New Operation Crusader Scenario!

[Erik Rutins]

http://www.ssg.com.au/Run5/scenarios/crusader.htm

[sol_invictus]

Excellent!

[Terminus]

Nice!

[tevans6220]

New scenarios are nice and appreciated but if they're all going to be PBEM the way that the majority of DB scenarios are then I fear I wasted my money on Battlefront. Not everyone wants to play PBEM or has the time to do so. I believe Battlefront will probably collect as much dust on my shelf as the DB series does for this reason. The fact that you have to have third party programs to create even the basic of maps is also a detriment. Not trying to rain on anybody's parade. I applaud the effort.

[captskillet]

Almost makes me want to load the original Operation Crusader (the old V4V / World at War series by Atomic)..........notice I said almost [:D] ..............if the powers that be at Matrix want to revive an oldie but goodie those would be ones that would stoke my fire for sure! [;)]

[Johnus]

Someone please create an AI opponent for Crusader. The scenario looks beautiful but, like tevans, I only play solitaire. Are you up for it Brubake ?

[JSS]

ORIGINAL: tevans6220

New scenarios are nice and appreciated but if they're all going to be PBEM the way that the majority of DB scenarios...

Ohhh, by my count 15 of 22 user scenarios for BII come with AI... and 13 of the 22 has an AI that's pretty good. That's still more than half.

Anyone with a little time and imagination could make an AI for the 7 BII battles with no AI. Same concept applies to BF.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Brubaker release an AI for Crusader as all of his BII battles come with AI.

[cbelva]

I would think that initially most user made scenarios would be released w/out AI, esp with the war card feature to IA programing. I am working on my first scenario. Since I am learing everything by trial and error, it is slow at best. I was going to release my once it is finished san AI and the later update the scenario with an AI as I learn that system.

[tevans6220]

ORIGINAL: JSS

ORIGINAL: tevans6220

New scenarios are nice and appreciated but if they're all going to be PBEM the way that the majority of DB scenarios...

Ohhh, by my count 15 of 22 user scenarios for BII come with AI... and 13 of the 22 has an AI that's pretty good. That's still more than half.

Anyone with a little time and imagination could make an AI for the 7 BII battles with no AI. Same concept applies to BF.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Brubaker release an AI for Crusader as all of his BII battles come with AI.

Didn't mean to sound ungrateful. I really do appreciate the effort and know that a lot of work goes into scenario creation. My point is that wargaming is a niche market as it is. When you start limiting the scenarios to PBEM and the editing capabilities to ownership of third party programs just to make a decent looking map then you have a niche within a niche. Only a small minority of DB players have actually taken steps to create scenarios. Compare that with TOAW3 where there are hundreds of scenarios created by different people. PBEM may be where it's at but not everybody has the time or inclination for it. I saw the list of DB scenarios and most of the scenarios's that interested me had no AI. You say anybody could do it but it's kind of difficult adding AI to someone else's scenario when you aren't exactly sure what they had in mind or you don't know the history well enough to do it. Battlefront will live or die by the numbers of user made scenarios. If only a small minority of players can make scenarios and those scenarios are only PBEM then I'm afraid Battlefront will have a very short life. That's exactly what happened to the DB series in my case. They now sit on the shelf collecting dust. I had hoped Battlefront would be different.

[grenade magnet]

What's wrong with PBEM only scenarios? It's all gravy if you ask me. I purchased BF with 4 battles and am quite pleased with the product. Additional battles? PBEM only! Sweet! PBEM is the only way to go anyway but to each his own I guess...
 
Deep thought of the day:
 
Tempests in tea pots whistle. Annoying but useful.

[Jack1986]

To Tevans6226:

I used to only play vs AI until a buddy got me into PBEM. 
Now, there is no going back.  Try it, you may like it!
Jack

[tevans6220]

It's not that I dislike PBEM. I know what it is and I have played some games that way. The thing is not everybody likes or wants to play PBEM. Some people just don't have the time or commitment to play that way. Whereas playing AI you play at your leisure. If you don't feel like playing the next turn for 3 weeks you don't feel obligated to do so. Given the fact that this game only released with 4 scenarios it's going to live or die with player made scenarios. If a large portion of those scenarios are created for PBEM only that limits the number of people playing the game. A niche within a niche market. If PBEM was so mainstream why did SSG even take the time to put AI in the game? PBEM isn't the be all end all answer to wargaming. Most wargamers I know started playing boardgames solitaire. Some people still like it that way.

[grenade magnet]

Tevans:

Listen fella:

I'm not implying that AI play vs PBEM play is any better [or superior...from a grogs arrogant point of view...like mine] or worse. Agin, to each his own. I simply stated that the product was provided with 4 COMPLETE battles with AI & PBEM functionality. Additional content that only supports either play preference should be viewed as a bonus to purchased content. I take ANY and ALL complaints [no matter how well meaning] of user or designer after-market content in this industry as irrevelant garbage.

I have been in this "niche" market for 30 years and I support this hobby with my wallet rather than my mouth.

That was my point. My only point. I welcome you to the hobby with open arms and an open mind...just don't slam what you did not pay for...that's all.

So...how about a PBEM of Market Garden? I'll play either side and you can take as long as you wish between file exchanges. What da ya say?????

Deep thought part II:
"Don't you wish!" "You just may git it!"

[tevans6220]

ORIGINAL: grenade magnet

Tevans:

Listen fella:

I'm not implying that AI play vs PBEM play is any better [or superior...from a grogs arrogant point of view...like mine] or worse. Agin, to each his own. I simply stated that the product was provided with 4 COMPLETE battles with AI & PBEM functionality. Additional content that only supports either play preference should be viewed as a bonus to purchased content. I take ANY and ALL complaints [no matter how well meaning] of user or designer after-market content in this industry as irrevelant garbage.

I have been in this "niche" market for 30 years and I support this hobby with my wallet rather than my mouth.

That was my point. My only point. I welcome you to the hobby with open arms and an open mind...just don't slam what you did not pay for...that's all.

So...how about a PBEM of Market Garden? I'll play either side and you can take as long as you wish between file exchanges. What da ya say?????

Deep thought part II:
"Don't you wish!" "You just may git it!"

No thanks on the PBEM. My plate is full right now. Perhaps another time.

I don't understand why you think I'm slamming anyone. As I said before all scenarios are greatly appreciated and I applaud the efforts made. My point is not everyone wants to play PBEM or even has the time to do so. If a large portion of the scenarios made are PBEM only then Battlefront is going to have a very short life. All extra scenarios post-release are a bonus but only to those who can use them. Not being able to test a scenario before PBEM play could lead to something very quirky happening on turn 30 of a 35 turn game. It can happen and when it does it's time wasted. At something like 2 turns a week PBEM that's 15 weeks before you get to something that could ruin the whole game. A quick play against the AI may catch something that could be brought to the designer's attention for fixing.

Since you've been into wargaming for 30 years you should know that it's a very niche market. Anything that divides us such as PBEM only or a small minority of the playerbase being the only people able to create scenarios only is not a good thing. My wargaming experience goes back further than yours. I started at the age of 8 in 1970 so I've been into this stuff for almost 40 years. Why is it that a similar game such as TOAW3 has literally hundreds of scenarios that can appeal to both PBEM and AI players but the DB/Battlefront series has no more than maybe 30 scenarios? Why did SSG even bother with AI? They should have just made a game for PBEM. As it is the way the editors work only a small minority of the playerbase will ever create anything. If those designers are only into PBEM then the people who paid $50 are SOL and stuck with a game with only 4 scenarios. I speak with my wallet too. I purchased this hoping it would be different with regards to scenario creation. Sadly it's headed down the same path as the DB series which is why I no longer play any of them.

[Johnus]

Gentlemen:

I think I've been playing wargames longer than any previous poster in this thread, whether that means anything or not. I play exclusively solitaire, for various good reasons. I do not apologize for this. It is the way I prefer to use and enjoy wargames, period.

More importantly, at least for a commercial enterprise selling games, the majority of time spent with these products is spent alone, or solitaire, as it were. I forgot where I read it, but am sure it was and is true. The percentage is overwhelming. Perhaps someone at Matrix, on the "sales" or "marketing" side could confirm.

Some PBEM posters display a silly and arrogant posture of superiority when they condescend to explain how we loners are wasting our time against an AI. Harmless I suppose, but annoying.

[TheHellPatrol]

ORIGINAL: Johnnie

Some PBEM posters display a silly and arrogant posture of superiority when they condescend to explain how we loners are wasting our time against an AI. Harmless I suppose, but annoying.

[;)]Amen Brother! Give us an Ai

[cdbeck]

AI, because humans interaction is so "healthy." [:D]

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: grenade magnet

I simply stated that the product was provided with 4 COMPLETE battles with AI & PBEM functionality. Additional content that only supports either play preference should be viewed as a bonus to purchased content.

A bonus? The question should be, how comparative is the provision of 4 scenarios to other similar scaled offerings on the market? I feel it's poor.

Which leads to the real question:

If this title was released as a scenario construction kit, how good is its DYO mechanism, how easy its is AI generation system, how streamlined is it to build scenarios - when to date, we've seen just 1 and it has no AI?

ORIGINAL: grenade magnet

I have been in this "niche" market for 30 years and I support this hobby with my wallet rather than my mouth.

Given the passion this hobby breeds, that's still quite a silly comment given simple criticism (justified IMHO) of this game don't you think? That badge you wear is really not so exclusive. They let folks into this club these days with flip flops and no tie.

However, to support this market, I take a contrary view. I only open my wallet if there's value and fulfilment of promises made. 4 scens and an AI that I've still yet to see an impressive list* of players rate as being great, misses on both counts unfortunately, this time around for me.

I've emailed Gregor these sentiments personally. I sure hope Carriers at War proves to be a worthy game given my criteria.


[right] (* In another thread I think I've asked to see 10 consumers in a row give their unreserved thumbs up to the AI.)[/right]

[Jack1986]

I vote with my wallet (as thin as it is, I must look hard to maintain my standing as a member of the electorate[:D]).
As soon as the boxed version of "Battlefront" is available, I am buying it.
If the continued development of scenarios for the Decisive Battles system (check Run5) is any indication of what is to come for "Battlefront", fortunate indeed are we who share this great (and economical) hobby![:)]

[RayWolfe]

A pretty daft discussion about which is better ... it will never be resolved. What makes sense to me is to produce scenarios that have do have an AI then BOTH factions can be satisfied. The real art of scenario design is one with an effective AI ... on without is more of a craft. That is not to suggest that it is easy!