The trouble with realism..........

[undercovergeek]

is its too real!

This must not be taken as a criticism of any game or any way in which a game works, BUT, playing a PBEM game of CMBN, I would say its taken IRL about 2 weeks to sneak around the back of the Axis line with a couple of tanks and some infantry. Turn before last im in the perfect position, Sherman behind some trees, bazooka team in the long grass, supporting infantry looking for enemy infantry - what could go wrong? This turn? Sherman rolls forward, bazooka crawls to edge of field, Tiger tank comes into view amongst the trees, Sherman misses twice, bazooka team kneel up, hit, no damage, miss, Tiger turns round, everyones dead. A great little vignette of Normandy combat for you.

Theres no reason at all for the sherman to miss a 50m shot, twice, or the bazooka team - we're all pointing at the ass end of the Tiger so it should have been the perfect ambush, but it went wrong, tomorrow it might go right, or might not, but i dont want the fact that the sun was too bright, the fields too dry, the sherman crew too have had too much bacon for breakfast factored in to whether i hit or not - i hate to say it, but in a normal RTS/TBS game this would have all worked out properly. If i point at my Hand of Nod Mega Monolith Awesome Tank and click it at the Chinese Instant Death Dragon Tank it rolls forward, shoots, hits and everyone gets what they expected from the transaction.

So, am i getting too old for 'realism'/simulation, do i not have enough time to game to factor in these 2 weeks that have all been a waste of game time, do i not want realism, or do i just need a game that simulates Tank A drives to point B and shoots Tank C and i get what i asked for. And this leaves me another question, if the nitty gritty of strategy pisses me off because i KNOW that ambush should have worked, im at a fork in the road - get a game where im the tank driver and ill do it my-frikking-self, or do i go operational and not sit and watch my hapless pixeltruppen fail to do what i damn well told them to do? Or should i applaud a system that throws spanners in the works (more than occassionally on my part?!)

In short im off to watch the Panther game tutorial vids, i dont like the system, never have but im in the market for operations as down at the ground level i always feel i could have done it better myself

Thanks for listening  :P

[JudgeDredd]

Probably just some frustration kicking in. The Combat Mission game style of WEGO is probably the most fair is it not? Though I'm guessing you are more specifically speaking about the accuracy in this respect than the game system (I only mention it because you say in an RTS/TBS game the correct thing would've occurred).

What your post DID highlight to me though is why I don't play PBEM - 2 weeks invested in one scenario! That's dedication - and frustration when it goes pear shaped.

[undercovergeek]

Probably just some frustration kicking in. The Combat Mission game style of WEGO is probably the most fair is it not? Though I'm guessing you are more specifically speaking about the accuracy in this respect than the game system (I only mention it because you say in an RTS/TBS game the correct thing would've occurred).

What your post DID highlight to me though is why I don't play PBEM - 2 weeks invested in one scenario! That's dedication - and frustration when it goes pear shaped.

yeah, only ever play CMBN as WEGO, like i said its not a complaint, more of a 'am i playing the right game for me' - im not upset at that particular mini battle that went wrong, i would just like the gun to go bang when i say so, the tank to turn right when i say so, and troops to jump over the wall when i say so, instead of having a myriad of unseen dice rolls and factors at work which influence the outcome without me knowing about it, which leads me to think i should play something more simplistic. In simple terms, playing an FPS, i died because i stuck my head out, reloaded mid shoot out, ran across open ground, or the little bastard kept jumping up and down, but at least i know why - in 'some' games its not that easy and id like the game to explain to me why it didnt work, or tell me beforehand the probability of it working and show me what its working out - if trees are in the way ill move, if ammos low ill wait blah blah

[Zulu1966]

is its too real!

This must not be taken as a criticism of any game or any way in which a game works, BUT, playing a PBEM game of CMBN, I would say its taken IRL about 2 weeks to sneak around the back of the Axis line with a couple of tanks and some infantry. Turn before last im in the perfect position, Sherman behind some trees, bazooka team in the long grass, supporting infantry looking for enemy infantry - what could go wrong? This turn? Sherman rolls forward, bazooka crawls to edge of field, Tiger tank comes into view amongst the trees, Sherman misses twice, bazooka team kneel up, hit, no damage, miss, Tiger turns round, everyones dead. A great little vignette of Normandy combat for you.

Theres no reason at all for the sherman to miss a 50m shot, twice, or the bazooka team - we're all pointing at the ass end of the Tiger so it should have been the perfect ambush, but it went wrong, tomorrow it might go right, or might not, but i dont want the fact that the sun was too bright, the fields too dry, the sherman crew too have had too much bacon for breakfast factored in to whether i hit or not - i hate to say it, but in a normal RTS/TBS game this would have all worked out properly. If i point at my Hand of Nod Mega Monolith Awesome Tank and click it at the Chinese Instant Death Dragon Tank it rolls forward, shoots, hits and everyone gets what they expected from the transaction.

So, am i getting too old for 'realism'/simulation, do i not have enough time to game to factor in these 2 weeks that have all been a waste of game time, do i not want realism, or do i just need a game that simulates Tank A drives to point B and shoots Tank C and i get what i asked for. And this leaves me another question, if the nitty gritty of strategy pisses me off because i KNOW that ambush should have worked, im at a fork in the road - get a game where im the tank driver and ill do it my-frikking-self, or do i go operational and not sit and watch my hapless pixeltruppen fail to do what i damn well told them to do? Or should i applaud a system that throws spanners in the works (more than occassionally on my part?!)

In short im off to watch the Panther game tutorial vids, i dont like the system, never have but im in the market for operations as down at the ground level i always feel i could have done it better myself

Thanks for listening  :P

Funny -but your description to me is what makes Combat Mission a game above all others. I like my number certainties in traditional baordgames / computer games, but there is nothing else out there that does tactical combat like combat mission.

I personally tend to have operational moods when I will play Panzer campaigns or decisive campaigns. Then I might have a napoleonic mood or an ACW. But then will want to go back to tactical. Sometimes I will slip into a fantasy mood and play elemental.

Just think after your 2 week long stint you may be sated on tactical. CM takes a lot of effort to play if you are doing it properly which is obviously what you were doing. Maybe you just need a little break from all the tactical thinking.

[MengJiao]

is its too real!

This must not be taken as a criticism of any game or any way in which a game works, BUT, playing a PBEM game of CMBN, I would say its taken IRL about 2 weeks to sneak around the back of the Axis line with a couple of tanks and some infantry. Turn before last im in the perfect position, Sherman behind some trees, bazooka team in the long grass, supporting infantry looking for enemy infantry - what could go wrong? This turn? Sherman rolls forward, bazooka crawls to edge of field, Tiger tank comes into view amongst the trees, Sherman misses twice, bazooka team kneel up, hit, no damage, miss, Tiger turns round, everyones dead. A great little vignette of Normandy combat for you.

Theres no reason at all for the sherman to miss a 50m shot, twice, or the bazooka team - we're all pointing at the ass end of the Tiger so it should have been the perfect ambush, but it went wrong, tomorrow it might go right, or might not, but i dont want the fact that the sun was too bright, the fields too dry, the sherman crew too have had too much bacon for breakfast factored in to whether i hit or not - i hate to say it, but in a normal RTS/TBS game this would have all worked out properly. If i point at my Hand of Nod Mega Monolith Awesome Tank and click it at the Chinese Instant Death Dragon Tank it rolls forward, shoots, hits and everyone gets what they expected from the transaction.

So, am i getting too old for 'realism'/simulation, do i not have enough time to game to factor in these 2 weeks that have all been a waste of game time, do i not want realism, or do i just need a game that simulates Tank A drives to point B and shoots Tank C and i get what i asked for. And this leaves me another question, if the nitty gritty of strategy pisses me off because i KNOW that ambush should have worked, im at a fork in the road - get a game where im the tank driver and ill do it my-frikking-self, or do i go operational and not sit and watch my hapless pixeltruppen fail to do what i damn well told them to do? Or should i applaud a system that throws spanners in the works (more than occassionally on my part?!)

In short im off to watch the Panther game tutorial vids, i dont like the system, never have but im in the market for operations as down at the ground level i always feel i could have done it better myself

Thanks for listening  :P

Funny -but your description to me is what makes Combat Mission a game above all others. I like my number certainties in traditional baordgames / computer games, but there is nothing else out there that does tactical combat like combat mission.

I personally tend to have operational moods when I will play Panzer campaigns or decisive campaigns. Then I might have a napoleonic mood or an ACW. But then will want to go back to tactical. Sometimes I will slip into a fantasy mood and play elemental.

Just think after your 2 week long stint you may be sated on tactical. CM takes a lot of effort to play if you are doing it properly which is obviously what you were doing. Maybe you just need a little break from all the tactical thinking.

I can't face PBEM much these days.  It was fun for 10 years or so, but the one predictable thing about it is that it takes an awful lot of time.

On the other hand, a quick run of CMBN in real time takes relatively little time.  Usually I just build a little scenario centered on something I want to see in realistic, cinematic terms (most recently Churchill IVs versus STGIIIs and Marder IIIs) without necessarily having a clear overall view.  Half an hour to set the thing up.  Ten minutes to run.  And then some variations.  All very quick and satisfying.  And stuff blows up right in front of your cinematic eyes.

[Sir Slash]

I've been there too. Many times in fact. The list of tactical errors and friendly fire casualties I've cause in all the CM games over the years would fill-up the NYC phonebook. The fact that so many unpredictable things can happen in any CM game is what I like and also what frustrates me about the game. In the original CM, my US Army Greyhound armored car once killed a German King Tiger tank. How the hell did that happen? The first shot hit the gun barrel disabling the gun, the second shot hit the tread immobilizing the tank and then the green crew panicked and abondoned the damned thing. It's great when it goes your way but s--t when it doesn't. I find I often get more of a break from the game if I dial down the difficulity level but nothing's gonna stop that random kick-in-the-balls it's gonna give you. Just know you've got lots of equally frustrated company man.

[SgtRock]

Did you really think you could kill a Tiger with a Sherman and a zook?

[Staggerwing]

You can if you shoot it in the ass. Just ask Oddball.

[SgtRock]

You can if you shoot it in the ass. Just ask Oddball.

Only works if you get real lucky!!!

[undercovergeek]

it seems entirely plausable, youll notice however the Sherman didnt hit anyway - but back to your point, if a sherman cant kill a tiger from behind even at 50m, let alone using a historical simulation, lets discuss real life - surely then the Tiger is indestructable and Germany won the war?