AI this and No German that

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

I don't plan to spend a lot of time trying to comprehend why it is so many will so defiantly insist on buying wargame after wargame, and then inexplicably insisting on making the AI opponent their primary adversary.

Newsflash AI fans, no one in the wargaming industry has cracked the challenge of making a truly challenging AI, because, they don't exist. Not here and not there. The AI in the most hard core of our wargames is not going to be any brighter than the AI in our most straight forward simple design wargames.

Yet people defiantly insist that they are going to play the AI only instead. They will insist their life and their conditions make it mandatory, and then when the AI lets them done as a challenge, they will blame the game.

It's not the game, it's YOU. You refuse to accept the game is a great game because you don't expect to be playing another human.
Maybe you should just accept it, you are incapable of playing ANY wargames, because you are not able to accommodate human vs human playing. Hey it happens. Get over it, you missed out I suppose is the proper approach.

You CAN get a good game in vs the AI, but it was designed to be great vs another human.
Just about every great wargame is great for this reason.
Close Combat, it's great in human vs human play. The AI play is not what made the game famous.
Steel Panthers, the AI opponent is really not that good at all. It got famous on human vs human play.
Combat Mission, the game again gained it's fame via human vs human play.

Battlefield Academy won't be any different. I plan to enjoy player vs player gaming the most.

Now the part about the lack of Germans. People are simply obviously over reacting.
Today you have 30 missions. Tomorrow it might be 31, next week who knows how many. The game was made specifically so it could be VERY mod friendly.
Playing as the Germans is just a matter of waiting on the mods that will be all over this game.
Mods for great games happen quick. I wouldn't even want to try and guess how many user made creations have been made for several of our obvious great wargames.

And if you ARE playing human vs human, one of you WILL be playing the Axis.
So the idea there is no German play is factually wrong.
The only people not playing Germans, will be the players sulking in solo play that simply obsess over the idea playing the AI was ever a realistic strategy,

There has not been one single solitary wargame with an AI worthy of REAL respect. If the AI is beating you, it is either cheating via artificial difficulty levels, or perhaps you are actually no good. Hey I'm not afraid to imply some of you simply might be no good sometimes.

Yes we know, some of you worship playing the Germans. Always gotta play the Germans. Think only German gear is great. They started the war and thus you think a person can only play the Germans, to see if you could win the war yourself.
Myself, I think playing the over stretched British is no small challenge. In 1939, playing Germany is almost the same as playing on 'easy'. It's really just an accounting game till 1941 when they bite off more than they can chew.
It's ironic that many games employ playing the Allies in 44 as the difficult level considering by 1944 the Germans have lost naval superiority and are NOT getting it back, the air belongs to the Allies and Germany is fighting for it's life.

The tiger tank had nice armour, nice gun. It was slow, and a maintenance hell too.
Sitting in a Tiger tank is still playing on easy mode. Try taking that Tiger out in a Sherman eh. When you have to put Shermans against Tigers, you find out who the gamer with REAL skill is.

For those taking a pass on this game all because they demand being able to play solo as the Germans, I can only say you're making a big mistake.
You all screamed for a game at 40 bucks that was truly great, and now you're backing out yet again.

I don't understand your thinking.
Sorry now, gotta run, I have a great game to play, and I need to show people out there who's the better wargamer
I'm not much into bragging I beat the AI you see

[NefariousKoel]

Newsflash Les fans:

Whine. Doom. Snore.

[sabre1]

Les_the_sarge, PM me and we can set it up. I know you would love to stomp my little capitalist...well you get the picture.

I will play you if you want. Had a little too much caffeine today?

I'm one of those guys who usually plays against the AI, and I "like" campaigns. I suck at wargames, but I don't define myself by my ability to "play" wargames, and yes I like playing the Germans. The equipment is neat. I mean c'mon, an M4 Sherman is one ugly tank. Panthers, Tigers, even Stugs are better looking. Besides I like bleeding out the socialist commies. I know there aren't any commies in this game. They are coming, I can hear the march of digital boots in the background, with dollar signs floating above their commie helmets, but I digress.

Sounds to me like you are trolling, no ,no, don't get mad, I'm just jerking your chain. I like everybody here at Matrix, but that doesn't mean we can't tease each other now and then.

Of course there was one guy here who I always tried not to annoy, but I haven't seen him post "as" much as he use to. Now where is JD, he should be stepping in here any moment.

[Oldguard1970]

Hi Les and Sabre,

I am strongly considering this game. When you play human v. human, do you use TCPIP Internet play, or is it Play by Email?

[Titanwarrior89]

I would play you but I am busy playing the AI.[X(] Oh yea did you actually mean "Some of US". You know a group thing-them,me and you.......[>:][X(]

[vonRocko]

Sorry Les, if I knew it would upset you this much, I never would have pooh poohed on the "the greatest game since steel panthers".[;)]

[jomni]

Les the Sarge,

Sadly Battlefield Academy does not have tons of Multiplayer maps at the moment.  And they are all meeting engagements.  They may get stale after some time despite having different human opponents.
If you want to play an Assault and Defend scenario, only way is to play vs. AI.  Anyway battle against AI is entertaining in this game.  Though scripted, they do pose a challenge even for veteran players.

[LarryP]

I guess us peon wargamers should have our feelings, likes, and dislikes checked at the forum gate to make sure we are in line with protocol. That seems to be the common post now, to condemn others for how they feel about issues and not the issues themselves.

There must be some standards posted somewhere so we can make sure we qualify before posting.

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

@sabre1 and all that would like a game, I will need to ask any and all that are interested, to give me a shout over at Armchair General. I am rarely here, and PMs through here would be highly unsatisfactory essentially speaking.

I am mainly appearing here for a couple of days to give the game some assist during launch.

The AI isn't so bad. It takes a while to beat it, and every new battle is a lot of unknown.

I've gotten owned in a few battles, then gone and owned the AI, and then later, you get that cockiness that you KNOW the battle and that's usually when you slip up.

But still, a human opponent is going to NOT do some things you know an AI likely would.

So regardless of the reasons, those only playing the AI, are not playing the full game.

See ya at my usual haunt

[Adam Parker]

Les - you'd have made a better point by simply saying that like Panzer General and Allied General - this game is premised on the same award winning formula of just being able to command one side of the war to its fullest mastery - and this time you get the Allies (but you can always multiplay the Axis)! [:D][;)]

As for the AI - sorry mate I do always want a good one. However if the AI here is "sus", why not just ditch it and make a robust/easy hot seat option where a gamer can play against himself just like a board game? I've been wishing that designers would wake up to that paradigm for years.

Hey... if you could hotseat yourself - you could then play the Germans too! [8|]

Right now I've got to make a choice, $42 AUD for this game vs $60 AUD for a new GMT boardgame with mounted board.

Having been burned on those stupid Operation Barbarossa and Commander Napoleon games here of the same turn-based, PG-Clone genre, I personally need convincing that there is a good and intelligent game to be found in Battlefield Academy before I can put money its way. That's where I'd rather people make some helpful posts.

Cheers,
Adam.

[sabre1]

ORIGINAL: OldGuard1970

Hi Les and Sabre,

I am strongly considering this game. When you play human v. human, do you use TCPIP Internet play, or is it Play by Email?

It's PBEM, but you get auto notification that your opponent has moved. You must setup an account with Slitherine.

[PipFromSlitherine]

You can also use our tiny system tray app which will inobtrusively let you know when you have turns waiting. Like a good butler.

We didn't realise that people wanted Hotseat so badly, so I am looking into it. Oddly one way to make it work quickly might be to just let people play themselves over PBEM. It works - I hacked it in to check .

Cheers

Pip

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

Les - you'd have made a better point by simply saying that like Panzer General and Allied General - this game is premised on the same award winning formula of just being able to command one side of the war to its fullest mastery - and this time you get the Allies (but you can always multiplay the Axis)! [:D][;)]

As for the AI - sorry mate I do always want a good one. However if the AI here is "sus", why not just ditch it and make a robust/easy hot seat option where a gamer can play against himself just like a board game? I've been wishing that designers would wake up to that paradigm for years.

Hey... if you could hotseat yourself - you could then play the Germans too! [8|]

Right now I've got to make a choice, $42 AUD for this game vs $60 AUD for a new GMT boardgame with mounted board.

Having been burned on those stupid Operation Barbarossa and Commander Napoleon games here of the same turn-based, PG-Clone genre, I personally need convincing that there is a good and intelligent game to be found in Battlefield Academy before I can put money its way. That's where I'd rather people make some helpful posts.

Cheers,
Adam.

The comments about Panzer/Allied General are good ones.
I've compared it favourably with Steel Panthers primarily because Steel Panthers was the first computer wargame I ever gave a damn about seriously.

You appear to have a bias towards board games, understandable. I would be much the same.
My take on AIs if you have to play solo, because you have no opponents, or timings are all wrong, why not just do what wargamers did all through the 70s and 80s, and play great board games.

My collection of ASL gives me more satisfaction than the sum total of every computer wargame ever made added together. But that's just me maybe.
I do know, that most ASLers seem to be of the opinion there is ASL and then 'oh some other wargames'.

I really like the Commander series. I do wish they allowed stacking of course.
Played solo it's a good game.
I have Operation Barbarossa. I have to admit, I wish I had been a little less rapid on my choice with it. Don't hate it, just unsure if I like it.

But the term 'intellgent game' is an interesting one.
War in the Pacific for all it's incredible detail, is a 'dumb game' if measured by how 'fun' it is. it's not 'fun' it's more like doing your taxes.
Of any game I have ever bought, I think it will remain the most wrong decision I have ever made.
Even if it is excruciatingly 'intelligent'.

[junk2drive]

Pip, start a thread aobut how to Multiplayer and stop calling it PBEM because you don't email files. Like dialing the phone when we don't have dials anymore [:D]

[PipFromSlitherine]

Yeah - we never came up with a snappier title for it. It's a pain to explain to people just how simple it is to play - no going out of the game, no wrangling files, just click and go. If only we could give people the first one for free .

Cheers

Pip

[Johnus]

Les the Sarge:

The fact remains that most computer wargames are played against the AI. And I would guess that most wargamers play their wargames (like I do) against the AI exclusively. Most of these gamers understand that, once they become proficient at a game, they will win more often that they will lose, but, as long as it takes concentration and a decent effort, this is acceptable (and maybe even preferable, as most enjoy winning.)

I do not consider myself an inferior or limited wargamer. And I get my human interaction fixes elsewhere (including on this forum.)

To each his own, I suppose. But I don't accept the proposition that playing against another human is the "ultimate" or "right" way to enjoy these products.

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

ORIGINAL: Johnnie

Les the Sarge:

The fact remains that most computer wargames are played against the AI. And I would guess that most wargamers play their wargames (like I do) against the AI exclusively. Most of these gamers understand that, once they become proficient at a game, they will win more often that they will lose, but, as long as it takes concentration and a decent effort, this is acceptable (and maybe even preferable, as most enjoy winning.)

I do not consider myself an inferior or limited wargamer. And I get my human interaction fixes elsewhere (including on this forum.)

To each his own, I suppose. But I don't accept the proposition that playing against another human is the "ultimate" or "right" way to enjoy these products.

Most wargames are played against the AI primarily for the same reason most board game wargames are played solo. Now, if they only made board games as solo designs, it wouldn't hurt the market, as we'd be playing games intentionally made to be played solo and it wouldn't really matter that they could only be played solo, as we'd be playing them solo either way.
If they made wargames without an AI, which were either played hotseat solo, or vs another human, or not at all, we'd still play them and you know it. Saying we wouldn't is a pointless assertion no one is going to believe.

Why designers have refused to give up on AIs that we all know have no long term value escapes me. But then again, humans do a great deal of things that lack any logical justification. Why should wargames design be different.

How would I personally perfect the computer wargame as a genre?
There would only be wego. No turn based igougo or real time at all. You vs you simultaneously or vs the other guy simultaneously. Nothing else.
It would all be 2d or 3d as in BBC BA. No total 3d as it adds nothing and merely costs computer muscle for nothing.
To me wargaming is just a form of chess. Not a dexterity challenge. Your plan vs your plan, or vs his plan. But it would be a well thought out plan. Not reaction speed. Not for a game meant to simulate hundreds and thousands of unique minds.

BBC BA in wego I'd drop 100 bucks for that without even thinking twice.

It would be nice if BBC BA had the same unit variety density of Steel Panthers.
But it is nice that BBC BA has the same fun factor potential of Steel Panthers.

Those calling it Steel Panthers lite, I understand where you are coming from.
I think it is only 'lite' where density of unit types is concerned. Sorry, BBC BA won't have as many vehicle types as a full set of ASL either.
But the battles are just as challenging.

Yesterday, I just got trashed playing a battle I have tested all summer.
Those swine cherry picked both of my Matildas dang it. And with Italian garbage. Bam bam gone in two shots. My Honeys never had a real chance. I lost all 4 of those too in unfair shooting contests. The only reason I won, is I lured the armour in close to my infantry in buildings and took them out dirty like. Still had to take out the last tank with artillery and bombing runs, and the swine made me hit him with 3 srikes too. Came out with a win and a 1 lousy bren carrier

Against a human though, oh that wouldn't have happened at all. He'd have shot up the bren carrier I was using to spy on his tank with, and he wouldn't have needed to sit under the barrage. I'd have just plain lost. He also wouldn't have used his armour unwisely near my self evidently troop occupied town.

Thus, I need to reassert, this game vs the AI, it is only going to be half the experience vs the AI. You want a REAL fight, you're just going to need to play a human.

[Oldguard1970]

Hello Sabre,

Thanks for the information.

[junk2drive]

+1 for WEGO

[Jestre]

Wow, I guess I need to quit playing wargames.... I always play the german side, personal preference, and I always play solo vs the AI. I don't have the time nor the schedule to accomodate a human vs human computer game without it taking FOR-FREAKING-EVER. I don't have the patience anymore for that. So now that I know just how pathetic my play preferences are I guess I will just slink away and find another hobby....