State of Combat Mission Quick Battle v AI?

[fabius]

Haven't picked up Red Thunder yet. But am wondering what the state of Quick Battles against the AI are like?

The reasons I'm interested in QB are

1. I prefer Infantry vs Infantry.

2. A lot of the old scenarios used to often feel so scripted to be puzzle like. Prefer more open play.

[Cyrano]

I need to know where you "left the story" of CMx2's QBs.  Put another way, what do you want me to compare them to?  As is well known, QBs in CM:SF were and are horrid, especially since you can't cherry-pick the OOBs.  Matters are better now, and this directly affects the AI.

Also, do you want the AI to pick the units or do you want to do that for a) yourself and b) the AI?

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[Rayfer]

I play Red Thunder but have had no experience with the prior Combat Mission games so I can't make a comparison. But on its own merits I find Red Thunder QB's to be excellent.  In fact, it is about all I play.  It is quite versatile regarding maps, units, etc. In other threads the AI has been both praised and criticized...I think a lot of it has to do with the skill of the player. I am tactically challenged so I find the AI gives me quite a fight...I win some, I lose some.

[fabius]

I need to know where you "left the story" of CMx2's QBs.  Put another way, what do you want me to compare them to?  As is well known, QBs in CM:SF were and are horrid, especially since you can't cherry-pick the OOBs.  Matters are better now, and this directly affects the AI.

Also, do you want the AI to pick the units or do you want to do that for a) yourself and b) the AI?

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

CMSF. And prefer AI to pick their forces so there's some what ifs.

Just loaded one for CM Normandy old version to see how that plays. But wondered whether there was much advancement with it in Red Thunder. Tempted to pick it up but balancing that with the Black Sea game on the horizon.

[Sir Slash]

Agree with Rayfer though I don't play QB's, Red Thunder is a tougher opponent than CMBN or CMFI's AI. It can be brutal at times especially with the larger, more open maps and the more powerful, long-range weapons. I've adjusted my usual difficulity setting down one and still have a tough time getting the win. The AI now reacts to your actions such as getting reinforcements when you engage them to a certain level and this can really have you looking over your shoulder a lot. Some very nice new features too. Much improved from CMBN and CMFI.

[fabius]

Thanks Rafer and Sir Slash. Really does sound like they've come on a long way. Probably will end up pulling the trigger on RT as I've got the tactical itch. May just may hold out until after Black Sea though.

By they way, did abstracted close combat make it in?

[Sir Slash]

I haven't gotten close enough to the enemy to see but I don't think it's changed any. Most cases from CMBN, if my troops get that close the enemy either surrenders or runs away. Or they just shoot it out.

[Cyrano]

You cannot compare scenario AI to QB because the latter lacks the well-developed set of triggers that scenario designers can use for the former.  The TACAI remains very good -- as frankly it was in the CMx1 series given its limitations -- but the broader AI will still show its limitations, particularly on the attack.

Its ability to pick forces is vastly improved over CM:SF and I'm not merely damning with faint praise.  I think it's helped a lot that they abandoned the idea of truly random maps in favor of letting you pick from a selection of MP blanks which the AI manages much better.

Bottom line:  coming from SF to RT, you won't even recognize the QBAI.

Enjoy.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[fabius]

Thanks Jim. Probably end up with Red Thunder before their new modern game as East Front always has a big pull.

[Rayfer]

Another thing I like about RT QB's is the ability, if I opt to do it, to choose the specific forces on both sides.

[fabius]

Another thing I like about RT QB's is the ability, if I opt to do it, to choose the specific forces on both sides.

That would help to make sure they get good infantry mix. Just got the WW2 Tactical thing at the mo'. Probably from playing H&G and HoI3 and watching documentaries.

Back in CMBB days two things were climaxes:
1. Close combat sounds, highly abstracted, but the imagination filled in the blanks.
2. Units going fanatic or highly suspecting an enemy unit had.

[Cyrano]

On the close combat thing -- with the notable exception of buildings -- I have never seen troops get anywhere near that close to each other before either being slaughtered to a man or breaking and running.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[fabius]

That's how it was with SF. Just figured that the rare occurrence in buildings, night, or thick woods etc may have made it in.

[Boggit]

Agree with Rayfer though I don't play QB's, Red Thunder is a tougher opponent than CMBN or CMFI's AI. It can be brutal at times especially with the larger, more open maps and the more powerful, long-range weapons. I've adjusted my usual difficulity setting down one and still have a tough time getting the win. The AI now reacts to your actions such as getting reinforcements when you engage them to a certain level and this can really have you looking over your shoulder a lot. Some very nice new features too. Much improved from CMBN and CMFI.

I totally agree with Sir Slash. I did an article on Red Thunder and had some feedback from Steve Grammont on the new AI routines...
http://grogheads.com/?p=4626#more-4626

[panzerde]

CMRT is definitely a winner, both in QB as mentioned but also in the scenarios. If you have the tactical itch this one needs to be on your drive.