Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustement

Upsilon88
Private First-Class
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon 29 Apr 2013 10:30
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby Upsilon88 » Sat 1 Jun 2013 14:21

I must admit that I had to wait too much of this campaign ...
Unfortunately, I find it just very heavy ...

let me explain:

- No explanation of why and how to share a block of text at the beginning of the game.
- 20 minutes on the battlefield is too cost for those like me who like to take their time and control the whole map for example ... it takes away any sense of epic battle
- The endless towers ... I found myself on the campaign 4 to 4 fights chained one after the other before moving on to the next round ... it's heavy ... we would like to manage more stuff between two fighting ...
- I liked playing with a personal deck as multi
- I still do not understand the influence of certain events that happen from time to time.

Anyway ... I leave the country and devote myself to hoping for a multi pacth with a little more fun for the campaign

Hawke21
Corporal
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri 31 May 2013 19:21
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby Hawke21 » Sat 1 Jun 2013 14:46

This is not a skirmish play or multi, this is a singler player campaign, I have never seen one where you could set the time limit yourself.


Total war games, all of them. Selection between 2 or 3 different times and unlimited. I personally feel 30 min is more the mark due to the CV hunt and limited forces. As for AI, the omniprescense is a bit too good. All else, thanks for the comments.

Falcrack
Lieutenant
Posts: 1418
Joined: Sat 18 Feb 2012 21:10
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby Falcrack » Sat 1 Jun 2013 15:05

AI should not be allowed to act upon it omniscience in the form of arty on a given spot unless it has actually spotted a unit there it wants to arty. It should not make a beeline for units that it has not previously spotted, especially CVs.

In fact, I stand by the assertion that a good AI is one that does not need to have omnipotence in order to be effective. I can handle income buffs, fine, but the problem with AI omnipotence is that it negates the ability of the player to hide and ambush. When playing against another human, there is always a level of uncertainty whether a particular area is well defended or not. Thus the need to proceed more slowly and with generous amounts of recon. The AI doesn't have this issue, it knows exactly what you have got, where you got it, and lays down a nice artillery barrage on top of its head to boot all without having spotted the units in question. It knows when CVs are unprotected, and heads straight for them. Seriously, there are good RTS games out there with competent AI which do not have this AI omniscience, see Supreme Commander 2 for example.

User avatar
Breadbox
Captain
Posts: 1667
Joined: Sun 20 May 2012 12:12
Location: Cannot into Space
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby Breadbox » Sat 1 Jun 2013 15:18

Here"s so e mainly overlooked issues

-Nearly unuseable and badly composed brigades:
Airassult brigades,there seem to be noway to make this work.A bridge which consists of almost entirely of Infantry whose price is inflated to a ridiculous extent due to transport(60 riflemen in blackhawks anyone?)

A more ideal composition of transport would be 50% of the general infantry in cheap heli transports,30% in upgraded helo transports while the remaining 20% gets the most hopelessly expensive transports.Until them,Air-assault will remainly fairly pointless.Moreover,the unit variety featured in the campaign is extremely lacking(tank bridges comes with over 9000 T80s and hardly anything else).I know the brigades are suppose to be realistic bit it comes to the point where its Horrifyingly boring to play.No possibility of combined arms or unit synergy what so ever.

-US Marine Brigades
Again,its the transport option which breaks everything,every single Marine Section is mounted on Lav25! :x Where are the Lvtp??Are you sure this is a "historically accurate brigade composition"?Having A Lvtp as its strategic map icon while not containing a single Lvtp just adds to the irony. :|

-Meaningless attrition
While using a Naval/Airborne bridge against a mech/tank brigade.The only way to win is to spawn camp and hope for the Ai to fast move enough nonsense in your ambush.

However,with the current bridge composition,victory conditions and draw outcome,the underdog brigade is complete and utterly screwed.For a starter amour brigades consists of an inexhaustible source of heavy tanks.
Fending off T80s with 4 Nm142?No problem,but the problem is that on the second day,the remainly 70 T80s is going to come at you with a vengeance,not at all affected by the immense casualties yesterday.
Last edited by Breadbox on Sat 1 Jun 2013 15:21, edited 1 time in total.

fabius
Master Sergeant
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu 1 Nov 2012 23:52
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby fabius » Sat 1 Jun 2013 15:19

Hawke21 wrote:
This is not a skirmish play or multi, this is a singler player campaign, I have never seen one where you could set the time limit yourself.


Total war games, all of them. Selection between 2 or 3 different times and unlimited. I personally feel 30 min is more the mark due to the CV hunt and limited forces. As for AI, the omniprescense is a bit too good. All else, thanks for the comments.


Add to that Combat Mission. There are other's but they escape me right now.

fabius
Master Sergeant
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu 1 Nov 2012 23:52
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby fabius » Sat 1 Jun 2013 15:23

Breadbox wrote:Here"s a mainly overlooked issue.

-Nearly unuseable and badly composed brigades:
Airassult brigades,there seem to be noway to make this work.A bridge which consists of almost entirely of Infantry whose price is inflated to a ridiculous extent due to transport(60 riflemen in blackhawks anyone?)

A more ideal composition of transport would be 50% of the general infantry in cheap heli transports,30% in upgraded helo transports while the remaining 20% gets the most hopelessly expensive transports.Until them,Air-assault will remainly fairly pointless.Moreover,the unit variety featured in the campaign is extremely lacking(tank bridges comes with over 9000 T80s and hardly anything else).I know the brigades are suppose to be realistic bit it comes to the point where its Overwhelmingly boring to play.(No possibility of combined arms or unit synergy etc)

-US Marine Brigades
Again,its the transport option which breaks everything,every single Marine Section is mounted on Lav25! :x Where are the Lvtp??Are you sure this is a "historically accurate brigade composition"?Having A Lvtp as its strategic map icon while not containing a single Lvtp just adds to the irony. :|

-Meaningless attrition
While using a Naval/Airborne bridge against a mech/tank brigade.The only way to win is to spawn camp and hope for the Ai to fast move enough nonsense in your ambush.

However,with the current bridge composition,victory conditions and draw outcome,the underdog brigade is complete and utterly screwed.For a starter amour brigades consists of an inexhaustible source of heavy tanks.
Fending off T80s with 4 Nm142?No problem,but the problem is that on the second day,the remainly 70 T80s is going to come at you with a vengeance,not at all affected by the immense casualties yesterday.


I've had some good results with the US Air Assault. Very good brigade for sub T80's especially in Urban.

Mixed results from US Paras, but that's to be expected against Mechanised. I'm all for players having choice; but I really like the problems and opportunities that 'realistic' limited formations bring.

3rdEye
Specialist
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat 1 Jun 2013 16:21
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby 3rdEye » Sat 1 Jun 2013 16:49

Hawke21 wrote:
This is not a skirmish play or multi, this is a singler player campaign, I have never seen one where you could set the time limit yourself.


Total war games, all of them. Selection between 2 or 3 different times and unlimited. I personally feel 30 min is more the mark due to the CV hunt and limited forces. As for AI, the omniprescense is a bit too good. All else, thanks for the comments.



Yes, this. And another thing that as an example Medieval Total War II AI does is to actually hunt you down if your general is dead and you're hiding units in forests. It will first move the entire force, then after a while it will split in to several groups until it has you surrounded and you have no other choice than to engage or retreat. MTW II is 6.5 years old.

I don't mind the AI getting more points, more units, more of everything to make it harder for me to beat but an all-seing AI just takes away lots of strategic elements, surprise being one of them.

Last night I had a series of holding battles I knew I would probably eventually lose, but I had a unit on its way to reinforce. I had rec-units placed to see any and all approaching AI units and my CV in the bushes in the back corner safe and guarded. The AI then comes with a large strike force, which I kind of expected was due anyway, but it just made some effort to engage my front-line forces while it wanted to continue moving past to somewhere else. I knew I was doomed anyway, so I just dropped everything and see what the AI wanted to do if I did not hinder it. It went straight for my CV in the back corner, under the cover of forest.

While the Total War series ain't at all perfect when it comes to AI management, they have gotten a lot right through experience during the years. While the AI core is in the executable, the parameters (how the decisions are made) are easily accessible for anyone and can be modded, and has been to a large extent by users as well. I guess there's more than a certain pride involved when making one's own game, but some times there's no need to reinvent the wheel if someone has one that works and one can look at.

WAB is just off the shelves, and I happy to see that the developers are working so actively with patches and also being in contact with the community. I personally think this game has great potential, once it's all patched up and adjustments are made. All I can do, for myself, is to hope the all-seeing AI is reworked.

That's my 5 cents on the matter.

Grosnours
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2091
Joined: Mon 17 Sep 2012 23:00
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby Grosnours » Sat 1 Jun 2013 17:14

Falcrack wrote:AI should not be allowed to act upon it omniscience in the form of arty on a given spot unless it has actually spotted a unit there it wants to arty. It should not make a beeline for units that it has not previously spotted, especially CVs.

In fact, I stand by the assertion that a good AI is one that does not need to have omnipotence in order to be effective. I can handle income buffs, fine, but the problem with AI omnipotence is that it negates the ability of the player to hide and ambush. When playing against another human, there is always a level of uncertainty whether a particular area is well defended or not. Thus the need to proceed more slowly and with generous amounts of recon. The AI doesn't have this issue, it knows exactly what you have got, where you got it, and lays down a nice artillery barrage on top of its head to boot all without having spotted the units in question. It knows when CVs are unprotected, and heads straight for them. Seriously, there are good RTS games out there with competent AI which do not have this AI omniscience, see Supreme Commander 2 for example.

Indeed.
AI shortcomings are bearable in skirmishes or scripted missions (WEE) but here it becomes quite painful to play against it.
I did try the hardest campaign on the highest AI settings and it was an exercise in frustration. Same campaign on normal AI and it‘s a cakewalk thanks to its reduced efficiency.
So it goes like that (pretty much all the time) : AI creates one or several blobs with IFV(one or several grous of 4), tanks (2x2 mostly, sometimes more), a couple of SPAAG and some other AA. Plus some arty and some IFV reserve. It then proceeds to send the blob directly on straight line against your CV which it will always smoke as a warning. Your recon are high priority targets for blobs and arty artillery. Planes are a somewhat rarer occurence but some ennemy battlegroups sure love their helos.

The AI level changes a lot the efficiency and its drive. At medium difficulty level blobs might be sitting around a lot. Not that much in very hard.

So you would think "hey great news, I can sure ambush those blobs!". Well actually no, AI knows everything. So your ambushing ATGM will be shot to death very quickly (just after your reco) and forests are your only survival chance for the tin can called "tanks" you are sporting around. It's a damn blessing arty is so ineffective given you're treated with frequent iron showers. The only ambush which actually works incredibly well is when you happen to have buildings (towns are a must) on the way to your CV. There you can see the AI mindlessly suicide all their preciousunits on your entrenched units. Btw don't forget some supplies (LAW run out quickly) but be careful as it's also a high priority target for AI.

To survive, it quickly devolves to that :
- put your CV in a forest of a spawn zone, place 8 tanks around it
- place lots of cheap recon around
- if you're lucky enogh to have a town, some inf in buildings
- buy nothing else ! ATGM is killed when it aims, arty is useless and air is not a big threat so no AA at first

You wait, buy as much bombers as possible and when the blob comes send them all on their AA. Then pick all the units with air raids. Of course you have to pray that all the ennemy tanks and IFV haven't killed your CV as they are driving right at it.

Once you spend a few turns like that you can begin "counter-attacking". And by that I mean being incredibly gamey and sneakily cancel the ennemy spawn points with your CV at the very last second. Yes, for an all-knowing AI obsessed by CV, it does a very shoddy job preventing those kind of operations.
Once you've done that several battles in a row (after the fist time cancelling, think about taking 4 tanks with you and have them roam around as it scares the AI CV away and you can take the spawn for yourself), congratulations you have reache the famous "Alamo" stage. It's all about tedious CV hunting there, so it's pretty straightforward.

All in all playing against the AI is just that: playing the AI and its default to death. It's damn gamey and sometimes outright boring. It almost feels like both you and the AI have been parachuted in a completely foreign environment with foreign rules and you're both struggling with them.
An AI that would actually be tailored for the campaign and its specific rules would go a very long way into making the campaign a much more enjoyable experience.
Image

seannybgoode
Specialist
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri 20 Apr 2012 17:33
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby seannybgoode » Sat 1 Jun 2013 19:56

It seems like the vast majority of users are not enjoying the campaign. I get there are a vocal minority of community members defending their baby, I get that. But most people are not enjoying the campaign.

I saw a dev response, and aside from one issue, it was entirely dismissive of the problems with the design. I would strongly suggest taking these concerns more seriously, as your customer base is upset with what they received. The multiplayer is great, but the campaign is awful and tedious. Maybe we don't get what it's "about", but if that's the case, then you've failed in your design and it needs to be looked at.

The fact of the matter is though, that the campaign just doesn't work. Maybe it works for the designer, because those are the kinds of battles he/she wants to play, but it really just doesn't work. The concerns brought to the table here are all quite valid.

Personally, if this doesn't get fixed, I will be thinking twice before pre-purchasing another focus title, or purchasing a focus title at all.

TKN_Jez
Corporal
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon 14 May 2012 18:13
Location: Lyon, France
Contact:

Re: Campaign - The thoughts, rant and proposals for Adjustem

Postby TKN_Jez » Sat 1 Jun 2013 19:58

Wister wrote:[...]
take this campaigns even higher! (co-op campaign anyone?)[...]


DO WANT!!!!!!!!!!! :o :o :o :o :o
Image

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests