From: Crush Depth
I agree I was taking a simplistic view of VP's, and your thoughts are well reasoned.
But, how long would it take to gain the experience, by both sides to balance hold enough vs. don't push too far? And to find the VP balance between players of the same skill and the AI.
I have six PBEM games going, three as the Russian and three as the German, and I want to have long satisfying games in all of them, so I am definitely invested in balancing the game so it is fun for both sides.
That is a good point, and a valid concern.
Generally, when victory conditions are laid out clearly, it does not take a lot of experience, you just have to be a good war gamer and judge of a situation.
For example (just hypothetical), if you get 0 points if you still hold city X by turn 3, 5 points if you can hold it till turn 4, and 10 points if you can hold it till turn 5. You control your army, you judge the situation. You may decide you can hold it, with reasonable risk until turn 4, but after that, the extra 5 points just is not worth it. Are you a good judge of the situation? Will you be right in what you do more times than you are wrong? Thats the challenge of a war game, at least, to me.
For some people, objectives makes their head hurt. They just want to push counters around, with little regard to any military/political/economical objectives. For others, they thrive on this. As a Soviet, give me no good reason to hold a city (current game as it is), and hell yeah, I am retreating. It makes "game" sense. Give me a reason, give me a risk/reward situation to fight forward, hold a city, and I will at least access the situation, and perhaps try and hold it, because, yet again, it makes "game" sense.
To jazman: I did not mention the logistic system, did not say the game was not WAD. These are just suggestions. WAD does not mean it cannot be improved.
I wasn't disputing you--I agree with all your points. And I was throwing in the Logistic system as a bonus.
I'm not sure how well requirements were defined for this game, but surely they should include things that reflect "design for effect". For example, the Russian needs to be incentivized and enabled to stand and fight. I think there should be morale / political fallout from running. I can't believe designers overlooked such things--I believe decisions were made and we see the results.
The logistic system would be buggy if, for example, the documentation explained that supply works like this, and you saw supply doing crazy things. So it's not buggy, it's working the way they designed and coded it. Not sure it's working like intended, though. In a game it can be hard to test "did we design this element right?" And some things, you just can't get it right--only reality ever worked right.
< Message edited by jazman -- 4/25/2012 3:39:34 AM >
BS, MS, PhD, WitP:AE, WitE, WitW