Which wargame has done it best?

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

User avatar
MrsWargamer
Posts: 1655
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 4:04 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by MrsWargamer »

ORIGINAL: 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.

Weeeeeell we can deduce from your account name and avatar, That you like Rangers and see yourself as a famous female Soviet Sniper. And you appear to be a grumpy ill-tempered unsociable sort of person unwilling to offer anything of who they really are in their posts. That's your fault and on you. I don't really much care for what your mother tongue is or where you are from if you aren't willing to share it. I'm a 57 year old extremely fluent English speaking writer from Canada.
Wargame, 05% of the time.
Play with Barbies 05% of the time.
Play with Legos 10% of the time.
Build models 20% of the time
Shopping 60% of the time.
Exlains why I buy em more than I play em.
User avatar
MrsWargamer
Posts: 1655
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 4:04 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by MrsWargamer »

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.

I have Campaign Series. I DO think it is very good actually. Sort of Panzer Leader scale. I had issues with it for a time with OSs between XP and 7 for some reason. Seems to cooperate in 10.
Wargame, 05% of the time.
Play with Barbies 05% of the time.
Play with Legos 10% of the time.
Build models 20% of the time
Shopping 60% of the time.
Exlains why I buy em more than I play em.
User avatar
asl3d
Posts: 7190
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:48 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by asl3d »

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

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.

I know that your comment is not directed towards me, but to another friend of this thread. However, when I wrote my comments about the lack of intelligence of the computers AI, I knew that there would be friends who would not agree with what I was saying, precisely by the influence of excellent evolution of computers in the game of chess, like the CHESS software.

I think that, even in the case of CHESS and other chess games capable of winning any human player (including the world champion), it's not thanks to their intelligence but thanks to the excellent algorithms capable of handling many of the game systems and positions that occur in elite chess.

I remember that, many years ago, the easy way to win a chess computer was play against it in an absurd manner. On many occasions, the AI didn't have in its database a strange (but not catastrophic) movement like the one I was doing, so that she ended up playing in a strange manner too ... and ended up playing strangely! Then, when he made a mistake, as a result of his bewilderment, it was easy to finish winning the game with chess technique (Nimzowitch dixit). Easy!!!!

Currently, the algorithms for AI in chess have evolved a lot and make us think that we have an "intelligent" player in front of us, capable of winning us without effort. But, friends, that's not the case. They are only the algorithms.

ASL is infinitely more complex than chess. It has many more degrees of freedom (more counters, variable terrain, variable abilities as the game progresses, ...) Programmers have a long way to go to design a package of algorithms capable of winning a human player. It's a challenge!!!

But the message I want to leave here is that ASL (board game) or Heroes of Stalingrad (computer game) should not be played as in chess. There're so many variables that it’s preferable play with intuition, not with a deep reasoning (like chess). Also, taking into account the circumstances in which the WW2 Squad Leaders were in combat, with enormous pressure on their immediate decisions, we should play quickly, intuitively, as a fast game (to 3 minutes) of chess.

An important rule: You have to do “fair play” against AI. She is still helpless in front of you !!!

By the way, RangerJoe, I congratulate you about your avatar. It’s a magnificent photograph of the famous and very pretty Roza Yegórovna Šánina.
Semper fidelis
User avatar
asl3d
Posts: 7190
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:48 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by asl3d »

ORIGINAL: Michael T

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.

The games similar to ASL for PC that I know are:

1.- Heroes of Stalingrad (I myself have a mod published on this game: Heroes and Leaders mod)

2.- Tigers on the Hunt
Semper fidelis
User avatar
Zovs
Posts: 7079
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:02 pm
Location: United States

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by Zovs »

In my opinion the hands down the closest games to ASL are Steel Panthers series, its on the same level and does a most excellent job of recreating tactical war gaming.

Image
Beta Tester for: War in the East 1 & 2, WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific, Valor & Victory, Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm, Computer War In Europe 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by Michael T »

Tigers on the Hunt appears the closest to an ASL like game to me but it has no human v human online play. Which kills it for me.

So I wait for Steel Tigers or some other ASL like game may appear.

As to the subject of this thread I would vote for ASL for board gaming and JTS Panzer Campaigns for PC.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 13465
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by RangerJoe »

By the way, RangerJoe, I congratulate you about your avatar. It’s a magnificent photograph of the famous and very pretty Roza Yegórovna Šánina.

Thank you. That is why I used her picture as my avatar.

Of course, against any AI you can mess it up by doing something not programmed. But if you had a computer that could remember and use that in the future, what might have been easy would then become harder and harder.

***************************************************************************************************************************************
As far as understanding English, I do understand it fairly well although some things are different unless properly translated. As far as letting people know about myself in my posts, I have done so. How many have posts of mine have you read?
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child

User avatar
JReb
Posts: 298
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 6:24 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by JReb »

How far can the Unity and Archon engines be developed? Isn't that the limiting factor? Is a new type of engine required to make a quantum leap to the next generation of games?

I am anxiously waiting for the release of Steel Tigers to see if they can even make a quality WW2 tactical game. It must be light years better than battle academy and if not squad level units then no larger than company level.
My shrink says I have anger management and conflict resolution issues....and I'LL FIGHT ANYBODY THAT DISAGREES!
User avatar
76mm
Posts: 4695
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 4:26 am
Location: Washington, DC

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by 76mm »

ORIGINAL: asl3d
The games similar to ASL for PC that I know are:

1.- Heroes of Stalingrad (I myself have a mod published on this game: Heroes and Leaders mod)

2.- Tigers on the Hunt
You're right that these are closest, but they are not very close...I tried both and dropped them quickly.

I loved SL and ASL back in the day...the original Combat Mission games were a pretty good computer replacement for me, but in my view the current versions are not especially fun... Also looking forward to Steel Tigers. I hope to never play a boardgame again, they take up too much space.
User avatar
sPzAbt653
Posts: 9629
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:11 am
Location: east coast, usa

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by sPzAbt653 »

You have to do “fair play” against AI.
THis taken from a nice post back there at #163. I just wanted to clarify something that maybe some times gets overlooked, that there is no 'AI' in our games. We are not playing against any form of an Artificial Intelligence, we are playing against a Programmed Opponent [PO]. That is a guy programming in reactions to your moves, as they did with chess. Chess is a complex game, but it only has 64 hexes and 32 pieces. What does your game have? And how about rules, lol!

A little more - I am a big solitaire player [and I don't misuse that term to include hotseat]. The two games that I have programmed opponents for are Strategic Command 3 and Operational Art of War. Both of them use a coded PO for basic operations, and another layer for more specific operations. I bring this up so that when someone says something like 'the AI sucks in game xx', maybe they will think a little, because the AI certainly doesn't suck because there isn't one!

And a little more - programming a PO takes a lot of effort, in SC3 there are many scripts involved, in TOAW there are many Objectives that need plotting [and Events can play a part also]. So while I am a firm believer in solitaire play and if a game doesn't support it then it isn't a game at all [what do we have a computer for, anyway?] we can't expect 'good AI's' [because there aren't any! What we can expect are games like SC3 and TOAW where we the users have the opportunity to enhance the PO's.
User avatar
sPzAbt653
Posts: 9629
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:11 am
Location: east coast, usa

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by sPzAbt653 »

I hope to never play a boardgame again,
Here here unfortunately these dang computers just can't get it right !
Oberst_Klink
Posts: 4809
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:37 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by Oberst_Klink »

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 ?
A good point, Stevo; and I can assure you, the devs are doing a heck of a job with the .lua script and the AI. There a sneak preview thread here on the MG forum (tm.asp?m=3942519&mpage=35&key=), as well as regular updates on FB and Twitter as well. The AI, IMHO is a game changer.

Klink, Oberst
[left]My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.
User avatar
Zovs
Posts: 7079
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:02 pm
Location: United States

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by Zovs »

Steve has it right, there really is no AI in any of our games at all. Some (TOAW, SC series, OOB, PzK, SP, CS, and WitE/W/P) have Programmed and scripted "opponents" for solitaire play.

It is more complex then folks think, I worked with Gary for at least 6 months on WitE1 for a PO for the Germans and some for the Soviets. Its time consuming for a tester and I am sure insane for a programmer to code all the possibilities. Same thing with scenario 'scripters'.

Any hex or even area based war game with half a dozen or more counters will surpass any kind of logic that Chess would need. Chess is a simple game with simple rules with squares and a limited amount of movement and combat. Hex based war games in particular require more logic than chess.

As an example: A small 50 by 50 hex based game, with 125 units per side with the normal ZoC, Supply, attack/retreat, movement, weather, terrain, morale, experience, ranged artillery, combined arms, air power with tactical, and strategic assets would throw any "AI" into a tailspin. A human, no worries, once he knows the rules, but for a PO then there is a lot of variables to take into account.

Chess has no concept of terrain, which would effect movement of the units, and hence the logic for a human player to decide which is the best plan of attack.

To me chess is just checkers with some chrome. Give me PanzerBlitz, PanzerLeader, ASL, WIE or any awesome computer war game such as TOAW, WitE/W, Steel Panthers or CWIE any day over chess.
Image
Beta Tester for: War in the East 1 & 2, WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific, Valor & Victory, Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm, Computer War In Europe 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 13465
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by RangerJoe »

I still say chess for its longevity, the sheer numbers of people playing it, the relatively simple rules, and the world championship. Young and old can play it, it can be fast or slow. The other games are more complex, fewer people play them, and some of them are still evolving.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child

Zorch
Posts: 7087
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:21 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by Zorch »

ORIGINAL: Zovs

To me chess is just checkers with some chrome.
Chess is much, much more than Checkers with chrome. [&:]
User avatar
asl3d
Posts: 7190
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:48 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by asl3d »

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Thank you. That is why I used her picture as my avatar.

Of course, against any AI you can mess it up by doing something not programmed. But if you had a computer that could remember and use that in the future, what might have been easy would then become harder and harder.
Yes, I think that's the way.

I have the impression that every time we turn off the computer, we "kill" it. As far as I know, we have not yet learned how to make computers "intelligently" remember everything they have "seen" during their short existence between a switch on and off of the electrical voltage that feeds them.

I think that in this we are still in the field of science fiction but, I think it's the way to have a HAL-9000 in the future.
Semper fidelis
User avatar
asl3d
Posts: 7190
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:48 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by asl3d »

ORIGINAL: JReb

How far can the Unity and Archon engines be developed? Isn't that the limiting factor? Is a new type of engine required to make a quantum leap to the next generation of games?

I am anxiously waiting for the release of Steel Tigers to see if they can even make a quality WW2 tactical game. It must be light years better than battle academy and if not squad level units then no larger than company level.

I love the Close Combat saga. My favorite is Battle of the Bulge and his remake Wacht am Rhein. I guess all of them have been developed with the Unity engine.

Throughout these years I have seen that Close Combat AI did not progress. There're many excellent mods that use the Close Combat engine, but they also run into the problem of AI. Graphically they're a scandal, infinitely better than Tiger on the Hunt or Heroes of Stalingrad (even betters than Heroes and Leaders mod).

It seems that the new Archon engine, from Slitherine, will be the one that will take control of the future Close Combat (The Bloody First?). I've only been able to see some screenshots. The great novelty is the 3D vision (?! # @ = $?) ....

I understand that the show is important. The show helps sell copies to wargame fans. It's clear. But if everything ends in the show then we are facing a sale at "French style" (that forgive me the many French friends of this forum; it's just an expression). That is, very well wrapped, with a perfect and very attractive exterior appearance, but with almost nothing new inside ....

Image
Attachments
Fort Benning Georgia.jpg
Fort Benning Georgia.jpg (30.41 KiB) Viewed 22 times
Semper fidelis
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 13465
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by RangerJoe »

One problem with some games is that they will go to 3-D graphics with no other changes. Just making things look better does not make the game better. Some people are still playing Masters of Orion 2 with various modifications. Yes, they even play multiplayer games.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child

User avatar
asl3d
Posts: 7190
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:48 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by asl3d »

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
You have to do “fair play” against AI.
THis taken from a nice post back there at #163. I just wanted to clarify something that maybe some times gets overlooked, that there is no 'AI' in our games. We are not playing against any form of an Artificial Intelligence, we are playing against a Programmed Opponent [PO]. That is a guy programming in reactions to your moves, as they did with chess. Chess is a complex game, but it only has 64 hexes and 32 pieces. What does your game have? And how about rules, lol!

A little more - I am a big solitaire player [and I don't misuse that term to include hotseat]. The two games that I have programmed opponents for are Strategic Command 3 and Operational Art of War. Both of them use a coded PO for basic operations, and another layer for more specific operations. I bring this up so that when someone says something like 'the AI sucks in game xx', maybe they will think a little, because the AI certainly doesn't suck because there isn't one!

And a little more - programming a PO takes a lot of effort, in SC3 there are many scripts involved, in TOAW there are many Objectives that need plotting [and Events can play a part also]. So while I am a firm believer in solitaire play and if a game doesn't support it then it isn't a game at all [what do we have a computer for, anyway?] we can't expect 'good AI's' [because there aren't any! What we can expect are games like SC3 and TOAW where we the users have the opportunity to enhance the PO's.

I agree.

In a wargame the fundamental thing is that it must have a sufficiently powerful and complex set of algorithms that allow it to face human intelligence, just like in chess.

It's easy to say but it's difficult to do so.

The more complex the wargame, the more difficult it's to teach the computer how to deal with a supercomputer such as the human brain.

It's not enough to calculate all the possible variants in each movement or action (which is already a miracle), but, for example, to interpret a "sacrifice" (and not confuse it with a mere error of the human player), or know in what moment is passed from the offensive to the defense. These two examples can be considered more as a state of mind or play comfort than as a strict calculation of possibilities.

By the way, some of you have wondered how a computer would react, after all its calculations and analysis, in front off the result of the dice (for example, 1-1 or 6-6). Would he cheats? (we, the humans do it!)

Semper fidelis
Red2112
Posts: 1355
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:02 pm

RE: Which wargame has done it best?

Post by Red2112 »

ASL so you can play online 1 on 1...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NghyHAzw-RE

You can also find Panzer Blitz, and Squad Leader in the Steam Workshop for TTS.

Red
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”