Wargames

[Red2112]

3 hours ago, Count Sessine said:

You're a lifesaver, I got it to work. Played it every day since Friday My review is very very positive: it is a super deep wargame, with tons of rules etc. They 'just' ported the Battletech tabletop game into a videogame, but they ported ALL of it, which makes it one of the most complex games I have played. It's got a strategy layer, Sims-like personnel management, all the fluff from Battletech, and Xcom-deep tactical game... Love it

Very happy to read that CS!

 

Glad you got It working, feel free to keep us posted on you´re findings, playthroughs, or what have you while exploring MegaMek. I for one will most welcome you´re contributions. 👍

[Red2112]

A bit of a overview...

 

 

[Apocalypse 31]

Second Front. 

 

It just didn't feel right. Come to find out that it uses Random Number Generation with combat engagements and no tertiary effects. You can literally fire at an enemy 20 times or 100 times but won't see any effects until you roll the right number. 

 

I don't want to refund it, but it also feels like the definition of insanity - doing the same repeatedly and expecting different results. 

 

The fact that they're using RNG as the basis for combat mechanics is really really sad and unfortunate. Other games like Close Combat and Battle Academy have figured out how to model effects of morale and combat effectiveness over time, instead of relying on a static number. 

[Red2112]

1 hour ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Second Front. 

 

It just didn't feel right. Come to find out that it uses Random Number Generation with combat engagements and no tertiary effects. You can literally fire at an enemy 20 times or 100 times but won't see any effects until you roll the right number. 

 

I don't want to refund it, but it also feels like the definition of insanity - doing the same repeatedly and expecting different results. 

 

The fact that they're using RNG as the basis for combat mechanics is really really sad and unfortunate. Other games like Close Combat and Battle Academy have figured out how to model effects of morale and combat effectiveness over time, instead of relying on a static number. 

That´s because It´s basically ASL (Avance Squad Leader), but In a digital form. Just like most board game wargames, which this game draws from too. Even the video I posted above talks about It, and that´s what the devs Intention has always been.

[Count Sessine]

Second Front.

 

I'm with Apoc on this one. I watched a gameplay video. It is almost 100% ASL which is fine by itself. But the whole idea of shooting and shooting and then if you're lucky, the enemy break, pin or you inversely have to flip the counter to half strength, is not doing it for me these days. I was a very happy ASL player back in the day (aka the Eighties :D), mind you.

 

But about RNG, what does it *really* mean? There must be RNG in all games, I mean at some point statistics become a choice between two numbers, right? Even in games like Graviteam.

 

 

[CalAB]

Because I play Diablo 3 I’ve become numb to RNG. 
But randomly generated numbers in a computer do not give true randomness. 

A quick internet search will show that RNG

is false on computers. 
 

 

 

[Ssnake]

Other approaches have other disadvantages. If you go with ballistic computations and line of sight collision tests, it's computationally more intensive (not such a big problem anymore these days), but then you need to invest a lot into AI so they pick the right target, aim right, and still have a chance of missing - ideally close to a human shooter's abilities. And this doesn't even account for cover and concealment effects. At the end of the day the question is, what level of detail is the game supposed to depict? At battalion scale, the details of how infantry shoots other infantry may not be of such dramatic importance. At the platoon and squad level you would absolutely want this to be done the right way.

The bigger challenge IMO is to make infantry-on-infantry engagements realistically protracted (without losing sight of the entertainment aspect). These types of battles usually consume a lot of time, appear somewhat chaotic and are, frankly, boring to watch if you aren't the one who's busy dodging bullets (in which case it's terror).

Heaven knows, after 25 years of development we still aren't there in Steel Beasts.

[Red2112]

There has to be some element of randomness, or even luck (If you believe In that) as there Is In real life. We don´t have perfect shooters In our army´s, or perfect conditions, or stone cold pulse, or even nerves of steel, do we? Not everything Is under control IRL, even If some think so.  More so with the gear In WW II, so these rules sets "try" to simulate some of those aspects with combat tables, modifiers, terrain charts etc.  These wargames test you´re strategies and tactics more then asking from you to have perfect aim because the game design Is made that way, they also try to add some historical accuracy, there not games that simulate ballistic computers. But all these games count on variables, charts and tables for randomness, and possible events not counted for, that´s were the numbers come In when certain conditions are meet, although not perfect because then, each turn would be way to long, or to short, and not fun.

 

Second Front since It´s early stages was meant to be a ASL like game but for PC, some may like that and others may not. There´s nothing wrong with that, what´s wrong Is expecting It to be something other then what the dev Intended It to be.  What I don´t understand now day´s Is that every time a new game comes out, some people expect It to be a better clone of another game they have already played. It´s difficult to find something new (fresh), Innovating and good at the same time, but It´s always been like that.

 

And while they might be using RNG elements, there´s new tabletop wargames coming out every month, and some sell out very fast, which means there´s a public for them, conventions, magazines and growing YT channels.

 

Might be easier for a PC wargame to get some things right, but a tabletop wargame Is a whole different ball game as nobody (or almost) wants to spend hours to play three turns of the game because they need to look up a ton of charts and cross check them to see If they meet certain criteria.

 

But surprisingly for some, ASL also tries to make a effort on covering those aspects of gaming/realism within the realms of RNG mechanics...

 

 

Just, talk and my opinion here, but the truth Is that Second Front Is based on a table top wargame.

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by Red2112

[Red2112]

The second edition ASL rule book (binder) video above Is just to show how much chrome you can have In a table top wargame with RNG mechanics, or you can play Second Front and forget the need of such rules to remember and/or look up for.  Second Front, ease of use without the fuss.

[Apocalypse 31]

6 hours ago, Ssnake said:

The bigger challenge IMO is to make infantry-on-infantry engagements realistically protracted (without losing sight of the entertainment aspect)

If ONLY other game developers figured this out at some point?

 

Close Combat 1 figured this out in 1996

Battle Academy 2 figured it out

Even Combat Mission continues to figure this out. 

 

Second Front developers couldn't figure it out and it feels like a children's game.

 

Real combat is NOT linear and isolated events but rather effects compounded over time and applied to psychological effects of a human.

 

Battle Academy and Close Combat do this VERY well and allow players to apply the basics of fire and maneuver by applying MASS against the enemy - consistent psychological effects after each engagement 

 

This doesn't exist in Second Front. 

 

3 friendly squads firing on an enemy is just 3 isolated dice rolls, whereas Battle Academy treats that same engagement like 3 compounded engagements.

Edited February 1, 2023 by Apocalypse 31

[Red2112]

Second Front developer. As in he Is a solo dev, and he has a artist for the graphics, just to make It clear.

 

The developer did NOT want to make a new game, or Invent new game mechanics etc. What he has done Is adapt a existing board game (ASL), and I say again, a board game, which Is not a computer game, and make It playable on PC.

 

It has nothing to do with what you are comparing It to, or expect It to be for that matter that´s why It doesn't exist!

 

You´re argument Is valid Apoc, but not In this case because that´s not what the dev was going for.  Second Front wants to be ASL on PC, that´s It.

[Red2112]

For TTS...

 

 

[Red2112]

In case you missed last months update, there has also been yet another update today...

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1109680/view/3674409756510130021?l=english

 

Last month...

 

 

[Apocalypse 31]

16 hours ago, Red2112 said:

What he has done Is adapt a existing board game (ASL)

Sure. But it doesn't play well or make sense to many people. 

 

People are starting to speak up about it. The developer is banning them. 

[Red2112]

2 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Sure. But it doesn't play well or make sense to many people. 

 

People are starting to speak up about it. The developer is banning them. 

 

Were do you see people getting banned?

 

Most of the people don´t know how ASL plays or how the phases In ASL work, aside from them expecting It to be "another" hex and counter game on Steam.

 

Needless to say, the Steam community Is well, just that, THE STEAM COMMUNITY!  A bunch of kids, trolls and what have you. For every 10 post. there 2 who may be reasonable If lucky!

[Apocalypse 31]

52 minutes ago, Red2112 said:

Most of the people don´t know how ASL plays or how the phases In ASL work,

I'm one of those people - but ironically, I find the SF mechanics to just be too simple. 

[Red2112]

Personally I don´t like playing tabletop wargames on PC, so It´s not a game that I will buy. Or any hex and counter wargame for PC.

 

ASL came out In 1985, and still being played and loved by many today, and there still making and adding scenarios/content for It. But the rules haven´t changed, they have added a lot more chrome, and rules to go with It (as seen In the 2nd edition rules book) since It´s release but that´s about It. The thing Is that with SF, It takes care of all those rules under the hood which streamlines hundreds of pages from the second edition rule book making It look simple. 

 

It´s like trying to play Harpoon 5, or Command Modern Operations. While CMO Is not a easy game to learn, Harpoon 5 will leave you´re head spinning while you learn how to play It. Harpoon 5 Is a tabletop minis wargame, and CMO Is It´s digital version.

 

BTW, some folks thought that Combat Mission (earlier versions) was the ASL on PC back In the days.  It goes to show that how a game Is presented can make the difference sometimes.

Edited February 3, 2023 by Red2112

[Red2112]

Demo available on the 6th...

 

 

[Red2112]

In the house...😉

 

 

[Mezentius]

21 hours ago, Red2112 said:

The thing Is that with SF, It takes care of all those rules under the hood

SF is not an entirely faithful depiction of the ASL rules, I’m afraid — it deviates in certain ways, and I’m not sure the developer has thought through the implications of those choices. For example, in ASL, you can combine FP from multiple squads onto a single enemy hex as a single attack, so long as those squads are adjacent to each other (it’s called a fire group). In SF you can’t do that, so all piecemeal attacks are resolved individually and can be shrugged off as low FP attacks on the results table.

 

I’m not sure why SF made that particular change, as it almost certainly leads to quagmire if you can’t coordinate fire on individual hexes. (And the fire group rule isn’t even bolted-on chrome from one of the optional modules—it’s literally in the ASL starter pack.) But perhaps that was an oversight and will be addressed in an update?

 

(Full disclosure: I don’t love ASL myself—I think there are probably better tabletop rules for infantry combat these days—but if I were going to tweak the rules, I definitely wouldn’t have changed that one.)

Edited February 3, 2023 by Mezentius

[Red2112]

21 hours ago, Mezentius said:

SF is not an entirely faithful depiction of the ASL rules, I’m afraid.

I haven´t played SF, and I did say It "aims" to be ASL on PC. Whether the dev achieves that or not Is another thing. Maybe not all the rules are there yet, IDK.

 

Tigers on The Hunt Is another game that focused on the ASLSK rules, but has a tedious UI and I think It really never took off as expected.  The mod was just the map and counters BTW.

 

 

I agree that there´s better Infantry rules now days, but I have the three ASLSK box sets and Avalon Hill´s Squad Leader 1 & 2 (Iron Cross), because of there legacy and fame, and as a fan of TT wargames one has to try them out.

Edited February 4, 2023 by Red2112

[Red2112]

 

[Red2112]

Just got Into SRU and Galactic Ruler. SR 2030 Is in the works...

 

 

[Apocalypse 31]

On 2/4/2023 at 11:55 AM, Red2112 said:

 

Have you played the demo?

[Red2112]

1 hour ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Have you played the demo?

Nope.

If I knew when and at what price It will be released maybe I would.