why so few player created scenario's ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Battlefront



Message


scout1 -> why so few player created scenario's ? (10/24/2007 4:57:14 AM)

I've been playing BiN and BiI but have held off on Battlefront. One of my long time opponents has Battlefront and swears by it. Same as but different description comes to mind .....

My question is both BiN and BiI had a ton of user created scenarios pop up shortly after release and primarily from a handful of dedicated individuals. Presumably, part of the same crowd that migrated to Battlefront.

So why so few scenarios for Battlefront ? Something unique that makes these harder to do ?

[&:]




cbelva -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (10/24/2007 5:41:50 AM)

I know that several people were working on scenarios. I for one was. I have a scenario I created on the battle of St Vith (Fortified Goose Egg). It is about 80% completed. I wanted to add an AI opponent, but SSG did not see a need to give any instructions on the IA editor. It seems to be fairly sophisicated. Several have complained about that on the Run5 forum (myself included), but SSG only response is that they are too busy with other projects and did not see a need to give instruction to the few who would need them. They did say that they would answer specific questions. I asked a few "specific" questions. They answered the first one, then stated they were too busy to answer the others and would get back to me. I never heard anything else. My scenario is on hold until they decide to explain the AI editor. I guess that others are in the same boat.




JSS -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (10/24/2007 7:11:21 AM)

Scott,

BF is in a very real way a much better game system than DB.   It's also more (much more) complex to build scenarios.   Have a half dozen in the oven baking but only two are nearing completion.   

Marty




Noakesy -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (10/24/2007 10:10:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cbelva

I know that several people were working on scenarios. I for one was. I have a scenario I created on the battle of St Vith (Fortified Goose Egg). It is about 80% completed. I wanted to add an AI opponent, but SSG did not see a need to give any instructions on the IA editor. It seems to be fairly sophisicated. Several have complained about that on the Run5 forum (myself included), but SSG only response is that they are too busy with other projects and did not see a need to give instruction to the few who would need them. They did say that they would answer specific questions. I asked a few "specific" questions. They answered the first one, then stated they were too busy to answer the others and would get back to me. I never heard anything else. My scenario is on hold until they decide to explain the AI editor. I guess that others are in the same boat.


I know it's selfish, but a number of the user created scenarios didn't have an AI, maybe you could release the PBEM version first? I am saying this as someone who is equally disappointed that there are not more of the user created scenarios, but equally someone who hasn't done anything about it himself [:(]




laska2k8 -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (10/24/2007 11:41:37 AM)

people like modding, create custom scenarios, repaint graphics and so on. Battlefront is
a very good game, sorry, is a great game with a painfully editor.

just my 2 cents

max




SlowHand -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (10/24/2007 10:42:13 PM)

From what I've read here, I'm glad I've held off from buying Battlefront as yet. I had been sorely tempted, as I really enjoy games at this scale the best. BUT, there's been just enough comments about the relatively few number of scenarios which shipped with the game, and now this thread. I'm keeping my fingers crossed (and Credit Card handy) that there will eventually be some better news on this front (pun not really intended).

Is there a really active PBEM ladder or community out there for this game? If so, could someone point me (and others) at the forum or site, so I can get a feel for how the game holds up with repeated PBEM playings? Thanks.





HercMighty -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (10/25/2007 12:40:47 AM)

I'll hold off on any more purchases from SSG. Its all a matter of opinion, but there are not enough scenarios that come with the game at $50.00 a pop. I bought HTTR and COTA and you get a lot more bang for the buck. If you like the game system in that series it is well worth the money.

I think Battlefront came with what 4? And I am not inclined to making my own, I didn't buy the game to do that. And I didn't like a couple of the scenarios so I was left with 2.

That's my opinion, others seemed to ahve enjoyed it when it first came out but the boards here and at SSG have been fairly quiet for a while now.




Fred98 -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (10/25/2007 7:56:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cbelva

My scenario is on hold until they decide to explain the AI editor.


I don't play the AI.

I would be very happy if you released a PBEM version only. There are many people to play.
-




Fred98 -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (10/25/2007 7:58:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SlowHand
If so, could someone point me (and others) at the forum or site, so I can get a feel for how the game holds up with repeated PBEM playings?


The real home of the game is here:

http://ssg.com.au/forums/index.php

Look to the top right corner and click on the link titled "Ladder"
-





Noakesy -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (10/25/2007 10:36:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SlowHand
From what I've read here, I'm glad I've held off from buying Battlefront as yet. I had been sorely tempted, as I really enjoy games at this scale the best. BUT, there's been just enough comments about the relatively few number of scenarios which shipped with the game, and now this thread. I'm keeping my fingers crossed (and Credit Card handy) that there will eventually be some better news on this front (pun not really intended).

Is there a really active PBEM ladder or community out there for this game? If so, could someone point me (and others) at the forum or site, so I can get a feel for how the game holds up with repeated PBEM playings? Thanks.


Joe's pointed you in the right direction further down this thread. There is a bit of debate on this going on, the general gist of it has been

1. "DBWWII is outstanding" and still has many devotees playing KP, BiN and BiI

2. "BF system is very good, in fact possibly better, but the scenarios are quite limited" which is odd, as there are essentially two scenarios to this game (if you accept that Novorossisk and Saipan are more for 'training'), whilst KP and BiN were by and large variants built around one scenario each. With the scale and nature of the campaigns covered by KP and BiN there was more variation, whereas with OMG you have to get up the road and kill everything in sight (something which I might add I've singularly failed to do succesfully [:(]). I like Gazala, and very much enjoyed my first crack at it, but the game died on my pc (not a fault with the game). It also takes a long time to move all the units in the big games (you can't have it both ways though I guess).

My twopenneth worth [:)]




SlowHand -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/3/2007 10:54:51 PM)

Thanks for the info, guys. I've bookmarked the sites and am checking them out.




Titanwarrior89 -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/4/2007 5:30:35 AM)

Don't waste your money. Its not worth it yet.[:-]
quote:

ORIGINAL: SlowHand

From what I've read here, I'm glad I've held off from buying Battlefront as yet. I had been sorely tempted, as I really enjoy games at this scale the best. BUT, there's been just enough comments about the relatively few number of scenarios which shipped with the game, and now this thread. I'm keeping my fingers crossed (and Credit Card handy) that there will eventually be some better news on this front (pun not really intended).

Is there a really active PBEM ladder or community out there for this game? If so, could someone point me (and others) at the forum or site, so I can get a feel for how the game holds up with repeated PBEM playings? Thanks.







e_barkmann -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/5/2007 12:52:39 AM)

quote:

Don't waste your money. Its not worth it yet


Oh, please. 

You are probably not recommending Chess either as it only shipped with one scenario [;)]

Where exactly do you not get value from playing 2 campaign sized battles, as well as a medium and introductory scenario in a newly developed game engine with stacks of depth to it? 

Not to mention the fact it has a mature, secure PBEM system so you can play them with all sorts of opponents once you tire of the computer opponent.

Anyway, if your victory conditions in life are the player with the most scenarios wins, then perhaps this game isn't for you, but if you enjoy quality, well crafted gaming then it's highly recommended  [:)]

cheers Chris







Waffenamt -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/5/2007 4:47:13 AM)

Chess - I always thought as every game as a scenario.  If I got a free eval copy I might give Battlefront the benefit of the doubt. A game with 4 scenarios is not my idea of a package I'd blow hard-earned wages on, especially if the community can't even extend this with some decent user-created scenarios due to apparent limitations. So, I guess I'll take any further reviews of yours with a grain or 2 of salt.  Perhaps you may also need to re-evaluate your victoy conditions in life [;)]
Cheers,




e_barkmann -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/5/2007 4:58:14 AM)

no thanks, more than happy with mine [;)]




Fred98 -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/6/2007 12:06:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nick Schieben
....decent user-created scenarios due to apparent limitations.



There are no limitations. It is very easy to use. The only issue is that each unit has a number of variables which may ( or may not) be checked by the user. Therefore it takes time. But its easy to use.
-







Gregor_SSG -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/6/2007 8:01:29 AM)

The Battlefront Editor is as complex as it needs to be. People want us to create a system which can deal with battles covering a wide range of topics, in different theatres, with airborne and seaborne invasions, realistic supply and command restrictions and a whole bunch of other considerations. This adds up to a lot of entries in the editor.

A capable AI, one that can actually cope with supremely complex battles like Market Garden adds some more entries.

It will take time for people to get to grips with this necessary complexity. This is the price we have to pay for creating a sophisticated gaming system. If we took the alternative path of cookie cutting simple scenarios with useless AI, we could certainly have a much simpler editor. However, I don't think that this is path people want us to take.

New scenarios may take some time, but I can assure people that their support of the Battlefront system will be well rewarded. People who are holding out are missing out on some great scenarios, especially Market Garden, which *against the AI* is still a challenge and a thrill to me, after countless games. If you add in PBEM, there's enough to keep anybody on their toes for a very long time.

Gregor




mariovalleemtl -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/6/2007 11:40:20 PM)

I actualy play Market Garden by email and I have a lot of fun. I will like to play new scenarios made by you guys of SSG. And I am ready to pay for.

mario

PS; I prefer small scenarios.




TheHellPatrol -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/10/2007 4:07:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HercMighty

I'll hold off on any more purchases from SSG. Its all a matter of opinion, but there are not enough scenarios that come with the game at $50.00 a pop. I bought HTTR and COTA and you get a lot more bang for the buck. If you like the game system in that series it is well worth the money.

I think Battlefront came with what 4? And I am not inclined to making my own, I didn't buy the game to do that. And I didn't like a couple of the scenarios so I was left with 2.

That's my opinion, others seemed to ahve enjoyed it when it first came out but the boards here and at SSG have been fairly quiet for a while now.
I gotta agree, SSG are the Gods of wargaming AI but their last releases have been bare bones, hell, they didn't even put in the scenario descriptions. They did one, Market Garden, but skimped on the others like they were bored with the work. Scenarios? Zip, and the one there is doesn't have an AI, sadly, just like most of them. What did it for me was they touted all the "user created scenarios" at release...its an SSG game so you'll get all the ....etc...never happened. It's either too complicated or nobody gives a damn. It's sad to see them end this way[8|]




JSS -> RE: why so few player created scenario's ? (11/10/2007 2:48:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHellPatrol

I gotta agree, SSG are the Gods of wargaming AI but their last releases have been bare bones, hell, they didn't even put in the scenario descriptions. They did one, Market Garden, but skimped on the others like they were bored with the work. Scenarios? Zip, and the one there is doesn't have an AI, sadly, just like most of them. What did it for me was they touted all the "user created scenarios" at release...its an SSG game so you'll get all the ....etc...never happened. It's either too complicated or nobody gives a damn. It's sad to see them end this way[8|]



Yep, game definitely needs some more releases. My personal experience is that the editor is not really more difficult/complex than BiN/BII, but it is different in significant ways... much like the game, its not DB V... just has a very familiar look and feel.

Getting the subtleties down is a bit of a new challenge (feeling same challenges as figuring out how to make KP scenarios work right).




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.222656E-02