man Publications).

No one "knows" the ASL rules perfectly, that is why there is so much back and forth banter when playing ASL, its part of the experience of the game.

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

I find those insulting. The first one, if they do not agree with what you are stating then they don't understand it? The second one indicates that in order to play decently one must be mentally ill. I would never want to have to be mentally ill just to play a game.

I think a lot of younger folks get insulted way too easy, they don't have any thick skin and take themselves too serious. Sometimes you just have to chill and roll with the punches and not take things so serious and get all insulted so easily.

You must have never heard of "tongue and check". I never said anything about being mentally ill. No just being crazy as in nuts. Most normal folks don't sit around a few geometric boards pushing cardboard counters around and saying "any prep?" and hearing "yeah, I'll take a 6 down 2 shot on those guys there from these guys". Most of the world will think we are all nuts, crazy going off the rails lol.

Seriously how many normal folks sit around playing computer war games for hours, the rest of the world will say we are nuts.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Another thing about ASL is the errata. People may not realize you cannot actually buy an ASL rulebook that is up to date. So even to make sure you have the most up to date rules is an issue. You have to sift through literally dozens of pages of errata and spend hours and hours updating your rulebook. So you come across some guy and he says 'but rule so an so says this', but you respond 'well errata bla bla bla says this'. He says 'I was not even aware of that... these rules are brand new'.

The current rulebook is 2nd Edition. They (MMP) have more than enough material for a 3rd Edition. But I don't think a 3rd Edition is even on their radar.

Its called Perry Sez, you can find him on GameSquad, that is the "official" ASL community.

[Michael T]

Again, I know that no ASL PC version will be available unless it's produced by the copyright holders, which is MMP (Multi-Man Publications).

I probably have not been clear on this aspect. I don't want a true word for word MMP version of ASL.

I want a PC *very much like ASL* game of squad based WWII combat that has similar depth and complexity while adding the improvements to play a PC can offer.
I gain no enjoyment from debating rules hour after hour. I accept some ASLer's do. I avoid those types. I want to play the game and demonstrate tactical skill or be shown tactical skill. I have no desire to engage in rules lawyering battles with anyone.

[RangerJoe]

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

I find those insulting. The first one, if they do not agree with what you are stating then they don't understand it? The second one indicates that in order to play decently one must be mentally ill. I would never want to have to be mentally ill just to play a game.

Zovs:

I think a lot of younger folks get insulted way too easy, they don't have any thick skin and take themselves too serious. Sometimes you just have to chill and roll with the punches and not take things so serious and get all insulted so easily.

You must have never heard of "tongue and check". I never said anything about being mentally ill. No just being crazy as in nuts. Most normal folks don't sit around a few geometric boards pushing cardboard counters around and saying "any prep?" and hearing "yeah, I'll take a 6 down 2 shot on those guys there from these guys". Most of the world will think we are all nuts, crazy going off the rails lol.

Seriously how many normal folks sit around playing computer war games for hours, the rest of the world will say we are nuts.

You know nothing about my age, so what do you mean by younger folks? BTW, in the Soviet Union, if you thought too differently than what was expected of you, you were considered mentally ill. What you posted appeared to be the same type of thinking. So why should I have to cool down and allow myself to be attacked?

I have never heard of "tongue in check" but I have heard of tongue in cheek. That can also lead to biting ones tongue.

You do not know my gaming history, nor how much I play. If you want to talk about a serious war game, talk about CHESS where there is a world championship even.

[Zovs]

I think some people to too sensitive or touchy and the slightest thing makes them feel insulted for no reason or for a incorrectly perceived feeling, especially with forums where you can't hear the inflection and tone of voice nor the sarcasm, humor, wit, jest, pun or even something serious, you can only go by the words on the screen. Sometimes you have to have some tolerance and an open mind to understand someone and sometimes one nationality or region says one thing that is perceived one way and in other region or country it's another.

When I say someone is crazy it generally is meant in a fun crazy way, like "Hey Evel Knievel is crazy man! That dude jumps over buses on his motorcycle man!". Now if you perceive that as I am saying he is mentally ill you got it all wrong and don't understand the English language and infliction of meaning and the culture behind that statement. If you were to get insulted by that statement, or all hot and bothers or felt like it was a personal attack then you really have a problem in my opinion.

In fact this whole side thread is silly and is going off topic.

I think Evel Knievel is nuts, crazy even is he sane? Most likely, but I'd never jump a motorcycle over 30 buses man, that is nuts.

Most people who do not play war games will look at us war gamers as we are crazy.

Lets just get back to our crazy war gaming huh? lol

Cheers

[RangerJoe]

I think some people to too sensitive or touchy and the slightest thing makes them feel insulted for no reason or for a incorrectly perceived feeling, especially with forums where you can't hear the inflection and tone of voice nor the sarcasm, humor, wit, jest, pun or even something serious, you can only go by the words on the screen. Sometimes you have to have some tolerance and an open mind to understand someone and sometimes one nationality or region says one thing that is perceived one way and in other region or country it's another.

As far as I know, you have no knowledge [&:] of my nationality or region, nor even what language I prefer to utilize. That is why it is best to state what you mean [:)] and mean what you state. If you want to change the meaning [8|] you can use emojis [8D] to get that part of the message across to someone.

As far as the best wargame, CHESS [&o] for its longevity.

[asl3d]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I was a big fan of Panzer Blitz and Panzer Leader, along with Kampfgruppe and Battlegroup [C64!], and while I know Squad Leader was a step above those I never got into it. But nobody has mentioned Campaign Series yet, and I thought that game had a good reputation and was similar in scale to PB and PL. It had been limited to the Middle East and it is tactical, so that might keep it away from a nomination here, but recently it is moving into Vietnam and WWII.

So nobody thinks the Campaign Series is good enough to be best ?

Panzer Blitz and Panzer Leader are two very interesting games. The scale of game is between the small tactical units of Squad Leader and the great strategic units of many games that which here there are many friends who love them.

Panzer Blitz was published in 1970 and Panzer Leader was published in 1974, and I believe that Squad Leader was born in 1977 as an immersion even deeper in the heart of real combat.

Panzer Blitz and Panzer Leader have game mechanisms that remind me of what later developed into infinity in SL/ASL (LOS, MP vs MF ...) Even the scale at companies level and vehicles platoons can also be considered as the battles core of the WW2.

The problem is that the concept of combat with combined weapons was not well simulated. On one side were the vehicles, which made war on their own, and on the other side were the rest of the mortals. Too simplified regarding real combat.

Perhaps this explains the birth and resounding success of SL/ASL.