Conflict of Heroes

[Bison]

Sorry Wodin, but those hardly constitute an overwhelming evidence as a completely hapless AI.  A couple of guys think it's too easy.  Which scenarios did they play?  How many times did they replay?  I don't know, but the first 2 scenarios are easy.  They are meant to be as they are the tutorials.  Reading what you linked it still seems as if no one has figured out a way to consistantly beat the a Russian AI in The Monsters scenario. 

[jomni]

I noticed that if a game was a port from a board game, the AI will not be as good as a human (Field of Glory is the best example).  This is because:
1) Scenarios are balanced
2) There are rules that are easy to follow for flexible human players but very dificult to code for the AI to follow or take advantage of.

This is the reason why World in Flames will come out with no AI during release.

Games with good AI are useually those purpose-built for single player action.  Game rules and mechanics are well though out to suit AI implementation.  Best example is Command Ops and Hannibal.

So far COH AI still puts up a challenge not like FOG.  I'm actually stuck now in "The Gap" scenario vs the AI.  Time will tell.

[joram]

I hear he AI is pretty poor so this means I shan't be buying.

Just out of curiosity, where are you hearing this? 
Everything I've seen - and most of what's been discussed here - is that it's a competent AI.  Maybe not a world-beater, but certainly not a negative overall for the game. 
Do you have online reviews/discussions you can link to?  Or were you just chatting with your mates about it? 
No issues if you've heard negatives; it's just that they run counter to what others have said so I think we'd like to see both sides of the story if you can point us that way.

thanks :)

Over on the Matrix forum. Since then I hear there are scripts that modders can play with. First link states users saying the AI is poor, the other two hint at it.

If it's as good as Command Ops which has the best out there then I take my hat off. I just don't want to buy it then fly through the scenarios beating them first time out.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3102781

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3104722

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3103911

As many people have stated, the earlier scenarios are easier and the later scenarios tend to be harder.  The additional firefight scenarios (of which there's a dozen-ish) also tend to be harder than the initial set of scenarios.  Since most people tend to play the scenarios in order, you find most of the comments are based on just the first few scenarios.  The AI is far from perfect but it is in my opinion orders of magnitude better than say Field of Glory which I have not once, ever, lost a scenario against the AI.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion but take the early reviews with a grain of salt.

[Bison]

Welcome about Joram!  I thought I'd seen you posting before today.

[joram]

Thanks, I actually only found out about it this week.  Then debated if I wasn't meant to be part of the club, then decided I didn't care, then debated whether I wanted to monitor another message board and then decided I didn't care again and thus here I am thanks to a lot of not caring!

[Wodin]

Sorry Wodin, but those hardly constitute an overwhelming evidence as a completely hapless AI.  A couple of guys think it's too easy.  Which scenarios did they play?  How many times did they replay?  I don't know, but the first 2 scenarios are easy.  They are meant to be as they are the tutorials.  Reading what you linked it still seems as if no one has figured out a way to consistantly beat the a Russian AI in The Monsters scenario.

I know, but it doesn't take long to work out how good an AI is in a game, and we all know 90% of the time they aren't. Command Ops never once has had negative comments about a weak AI even just after release. If I read a couple of people agreeing then I have to take some notice.  I was asked to link to the posts, so I have done. I'm not trying to prosecute in a court of Law or something here, nor am I saying the game as a poor AI as a fact, all I'm saying is thats what I read and until I came hear I heard no different, nor did I hear the AI being praised. Obviously everyones opinion and motive has to be taken with a pinch of salt on the net but you'd be silly to discount every compliant aswell.

Still as long as the challenge is there at some point and with the chance of AI scripts it sounds good. Not sure I'm going to buy it still, even taking the AI out of the equation I just don't  have that wargame itch at all. Also I know it's a boardgame conversion and all but I still feel games at this scale should monitored individual soldiers within a unit. If they had taken that from Squad Battles I'd be in. Take the best from SB and the best from CoH then that would be excellent. At the moment I have Red Victory and AOTR which though aren't that pretty and it's abstract nature can infuriate it's not as abstract as CoH, though CoH looks lovely.

Again if money was no issue I'd buy but more than anything I have no itch at all to play a Wargame.

[jomni]

Well SB is definitely more detailed and historical that this game.
If only SB gets the graphical 'wow factor' of Conflict of Heroes. :)

[LongBlade]

Thanks, I actually only found out about it this week.  Then debated if I wasn't meant to be part of the club, then decided I didn't care, then debated whether I wanted to monitor another message board and then decided I didn't care again and thus here I am thanks to a lot of not caring!

We're not heavily advertising right now, but this is not supposed to be a closed club. Tell your friends! All are welcome.

[Double Deuce]

The Info on the game says "This release includes a historical roster of infantry, artillery, mechanized and support units for the Axis and Soviet forces for the time frame of Operation Barbarossa."

Does that mean there are other forces in there or is this strictly German vs Russian because I would really like to play some Rumanians heading for Odessa?

[MikeGER]

Does that mean there are other forces in there or is this strictly German vs Russian because I would really like to play some Rumanians heading for Odessa?

IIRC sorry, i fear the answer is no
units are handled in a abstract way, but if the Rumanian's had no special equipment, i think you can reenact those fights with the 'Rifle' 'LMG' counters in the editor (...for example Russian partisans don't have a 'Partisan squad'  just 'Rifle' and 'Maxim' too) and unit stats can be adjusted with the level of experience you set for each unit   

[joram]

No, there are no Romanian units at this time, at least not distinguishable in characteristics from other units.

[Double Deuce]

No, there are no Romanian units at this time, at least not distinguishable in characteristics from other units.

IIRC sorry, i fear the answer is no

OK, thanks for the replies. Still probably get it.

[Bison]

Is the Storm of Steel expansion going to be limited to Germans and Soviets too?  I'm going to need to look up the board game website and figure out what expansions to expect.  I know that Guadalcanal is in future development.  A pacific consim would be a nice change from the WW2 west and east fronts.

[Keunert]

once i went pbem with wargames i never again enjoyed an ai much. it is probably ok with tactical or largely scripted games, but with operational games it is a lot more fun to play humans. the pbem part of CoH certainly looks like its nicely done.

[joram]

Is the Storm of Steel expansion going to be limited to Germans and Soviets too?  I'm going to need to look up the board game website and figure out what expansions to expect.  I know that Guadalcanal is in future development.  A pacific consim would be a nice change from the WW2 west and east fronts.

Storm of Steel expansion will be faithful to the boardgame which models battles in and around Kursk, 1943.  I believe it too would thus be purely Germans vs Soviets.