Reading replies here in Computer Wargaming, I see a lot of you trumpeting the virtues of solo play. It's easy to get a game going (which I suspect is the reason the majority of us do this computer thing), the time and pacing of play is up to you and many other good reasons to pick solo over multiplayer.
What I don't understand is a reluctance to play mp that I have seen expressed here. Wasn't that why we got into games in the first place? To test your skill against another human being? To share your experience with someone else?
While I play solo way more often than mp, I would love nothing more than to have a dedicated day and time to play games with my friends. I know real life can intrude, but, the friendships built and the fun to be had playing against humans far outweighs any scheduling conflicts for me. So what say you guys, solo? Or MP?
I think for most people it's a matter of time and coordinating a game within everyones availible schedules. Also I like to game to decompress or relax and MP isn't necessarily conducive to that.
I agree with Bison's comments. I play exclusively solo...total freedom to do what I want, when I want to, and to explore different stratgies, settings, set-ups, etc. etc. and I can quit when I want, and all in a relaxed, stress-free setting.
Quote from: Rayfer on October 07, 2012, 12:37:49 PM
I agree with Bison's comments. I play exclusively solo...total freedom to do what I want, when I want to, and to explore different stratgies, settings, set-ups, etc. etc. and I can quit when I want, and all in a relaxed, stress-free setting.
+1
Really? What about camaraderie? What about proving your skill against a human? I understand time constraints and relaxation, but I'm not asking for hours on end. And with the ability to voice chat while you play, it's almost as if your friend(s) are right there with you.
I completely agree with Bison. Having two kids and an active family life, scheduling multiplayer gaming is just too problematic for me. Playing against AI is (usually) sufficient.
Quote from: MetalDog on October 07, 2012, 01:29:52 PM
What about camaraderie?
I have a one-word answer to that: MMORPG. When I do play something multiplayer I generally prefer co-op. MMORPGs are, in general, suited to me in this respect, especially more modern ones such as
Rift and
Guild Wars 2. I can jump in, complete a few quests or whatever with random people or guildmates, then log off when real life beckons.
QuoteWhat about proving your skill against a human?
This doesn't apply to me at all.
Quote from: MetalDog on October 07, 2012, 01:29:52 PM
Really? What about camaraderie? What about proving your skill against a human? I understand time constraints and relaxation, but I'm not asking for hours on end. And with the ability to voice chat while you play, it's almost as if your friend(s) are right there with you.
Maybe if I was single, childless, and jobless I would have a different opinion:). Just don't have that time and flexibility.
I completely agree with Huw the Poo.
I used to fly Aces High 2 and I don't know if the stars just lined up that day or what, but I happened to get into a squad perfectly suited to me on my first try. That was a magical two years or so of gaming, really made some great online friends and the game was a ton of fun.
Eventually the squad broke up due to RL and every time I've gone back to AH2 I haven't been able to find that same magic as the first time.
I do play some MP, though, but it's games where I can jump on a server full of unknown people, blow things up for a while, and then log off....RO2, WotR (when I was doing beta), things like that. With time constraints, doing scheduled MP is just not really feasible, especially living in Hawaii with the time difference.
I will admit that my situation is more conducive to available time slots. But I work sixty hours a week, have a girlfriend, and a child and his family that live with me. I also understand the allure of solo play for all the reasons stated above. I guess what I don't get is, where is the itch to compete? As a whole, are wargamers immune to the call of whooping a$$? Some of the best times I have had playing are a hard fought battle that my superior tactics/production/maneuvers/luck/etc. won me over a good friend. The sense of accomplishment is satisfying far more than beating an A.I. And, you get to talk smack :-)
I think we all have that itch to compete...its just easier to beat the Sh*t out of an AI then to organize an MP game.
Well the AI in CoH just kicked my ass...again.
i find PBEM play a happy meeting of the two sides of the arguement
I love competing, playing against a human opponent (almost a must for me) but at my own leisure. The big problem with online play is i have to be at the PC at 20:00 or someone elses evening is going to be spoiled and sometimes that cant happen, or there is other stuff to do, whereas PBEM is - 'i can send it now, tonight, tomorrow, theres no rush, no pressure'
Quote from: undercovergeek on October 07, 2012, 02:13:38 PM
i find PBEM play a happy meeting of the two sides of the arguement
I love competing, playing against a human opponent (almost a must for me) but at my own leisure. The big problem with online play is i have to be at the PC at 20:00 or someone elses evening is going to be spoiled and sometimes that cant happen, or there is other stuff to do, whereas PBEM is - 'i can send it now, tonight, tomorrow, theres no rush, no pressure'
PBEM = No pressure.
I play solo
In all honesty - the drive to win at all costs is a behaviour all too many humans suffer from - and I don't - and whilst I don't mind losing on "equal terms" - I hate massaging cheats ego's
I don't know if you are going to read into that that I think everyone is a cheat ofr not - I guess some people will take that view. That's not my point. My point is I know people cheat out there and I have no interest in being beaten by a cheat - and since you never really can tell, he can massage his ego by using someone else...I'm not doing it.
Besides - I'm crap enough at these games to have a decent challenge from the AI more often than not. ;)
I'm with Dredd. Having to deal with some hyper ventilating alpha type who just has to win is tiresome. When I do play MP, (I play ArmA and Iron Front with SimHQ) I much prefer co-op mode and would rather sit out the free for all deathmatch rounds.
Even when I played IL2 online obsessively for a few years, I tended to team up with a few other guys who were focused on completing mission objectives instead of just hanging around and dogfighting.
Depends on the game.
Wargames = MP. Outsmarting people is more satisfying than outsmarting AI. But the game should be short.
Wargames that take a long time to finish = solo
Action / Shooters = MP. These games become really scripted when playing solo.
Simulation = Solo. I do not want some random people spoiling the simulation world because of their inconsiderate behavior.
RPG = I don't play.
I have to say, I am surprised at the responses. While it's true, I love to win and play games for just such a reason, I would never think of cheating or doing something hinky to gain the upper hand. And if playing a game is what you enjoy, then why play for any reason other than to win? Try different strategies? Absolutely! But that doesn't preclude winning. To leisurely while away some time? Sure. Games can be relaxing and enjoyable, but they all have rules and some sort of endgame that could be considered winning. So why not try to win? And a drive to win doesn't automatically make you a hard driving alpha or an insufferable a-hole who has to tell you how bad you lost.
It's joy of playing and competing against like minded people that brings me to these games. A desire to show your knowledge and acumen in knowing the rules of the game, and warfare, to achieve your objective(s) and come out the winner. And as good friends will often do, razz each other for unfavorable outcomes or boneheaded ploys that didn't work.
So, while I see all of your reasons for enjoying solo over mp, I guess I don't understand why it's preferable to play solo rather than against an opponent. Anybody else feeling me?
I feel like you're trying to win this thread.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on October 07, 2012, 06:37:30 PM
I feel like you're trying to win this thread.
I was going to say the same:) Either way, I think it is fine that some folks enjoy MP while others do not. That is why all the good games have both modes:) I don't see my viewpoint ever changing, just in my blood to play only single player.
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on October 07, 2012, 06:43:13 PM
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on October 07, 2012, 06:37:30 PM
I feel like you're trying to win this thread.
I was going to say the same:) Either way, I think it is fine that some folks enjoy MP while others do not. That is why all the good games have both modes:) I don't see my viewpoint ever changing, just in my blood to play only single player.
No. Not trying to win. I'm really not trying to change anyones mind. I am really trying to understand why some people perfer solo and some mp. :-)
I think its been explained Metal Dog. Some of us like to play at our own pace, pause when we want to get another beer,put the kids to bed, watch a bit of tv with the wife....whatever....then come back to it. Some of us also game to get immersed in an era and just enjoy simulating a war in that period. I dont have to prove anything....if anyone thinks any of these wargames are close enough to real life that you could step into napoleons shoes or something, your crazy. So if some guy proves that he is better at building a civilozation than me, I don't care. I just like to have fun.
Lastly, I deal with people all.day long. My gaming time is solo. I get to think and relax by myself and i dont want to spend that time beibg forced into chat conversations with other players.
PBEM is good, but there are times when I can't get time to game for a week.
I understand. I just didn't think I was in the minority of how and why people played these games.
When I was a young lad back in the days of board wargaming I sought someone other than my brother to play desperately. Most of my friends were not into boardgaming and I had zero interest in playing sports with them. Thus I was alone. By the time computer multiplay came along I had no time to devote to daily multiplay but plenty of people out there want to play. Oh the irony of life.
These days I spend about 10% of my time fragging people and getting fragged in shooters for no more than 25 minutes at a sitting. I have two PBEM games going on now and I find that PBEM play is a good compromise between time and playing other humans in a strategy game.
I don't think you are a minority in terms of playing MP. The reality is that most of the games with MP have communities setup specifically for the purpose of MP gameplay. I used to be pretty active over at theblitz.org to get PBEMs for my Tiller titles. I haven't done it in awhile, because of time and it started to become a chore rather than a pleasure to process a turn and send it out.
I think there is opportunity here for some MP action, but you'd need to setup dates and times and get folks to commit to the games. I've setup the Steam home group so that anyone can use the schedule calender to arrange MP games. I think Huw used it once, but otherwise it's basically gone unused.
Quote from: Bison on October 07, 2012, 08:38:43 PM
I've setup the Steam home group so that anyone can use the schedule calender to arrange MP games. I think Huw used it once, but otherwise it's basically gone unused.
Soon as I get home, I think I will. CKII MP anyone?
I don't have much to add that hasn't already been voiced by the others here in terms of playing more SP then MP. However, I have to agree with MetalDog's surprise that more of the members of GrogHeads aren't doing more MP.
Depends on the type of game for me. I definitely go multi player with shooters. Not so much with RTS games, mainly because I'm not all that great at them. I've actually never played a big strategy game MP.
Working evening shift for many years, I only had the am's to get on the computer when there was nobody online anyway so I always only played solo. Going back to my Amiga days that was the only choice you had and so it feels more natural to me. For comraderie and smack-talk I have Grog-Heads.
For me playing against the computer is a poor substitute for playing against a person or people. It's not so much the competitive urge (which is just as well coz I usually lose), though I am competitive by nature. It's more to do with the variety you get and the social side of things. I mostly play a couple of online FPSs and combat flightsims - and I usually only play those when someone I know is online. I also sometimes get a buzz out of venturing into the unfriendly skies on my own - knowing that what I do, whether it be good or bad, will be seen by other people.
I can get by playing wargames against the PC as the fog of war can compensate for the AI not being interesting, plus I tend to view wargaming as a solo activity. I would actually like to play CMBN or a Total War game (or a "proper" wargame) against a real person in real time, not PBEM, but that would eat into family time too much. Plus I worry that I'm too much of a noob at them (as my son would have it) and haven't the time/inclination to properly learn.
As others have pointed out, there is a problem with scheduling. I do fly IL2 with a squad regularly, but it's a very relaxed atmosphere and we all understand that real life can get in the way. Squad nights are like meeting up for poker or pool or five-a-side footy - the chat is almost as important as the game.
Quote from: MetalDog on October 07, 2012, 06:29:51 PM
I have to say, I am surprised at the responses. While it's true, I love to win and play games for just such a reason, I would never think of cheating or doing something hinky to gain the upper hand. And if playing a game is what you enjoy, then why play for any reason other than to win? Try different strategies? Absolutely! But that doesn't preclude winning. To leisurely while away some time? Sure. Games can be relaxing and enjoyable, but they all have rules and some sort of endgame that could be considered winning. So why not try to win? And a drive to win doesn't automatically make you a hard driving alpha or an insufferable a-hole who has to tell you how bad you lost.
It's joy of playing and competing against like minded people that brings me to these games. A desire to show your knowledge and acumen in knowing the rules of the game, and warfare, to achieve your objective(s) and come out the winner. And as good friends will often do, razz each other for unfavorable outcomes or boneheaded ploys that didn't work.
So, while I see all of your reasons for enjoying solo over mp, I guess I don't understand why it's preferable to play solo rather than against an opponent. Anybody else feeling me?
LOL - I knew my post would be taken like that.
I'm not talking down about people having a desire to win. Not at all. I'm talking about people who will reload and reload and reload a level in order to get the result they want.
Look at the hacks out there for Battlefield 3 and all the other online games...there are cheats about - and I have no desire to help make them feel big and clever.
And I didn't say you were like that or that it ever crossed your mind. I'm just saying I'm not willing to massage a cheats ego - and as I have no idea who is cheating and who isn't - and game developers (for the most part) seem to steer clear of closing cheats and hacks - I just don't partake in it.
Like I said - being so bad at these games I often get a decent game from the AI
Quote from: JudgeDredd on October 08, 2012, 06:56:38 AM
Quote from: MetalDog on October 07, 2012, 06:29:51 PM
I have to say, I am surprised at the responses. While it's true, I love to win and play games for just such a reason, I would never think of cheating or doing something hinky to gain the upper hand. And if playing a game is what you enjoy, then why play for any reason other than to win? Try different strategies? Absolutely! But that doesn't preclude winning. To leisurely while away some time? Sure. Games can be relaxing and enjoyable, but they all have rules and some sort of endgame that could be considered winning. So why not try to win? And a drive to win doesn't automatically make you a hard driving alpha or an insufferable a-hole who has to tell you how bad you lost.
It's joy of playing and competing against like minded people that brings me to these games. A desire to show your knowledge and acumen in knowing the rules of the game, and warfare, to achieve your objective(s) and come out the winner. And as good friends will often do, razz each other for unfavorable outcomes or boneheaded ploys that didn't work.
So, while I see all of your reasons for enjoying solo over mp, I guess I don't understand why it's preferable to play solo rather than against an opponent. Anybody else feeling me?
Like I said - being so bad at these games I often get a decent game from the AI
That is another big reason for me as well. I know people always comment how poor a games' AI is, but for the life of me it still usually kicks my butt:)
QuoteI know people always comment how poor a games' AI is...
This is just another thing many wargamers bitch about that I don't really give much attention. I play PBEM and against the computer.
For a long time I hesitated to play MP games. I was afraid of being tied down to a commitment and the game becoming more a responsibility and work than fun. I was skeptical of the type of people I would be playing against (mostly from poor experiences playing online chess) and frankly I was afraid of embarrasing myself.
After awhile I found playing the AI of most of my PC wargames started to get stale. For example playing the Tiller wargames, there is only so much SB you can play vs the A.I. and only so many scenarios...loved the system but it gets stale. Another example are the Steel Panther based games. I also disliked the fact that after playing an AI for awhile you start learning how to beat the AI with tricks and patterns and not beating it using tactical or strategic skill. I ended up joining Blitz and hanging about the forums for awhile and finally gave PBEM a try. I was hooked! It brought new life to the Tiller and SP games for me, they are truly made for PBEM. My dread of dealing with egos and cheats was ill founded. I have only had one or two negative experiences and the solution was simple...I don't play them any more. I am pretty busy with work and 3 girls all under 8yrs old so my time is limited and varied. I just make sure I am upfront with my opponents in giving a realistic turn around time on games we play, this avoids a fun game becoming work for me or frustration for my opponent. I have had great experiences and met a lot of great folks playing PBEM (on Blitz in particular). So for me who up until a few years ago was a 100% solo gamer with no thought of MP (I would skip over the MP section of game reviews or feature listings), I now have 2-3 PBEM games going at all times. I think I am going to try Matrix Decisive Campaigns next...(though the AI games have been pretty darn good).
My PBEM experience went so well that I thought I might like MP real time games also....well...um...I didn't. I just do not like having to play a game at a pace that is not my own, or really dealing with people in real time. I may give MP flight simulatiors a try someday as that sounds like fun, we'll see.
I guess my point is that if you have not given MP a shot you might want to give it a try. You can really meld your MP experience to fit your wants and needs. If you have tried and it didn't float your boat for whatever reason...well that is good to...at least now you know you are not missing out :)
I've tried MP
I've tried it with FPS games and watched all the little wall hackers and headshot specialists and thought "Nah". I've tried racing online only to have wreckers flying round not giving a shite who they hit.
It's not all been bad. The good experiences I've had were as members of a clan (co-op) and racing online - both of which with a good community made for a great online experience - but I simply don't have the time to do online gaming to that level.
I've also tried PBEM - and it really takes away from the immersion for me...so it's not all about not trusting people. Licking up a file, loading it, watching what your opponent did and then taking your turn and sending the file - only to wait and wait and wait - or not - point is having no idea when that file will be back to you...it just breaks the immersion and the game for me.
When I want to play a game - I want to play it then...not have x minutes playing and then wait for an unknown amount of time to have your next game.
It's a "broken" gaming experience for me. Just not enjoyable.
For about 7 years I played flight sims online. I was in the top 10%. I used to compete, write guides, and mentor. Truly, it was the best flying that I've ever seen or done.
However, even without formal competition, it was very stressful. I have cardiac problems and a night of on the edge flying could leave my hands shaking, and also chest pains ... Despite the fun.
If you want to teach, it is not enought to be published or have good references, you must be able and willing to prove yourself constantly. The gun slinger in those old West flicks is a good analogy.
Being Top Gun in many ways restricted my freedom. Flying anything but my preferred game could result in me losing that all important touch and timing.
So, in a very real sense MP limited my gaming freedom to play other flight sims or explore other genres. Since going offline in 2001, I have branched out considerably, and experienced a rennasaince of gaming. So, I am fine with no human opponents.
As far as the social aspect of gaming goes, that's why I participate here!
Quote from: Bison on October 07, 2012, 12:23:07 PM
I think for most people it's a matter of time and coordinating a game within everyones availible schedules. Also I like to game to decompress or relax and MP isn't necessarily conducive to that.
+ 1
Quote from: MetalDog on October 07, 2012, 02:04:25 PM
I will admit that my situation is more conducive to available time slots. But I work sixty hours a week, have a girlfriend, and a child and his family that live with me. I also understand the allure of solo play for all the reasons stated above. I guess what I don't get is, where is the itch to compete? As a whole, are wargamers immune to the call of whooping a$$? Some of the best times I have had playing are a hard fought battle that my superior tactics/production/maneuvers/luck/etc. won me over a good friend. The sense of accomplishment is satisfying far more than beating an A.I. And, you get to talk smack :-)
After 40 year of beating people at games, as a rule I prefer playing a reasonable AI. I guess most of my gaming never has been about competing, but more like reading or watching a movie. I still play some PBEM and even some online stuff, but most of the time I prefer to be mildly puzzled by the AI. To some degree, this is just something I've learned over time. You can get a good PBEM or a good online thing going, but I've learned to enjoy playing the AI because the AI is better than PBEM players who disappear or online situations that degenerate.
Also, I often modify the rules (especially in boardgames) or even mix games (for example, using Elusive Victory air rules in Harpoon 4.1) and your average player isn't happy with such things -- but I am.
Thanks for all the good responses guys. Having a larger sample size gives me a clearer understanding of my original question. I may have come off a little priggish to begin with, but my makeup and my reason for playing games I thought were way more common than what I saw in the initial replies.
@Judge Dredd-I was pretty sure you were making a general statement, not a specific one. Having played several RTS MP, I have found that what works in one group doesn't always work in others. Amongst my friends, I regularly win. Stepping out into the general community, I tend to get my a$$ handed to me. A very humbling experience.
It's all about hassle and relaxation.
I like MMOs because it's simple to get into.. and you can still pretty much play solo with all the extra chat options & such. PBEM is the most annoying, due to the extra hassle, wait times between turns, and RL affecting the frequency.
Quote from: MetalDog on October 08, 2012, 06:16:35 PM
I may have come off a little priggish to begin with
Not at all! It just seemed to me that, as someone who prefers MP, you were genuinely surprised to find yourself in the minority. As far as I recall, whenever a developer has talked about SP vs MP in their games, those playing exclusively or mostly MP are always in the minority.
Quote from: MetalDog on October 08, 2012, 06:16:35 PM
Thanks for all the good responses guys. Having a larger sample size gives me a clearer understanding of my original question. I may have come off a little priggish to begin with, but my makeup and my reason for playing games I thought were way more common than what I saw in the initial replies.
@Judge Dredd-I was pretty sure you were making a general statement, not a specific one. Having played several RTS MP, I have found that what works in one group doesn't always work in others. Amongst my friends, I regularly win. Stepping out into the general community, I tend to get my a$$ handed to me. A very humbling experience.
Ok - sorry - perhaps I read into that more than I should've.
Quote from: Nefaro on October 08, 2012, 08:12:40 PM
PBEM is the most annoying, due to the extra hassle, wait times between turns, and RL affecting the frequency.
Wha? Surely the easiest.... Is my turn in? Nope, cool ill play some whatever.... Is it now, yes it is.... Play turn send back out
How is that hassle?
Quote from: undercovergeek on October 09, 2012, 03:28:10 AM
Quote from: Nefaro on October 08, 2012, 08:12:40 PM
PBEM is the most annoying, due to the extra hassle, wait times between turns, and RL affecting the frequency.
Wha? Surely the easiest.... Is my turn in? Nope, cool ill play some whatever.... Is it now, yes it is.... Play turn send back out
How is that hassle?
I agree. The best thing about PBEM is that it is pretty easy to manage in terms of time and nature of your game.
Online FPS -- while definitely the most fun -- I'm wary of them since if you get pretty good at them they can eat up a lot of time.
I've pretty much stopped online FPS because I just get too far into it. Maybe when I retire again I'll go back to laughing at midnight
when I jump out of my M-10, shoot the guy with the MG42 with my 45, take the MG and rampage onward.
Come to think of it, jumping out of one's tank isn't even considered good ettiquette anymore is it?
Anyway for now plundering Athens with Sulla and Barbo is more relaxing.
Quote from: undercovergeek on October 09, 2012, 03:28:10 AM
Quote from: Nefaro on October 08, 2012, 08:12:40 PM
PBEM is the most annoying, due to the extra hassle, wait times between turns, and RL affecting the frequency.
Wha? Surely the easiest.... Is my turn in? Nope, cool ill play some whatever.... Is it now, yes it is.... Play turn send back out
How is that hassle?
Because I tend to lose interest after the constant waiting, for one.
By the time a scenario is finished, a month later, I'm already on to some other genre and the turn-around typically gets slower & slower between turns. I'd rather just have a head-to-head session than PBEM anymore.
I suppose the Slitherine-Matrix PBEM server has made this a lot less painful, but there are only a handful of games that use it.
Quote from: Nefaro on October 09, 2012, 03:49:18 PM
Quote from: undercovergeek on October 09, 2012, 03:28:10 AM
Quote from: Nefaro on October 08, 2012, 08:12:40 PM
PBEM is the most annoying, due to the extra hassle, wait times between turns, and RL affecting the frequency.
Wha? Surely the easiest.... Is my turn in? Nope, cool ill play some whatever.... Is it now, yes it is.... Play turn send back out
How is that hassle?
Because I tend to lose interest after the constant waiting, for one.
By the time a scenario is finished, a month later, I'm already on to some other genre and the turn-around typically gets slower & slower between turns. I'd rather just have a head-to-head session than PBEM anymore.
I suppose the Slitherine-Matrix PBEM server has made this a lot less painful, but there are only a handful of games that use it.
Exactly how I feel about pbem
As Toonces The Wise alluded to...MP-ing works best when the game format, the on-line or MP opponent, and mutually recognized goals all fall into alignment.
SOME FPS games absolutely beg to be played in MP format - Red Orchestra and mods, America's Army, and the "old" Day of Defeat are some titles that immediately come to mind. The trick here is to find a game / server where most (if not all) gamers are "like minded". I've played some amazing games where everyone is "mission focused", but I've also played some games where just 1 or 2 TK-ing fookers or 2 or 3 campers can wreck the whole game.
But not all FPS games work that way. The run-and-gun-and-power-up-and-bunny-hop genre never held my attention, and I never cared for Mechwarrrior "capture the flag" games where everyone loaded up with the biggest mechs they could and just blasted away at everything that moved. In fact, of the many CTF games I played of MW, I recall MAYBE one or two games where someone won by actually "capturing the flag".
Similarily, I've played RTS MP games where there was excellent gameplay and camaraderie, and others where it was much less so. Back in the Close Combat 3 days, I had some great head-to-head games where good tactics were mutually applauded. On the other hand, I've played a few CMAK games where my opponent's idea of a great game was to load up on German armor and wait in defense. It was okay for one or two games, but after that, it was deja vu, all over again.
My best MP experiences have been via PBEM, so long as you set the expectation early and continue communication throughout. If I'm taking off for the weekend then I'm taking off for the weekend and please don't expect a "move" on Sat and Sun. A little polite chatter via the game or email is nice, too...but trash talk is really not necessary.
As for flight-sims? I loved playing IL-2 on-line, but I was always out-classed by the guys who a) had really good joystick, etc hardware and b) spent hours on-line playing. It's a tough line to walk because I have no time for arcade sims (which is what I am expecting from World of Planes) but I also don't have the mojo for the hi-fi sims, either.
Yours in mostly solo gaming,
Jack Nastyface
Quote from: Jack Nastyface on October 09, 2012, 05:04:19 PM
As for flight-sims? I loved playing IL-2 on-line, but I was always out-classed by the guys who a) had really good joystick, etc hardware and b) spent hours on-line playing. It's a tough line to walk because I have no time for arcade sims (which is what I am expecting from World of Planes) but I also don't have the mojo for the hi-fi sims, either.
Jack Nastyface
I think flightsims are a special casein video gaming. I think there is a real discrepancy (over and above hardware ownership) between those who can play and the rest. I've played a few sports IRL and I've found that there are those who just have it and those that don't. Those that don't can work to get up to the level of the talented few, but it'll be a hard road.
What interests me with combat flightsims is that there are people who seem to have it, which makes it a skill-based "sport" as opposed to just a video game.
Playing wargames face to face, especially with friends, would easily rank as my all time favorite hobby. Unfortunately, for all my passion, and not too shabby of a wargame collection, I have a heck of a time ever making it happen. I'd have to say that the lengthy play time of your average wargame is the biggest stumbling block. Personally, I have no issues with starting a game with the expectation of it taking more than one session to complete. Most of my opponents are not as keen to start something that can't be finished in a single sitting. And even when they are open to a multi session game it isn't always convenient. Just last weekend for example I started a game on Axis & Allies 1940 Europe (technically only half of the A&A 1940 game...and a Milton Bradley title at that!) and after a full day of play we were about half way into it. While we were both interested in finishing it another day there just isn't enough brownie points in the world for me to rent the dining room table for week+, so we had to resort to taking a dozen or so pictures of the board setup before we packed up...which I'm almost certain will not have caught enough details for us to be able to reconstruct.
I love MP...but fly solo most of the time out of necessity. Guess I should think more seriously about PBEM or Vassal as I'm sure I'd get better results.
Good flight simming can be taught. I've done it.
My dreams came true when I recently was awarded primary custodial care of my 13yr old son who enjoys wargaming! We moved into a townhome together and half of the livingroom is taken up with a couple of game tables. Up Front, ASL, Co-op Ambush, Ukraine'44 were the most recently played. We also have LAN'd our computers so we've gotten in some Combat Mission but expect to play others if we tire of boardgaming (never!). What's even better is that he beats me almost every time in Up Front, so that encourages me to play better; yet I've owned him in ASL thus far (I can see that changing someday soon). We hope to get Day of Heroes on the table if I can ever figure out those rules that throw me for a loop for some reason.
When playing computer games solo, you may think the game is just ok. But when playing against people, the same game truly shines and you realize that this is what was intended to get the full spectrum of the game... I play both ways, but find multi player a lot more fun....
Quote from: MarkShot on October 10, 2012, 01:21:31 PM
Good flight simming can be taught. I've done it.
Yes, but could you
always do it? My point is that there is a degree of hand-eye coordination and spatial-awareness required in these games which exceeds all others. I'm a better "pilot" now than I was when I started, but I can see that that I won't ever be able to match the guys who can really do it. To my mind this is a positive thing as it marks the game out as something genuine.
Quote from: GJK on October 10, 2012, 05:07:35 PM
My dreams came true when I recently was awarded primary custodial care of my 13yr old son who enjoys wargaming!
Congratulations, Gary! Two years ago I was fortunate enough to have my two sons come into my full time care as well. I know how happy you must be right now!
I like PBEM because it does not interfere with my regular gaming.
Another solution is to have several PBEM games going on at the same time. You will soon realize that it get's quite busy at times and won't be boring.
Finally, pick an opponent who can at least reply once a day. The Blitz.org community has pretty consistent PBEMers.
Quote from: Father Ted on October 11, 2012, 06:20:21 PM
Quote from: MarkShot on October 10, 2012, 01:21:31 PM
Good flight simming can be taught. I've done it.
Yes, but could you always do it? My point is that there is a degree of hand-eye coordination and spatial-awareness required in these games which exceeds all others. I'm a better "pilot" now than I was when I started, but I can see that that I won't ever be able to match the guys who can really do it. To my mind this is a positive thing as it marks the game out as something genuine.
There was a lot of concepts that went into good air combat. I was older and didn't have the reflexes of the younger guys. But I never put on good air shows. But I understood energy fighting. Every maneuver I made was about efficiency and gaining E while my opponent lost it relative to me. Finally, when the time was right I would cash in E for the kill.
So, I taught E fighting. Also, I taught the psychology of dog fighting how to vulnerable when you weren't really, while given you opponent rope to hang themselves.
Finally, I taught progressive techniques. Meaning one slick move was not needed. Instead repeated moves executed slightly better would accumulate an advantage. A large number of my students went on to the top of competition ladders.
It wasn't about being a natural. I am very analytical and I believe reviewing one's performance, breaking down the process of what worked, tweaking it, and testing it in the cauldron of combat.
This approach can be applied to all human competition which isn't purely luck based. It's our brains that make us winner. Only Olympic athletes and pro sports players are dependent on perfect bodies and conditioning. Not PC war gamers.
That's fascinating, MarkShot. Have you taught any other games?
I love what you're saying Markshot. Energy is key in dogfighting. I found this air guide playing Battlefield Heroes to be especially good. Read his first 4 posts, good stuff!
http://www.battlefieldheroes.com/en/forum/showthread.php?tid=30176
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sci.fi%2F%7Efta%2F2-4.gif&hash=5d59941cdfcb305f624b5c3825f13e0c48eaf889)
Quote from: W8taminute on October 12, 2012, 08:40:26 AM
Energy is key in dogfighting.
That's the heart of it.
And
not screwing up.
It definitely takes training & practice but most people can learn that stuff given time. The biggest problem practicing it in video games is primarily the spatial awareness part. That's why so many dedicated simmers get TrackIR so they can (somewhat) keep their head on a swivel and easily keep an eye on everything going on about them. Having to rely on key/button commands to move your view around, in a sim dogfight situation, is the biggest hurdle to deal with and the spatial awareness that provides is essential.
Most cut the spacial awareness-interface corner by having a 'Snap view' key where you can quickly snap your view to your selected target and some basic directional views linked to the Numpad on the keyboard and the Joystick Hat. The Snap view is the biggest help, but it
only lets you look at one selected aircraft. The JoyHat/Num views are a big pain in the ass because it doesn't feel natural in combination with your joystick handling and your flight maneuvering suffers while you're looking around (although the snap-to-target view isn't so bad since it's typically more orientation friendly when stick-pulling).
I haven't invested in a TrackIR system as I don't play flight sims too terribly often anymore, and the same money can buy MOAR GAMES instead. :) Another annoying limitation is nice smooth rudder controls, but I'll save that bitchin' for another day. ;) I'm not a pro and I don't flight sim all that often, but I
do enjoy learning the ins & outs.
I've bought 2 TrackIR 4s. The first time I just couldn't get used to it and sold it on eBay.
Second time I convinced myself I hadn't given it a fair chance...so many people raved about it...and so bought another one. Ended up selling that cheap too.
I just could not get it setup so it was sensitive enough to movement to make it useful but be less sensitive when activating buttons in the cockpit.
If I could look around with ease without moving my head too much, I could never keep it still enough to activate cockpit buttons and if I made it stable enough to activate cockpit buttons, it required too much in the way of real head movement when looking about.
Both times I wasted my money.
Yeah, I can't imagine I'd ever like the TrackIR either. I've never been tempted to get one.
I'd love to have one of the more expensive stick/throttle setups though.
There is a PDF version which is better formatted which I can email, but I found this HTML one online.
This was my last dogfighting guide:
http://eaw.wikispaces.com/Shoot+To+Kill+from+MarkShot
I have done guides for Panther Games RDOA, HTTR, and COTA.
I also did extensive guides for 1830PC.
But for the air combat (Falcon 3, Flanker 1.5, and EAW), I actually had real students who I tutored interactively. My other work, you'll just have to take my word for it that I knew what I was doing.
The majority of noobs do not know how to use the vertical.
Also, they quickly grasp corner speed which is the fastest degrees/second. But in a fight, you often don't want or need corner. You want to invest the least E necessary to bring your nose around. Most often that conservation of E involves turning in the vertical. Let gravity slow your speed and improve your turn, and E is conserved. Sooner or later whe you hold the E advantage you convert to position and lead pursuit for a guns solution.
When your opponent holds the E advantage you sucker him into squandering it. A comon technique is to Split-S. Your opponent in try to match you will fail, but bleed a lot of E.
When you are E negative, you maneuver to converge E states. When are E neutral you maneuver to diverge E states with banking it to cash in later. E fighters win fights win one turn at a time.
No external views, no force feedback, no track IR, no VCR, ...
Simply observe your own speed, stick deflection, opponent's nose and maneuver.
I haven't even addressed psychology. You have an E advantage and opponent on your six. Go up in a gentle climbing turn. Turn just enough to keep him in lag pursuit that he can taste you and want to shoot. When he finally slows to the point of near stalling and can barely get his nose down, you convert to a flat turn and come around on him, and take him out.
I call this suckering someone up. You got make it look good so that he really feels he just a few degrees of getting the shot.
But I will stop here or I will turn this into a prop head thread ... Besides if I can get back home I really to get back on patrol in U-72.
Excellent guide MarkShot. That is going to help me out immensely!
Send me a PM with an email address and I'll email you an easy to read PDF.
Markshot,
A long overdue "thanks". I recall reading your shoot to kill guide back in the day....I think I might even still have the original pdf I downloaded once upon a time.
I hate to sound like a blamer, but some of my combat flight-simming prowess has always suffered due to crappy equipment. I've never spent more than $25 on a joystick, and the Logitech 3d Pro that I still use is probably 7 years old. It's so bad that I almost never do take-offs/landings because the Z-axis rudder twist has a ghost in the machine and is prone to sudden right-turns.
Quote from: Huw the Poo on October 12, 2012, 12:44:11 PM
Yeah, I can't imagine I'd ever like the TrackIR either. I've never been tempted to get one.
I'd love to have one of the more expensive stick/throttle setups though.
I have to say head-tracking does add to flightsims, IMHO. Note that I'm not saying it makes you
better! Decent gear does help. I have a cheapish stick (T16000) plus a home made throttle-box (has sliders for throttle, pitch, rad and trims) and pedals, though a twist stick is as good as pedals, really. Having sliders for the other bits really is a help, though.
The Track IR helps a lot. It's really easy to keep your eyes on your target regardless of which direction your plane is pointing. (unless, like me, you prefer the Tempest in IL-2. For some reason Oleg felt it necessary to recreate the Great Wall of China in the back of the cockpit). You can see what he's up to and plan your counters accordingly. It also frees up hats on your stick and throttle to map to other functions.
Good gear is an asset, but not as much as you might think. I think issues that prevent most people from flying as well as they might are:
1) Not understanding the strengths and weaknesses of their aircraft. I'm always befuddled when I see somebody in a P-51 trying to get into a turn and burn fight close to the deck or a Spitfire trying to get into a vertical fight with a 190.
2) Lack of patience. Especially true for BnZ E fighters. I see lots of guys with an E advantage piss it away and get into a turn fight because they couldn't get rounds on after 3-4 passes.
3) Lack of situational awareness (this is the one I'm most guilty of). People get fixated on their target and forget to look around and see if his buddies are about to come and give you a 20mm bukkake. Wingmen, Track IR, and Teamspeak help a lot here.
If you want a sim that requires superb focus, timing, and endurance, then try auto racing. Just a one second lapse will send you flying out of a turn. In my experience racing is far more grueling than dogfighting or FPS.
Now, if you want genre that fits my age and joints, then you have submarines. I can just about handle controlling a sub in real time without hurting myself. Clear the Bridge! Dive, dive, dive!
:)
I do have more to say. If you have spatial awareness to ride a bike or drive a car, then you good to go with flight sims. Youth and good reflexes makes you want to fly tricky. Tricks will work against noob to moderate players, but the top players will not out trick you. Instead they will out think you!
I saw folks who put on such good air shows that they would intentionally put opponents on their six to do things like force an overshoot.
That's f**king insane. That's like me allowing someone to disarm me and put a gun to my back so that I can reverse the situation. Insane.
Students used to ask, "what do I do when I have someone who has saddled my six at 600'?". I would answer, "then, you die". The point is not to get into such a situation in the first place.
To stay on topic ... I am glad that there was a time in my life that I played online 2-4 hours/day and that my wife fully encouraged that. However, now I am happy to just play when and as I want.
I regularly study chess and continue to s**k big time. I am glad that none have the opportunity to see how pathetic I am. If you could, I might give the game up entirely. MP or SP doesn't matter as long as you are having fun.
Quote from: MarkShot on October 12, 2012, 07:06:21 PM
I regularly study chess and continue to s**k big time.
I'm going to guess that is a subjective statement. I can't imagine that someone of your accomplishments is as bad as all that. Having said that, chess is a giant pain in the neck to play against anyone with a brain. Unless you have the ability/talent to see three moves ahead constantly, you are going to get smoked.
Whether playing hockey as a kid, sim flying, or chess, the intellectual lessons must become ingrained and instinctive. I understand forks, skewers, pins, passed pawns, pawn skeletons, zuscwang, tempo, ... But they are concepts to me and not a framework by which I see the board. Until I see the board as my lessons describe the board I will continue to trip over my own skates as I pivot to skate backwards and play defense. And the spectators will laugh!
I stick with the basics. The knight moves in the shape of an L. Bishops move like / or \. Yeah my win record is low, but I continue to keep the first 5 to 6 moves competative.
Chess ... P-51s ... It don't mean squat to me ... Just tell me where I can find a convoy! I'll even add you to my XMAS card list with a photo of me and the crew in front of U-72!
To add to that ...
The knight changes color every move.
It takes three moves to move one space over.
It is valuable in the early game and in closed pawn structures it is more valuable than the bishop.
It is of limited value on the side of the board.
It is good for blocking passed pawns and forming an outpost.
It is the only piece which can deliver check with intervening pieces.
It can be pinned on the side by a bishop.
It can achieve a smothered mate.
It is adept at forking.
Because of its short range it can be trapped or sucessfully attacked by a king in the end game.
Despite this, I still s*ck!
I had a Bobby Fischer chess book growing up. It was mostly illustrations of games in progress. You then had to figure out what they asked of you: use the knight to checkmate in three moves; using your rook, take white's Queen in four moves; etc. I liked that book and I was good at solving the puzzles, once I knew what they were looking for. There was another one with a title similar to,"Seeing three moves ahead." Pretty similar to the Fischer book. I was adept at solving those, too. What always befuzzled me was the opening move. I never read a book on those.
Chess has opening books (pretty much preplanned play based on statistical results of thousands of games). The middle game of tactics. The end game with a few pieces that follow some fairly typical patterns. A knowledge of each is of value, but I admit studying openings is kind of boring.
This is a great thread that I've been planning to reply to for like a week now. Better late than never, I guess. ???
I think we derive enjoyment out of games for two main reasons.
For those of us who started out playing board games (and that includes pretty much anybody who started gaming before 1985), gaming is a social experience. This fact was reinforced to me several years ago when I and a couple high school buddies got in the habit of weekly gaming sessions where we'd just play some game (usually a co-op game of some sort) while jawing away at each other on Skype. Whether playing against each other, or playing together against a game system, there's a huge social element to it.
But another source of enjoyment in all gaming is the puzzle-solving aspect of it. Winning a game is fundamentally about solving a puzzle better than the opponent. This is one aspect where PC-based games shine. Playing solo, it's the primary source of pleasure. It's also where that dreadful/wonderful "one more turn" dynamic gets engaged.
I LOVE playing MP, because of the social aspect of it. But I'm not really that eager to play with strangers--socializing with strangers just isn't something that's appealing to me right now. Partly because my own availability is crazy (wife, young family, etc.), partly because my recreational time is limited (see above), and partly because I really don't want my limited gaming experiences squandered with some stupid dip peeing all over my gaming experience, I've just never gone the MP route with strangers. Mostly, because I don't know somebody, it makes me not prone to trust them and it just gives me one more thing to worry about as I'm playing.
I come to gaming because I want escape from stuff in life. Playing MP with strangers, I fear it would be too likely to just reintrude the hassles of life I try to escape from when I game.
Maybe if I tried it, I'd like it. But I'd be such a flaky gaming partner, I only really trust good friends to try carrying that load.
Solo, just like sex.
I enjoy playing PBEM games. I spend most of my free time during the day at work planning my moves, then send in the turn having forgotten to do something critical then spending the next day trying to recover. :)
I sometimes enjoy traditional multiplayer, but usually only with people I know or have come to know online. The 'unwashed masses' of the Internet can really spoil a good game. There are too many people who will sacrifice fun just to win, people who get online only to irritate others, etc. Often it seems Internet Anonymity brings out the worst in certain people. Myself, I try to be the same me digitally as the me you'll see in person.
Also, with my husband/father/full time working lifestyle I can't keep up with the teenager learning curve of many of the online games. I start out on an even keel, but before you know it on games like Battlefield 3 they know all the hidey holes and are maxed out before I even see all the maps in rotation.
Multiplayer strategy games can often be broken down into a perfect build order, and I never play online long enough to learn that build order...and even if I did...I would probably stop playing the game. I don't like to think of games as puzzles to figure out. I like to think of them as a canvas to try different strategies, or to learn new things about subjects I'm interested in. Though, Wargame: European Escalation seems to break that "build order mold". I just stink at it. :)
The best and worst experience I've had with multiplayer has been Aces High the online flight sim. Sometimes it can provide that rare feeling of 'being there'. Yet...I've quit the game 3 times because of the community. I've just seen at Gamersgate I can buy 2 months for $7.50....and I'm thinking "Should I?"