Cheers
Pip
Coop!
Moderators: Slitherine Core, BA Moderators
-
pipfromslitherine
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9706
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:35 pm
Re: Coop!
I don't think I will be playing this mode much. I started up a game and was disappointed to find that it's co-operative again the AI. I expected 2 vs 2 players. This would be much slower, of course, but certainly more interesting.
Re: Coop!
So I am into a few. The first thing that jumps out is the need to send messages BEFORE buying/deploying, and maybe an option of knowing the nature of the other player's force. E.g., I've experienced lack of artillery/mortars, or having little (Paratroops) or a lot (Panzer Corps) of armor, or have relatively little infantry. I like the variety, but it would be good to know if I'm responsible for the general fire support, or who is prepared for BUA combat, so might go lighter or heavier on the portion available for spending.
Second, the Paratroops/Panzer coop pairing happened to work out, only the two forces were not in the right positions, and a lateral passage of lines by the panzer troops who had been facing the town brought back memories from "Patton" of traffic jams at road junctions (given all the stone walls common in beta region of Russia) and disturbed the coordination of the attack. That's a nice touch of reality thanks to coop!
Second, the Paratroops/Panzer coop pairing happened to work out, only the two forces were not in the right positions, and a lateral passage of lines by the panzer troops who had been facing the town brought back memories from "Patton" of traffic jams at road junctions (given all the stone walls common in beta region of Russia) and disturbed the coordination of the attack. That's a nice touch of reality thanks to coop!
-
AndrewGardner
- Slitherine
- Posts: 535
- Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:24 pm
Re: Coop!
That definitely sounds like a bug. Which side was supposed to be German?collier4 wrote:MikeK and I are playing a coop game. Not sure if we set it up incorrectly or it is a bug, buy we Germans are attacking Germans!
Re: Coop!
We were. The Soviet Germans have the Russian icon on their units.AndrewGardner wrote:That definitely sounds like a bug. Which side was supposed to be German?collier4 wrote:MikeK and I are playing a coop game. Not sure if we set it up incorrectly or it is a bug, buy we Germans are attacking Germans!
-
AndrewGardner
- Slitherine
- Posts: 535
- Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:24 pm
Re: Coop!
I had forgotten that when using army lists we do allow you to choose an army list from either side (and any era) for the opponent when Filter Army List is set to off. Do you recall if you turned the filter off?
Coop Battle Comments
@AndrewG: Yes, filter off might be it - BTW tooltips on the various buttons and what they do would be nice in the actual release.
In another COOP (Meeting Eng, large map) completed with Skyrider: Sizable wilderness map with a lot of woods and marsh/mud/deep gress and the only avenues for vehicles to reach the enemy (and the middle objectives) for us were in the center, while the Soviets had more easy access to the left and right central objectives. The Soviets did not push hard enough for those objectives, though they had an initial opportunity to come up and take them or flank our vehicles as they headed toward them. As a precaution, on both sides infantry went through the woods, on my side ultimately across the map through the wilds to a small town unexpectedly packed with enemy (taken only with help from some of the armor once they won in the center where my armor and part of Skyrider's beat the Soviet force in that area.
Their armor came up a little piecemeal in depth rather than adopting a firing formation as I did to concentrate fire- realistic enough behavior in hasty maneuvers, but the Soviets by the late war should be in doctrinal formation for jump off. Maybe they were but got unsorted by the terrain. The Stalins are tough, the T-34s can't be ignored, the 76mm At guns are a nasty sting - but being able to concentrate in turn destroyed or drove off the enemy armor group facing me, the survivors damaged (and later chased down on the way to the southern village. Had the Soviets just come up in line or double line it would have been a sharper contest.
On Skyrider's side, there was a single road from their rear objective to the center that cut through the woods, and there was heavy back-and-forth fighting led by the two Tigers he had vs. the Stalins as well as other vehicles and infantry in the woods. At the end, the Russian infantry were still trying to move toward the middle objective without success, while for lack of a few movement points the Soviet north objective was not taken by the end, for a final 7:1.
Had the armies deployed on opposite sides, I think we would have been able to bottle up the Soviet armor in the passages and made it a more uneven fight. Do the algorithms evaluate the suitability of terrain and assign sides accordingly, or randomly?
Of course, the battle was "won" on number of objectives held early on when the two central objectives were seized, and German losses were low to that point. It was taking the option of pushing for the rear objectives that increased the casualty rate - still greatly in our favor overall, but a reminder that pushing hard can be costly.
I would like to see options for opposing force strength that would make for a tougher fight, as well as allowing prepared defenses (Leningrad scenario was exhausting, but some of that is appropriate), and the option of possible reinforcements sent to the battle to counter-attack and try to retrieve the situation (maybe it extends the game some turns, maybe not - surprise me.
How often do we read about eastern front battles where a position was captured and the attackers turned out by a quick counterattack before they could regroup and settle in? Just when the attackers thought they won and the battle was over....fresh troops appeared - so it's not over till it's over. There was real risk in spreading out loosely to seize objectives - even small reinforcements can stall an attack by a worn column. And caution can look foolish in retrospect. Exciting either way.
There were a lot of ambushes and a fair number of infantry assaults on passing tanks - certainly something that encourages recon by fire and suppression. With a lot of cover, it was easy to miss hold out Soviets as we advanced.
The Hummel I took was disappointing, useful when it could bombard but taking time to reload and then I think running out of ammo for bombardment (though it still could have suppressed, if it were to get close enough). Maybe there is an ammo supply indicator I am missing? Kind of important to know the round count to use ammo efficiently.
Good fun. The AI gave a good impression on defense, lying low at times to await opportunity rather than opening fire on unpromising targets.
In another COOP (Meeting Eng, large map) completed with Skyrider: Sizable wilderness map with a lot of woods and marsh/mud/deep gress and the only avenues for vehicles to reach the enemy (and the middle objectives) for us were in the center, while the Soviets had more easy access to the left and right central objectives. The Soviets did not push hard enough for those objectives, though they had an initial opportunity to come up and take them or flank our vehicles as they headed toward them. As a precaution, on both sides infantry went through the woods, on my side ultimately across the map through the wilds to a small town unexpectedly packed with enemy (taken only with help from some of the armor once they won in the center where my armor and part of Skyrider's beat the Soviet force in that area.
Their armor came up a little piecemeal in depth rather than adopting a firing formation as I did to concentrate fire- realistic enough behavior in hasty maneuvers, but the Soviets by the late war should be in doctrinal formation for jump off. Maybe they were but got unsorted by the terrain. The Stalins are tough, the T-34s can't be ignored, the 76mm At guns are a nasty sting - but being able to concentrate in turn destroyed or drove off the enemy armor group facing me, the survivors damaged (and later chased down on the way to the southern village. Had the Soviets just come up in line or double line it would have been a sharper contest.
On Skyrider's side, there was a single road from their rear objective to the center that cut through the woods, and there was heavy back-and-forth fighting led by the two Tigers he had vs. the Stalins as well as other vehicles and infantry in the woods. At the end, the Russian infantry were still trying to move toward the middle objective without success, while for lack of a few movement points the Soviet north objective was not taken by the end, for a final 7:1.
Had the armies deployed on opposite sides, I think we would have been able to bottle up the Soviet armor in the passages and made it a more uneven fight. Do the algorithms evaluate the suitability of terrain and assign sides accordingly, or randomly?
Of course, the battle was "won" on number of objectives held early on when the two central objectives were seized, and German losses were low to that point. It was taking the option of pushing for the rear objectives that increased the casualty rate - still greatly in our favor overall, but a reminder that pushing hard can be costly.
I would like to see options for opposing force strength that would make for a tougher fight, as well as allowing prepared defenses (Leningrad scenario was exhausting, but some of that is appropriate), and the option of possible reinforcements sent to the battle to counter-attack and try to retrieve the situation (maybe it extends the game some turns, maybe not - surprise me.
How often do we read about eastern front battles where a position was captured and the attackers turned out by a quick counterattack before they could regroup and settle in? Just when the attackers thought they won and the battle was over....fresh troops appeared - so it's not over till it's over. There was real risk in spreading out loosely to seize objectives - even small reinforcements can stall an attack by a worn column. And caution can look foolish in retrospect. Exciting either way.
There were a lot of ambushes and a fair number of infantry assaults on passing tanks - certainly something that encourages recon by fire and suppression. With a lot of cover, it was easy to miss hold out Soviets as we advanced.
The Hummel I took was disappointing, useful when it could bombard but taking time to reload and then I think running out of ammo for bombardment (though it still could have suppressed, if it were to get close enough). Maybe there is an ammo supply indicator I am missing? Kind of important to know the round count to use ammo efficiently.
Good fun. The AI gave a good impression on defense, lying low at times to await opportunity rather than opening fire on unpromising targets.
Re: Coop!
Just finished my first coop game with Morge4 - very enjoyable. The coop concept is a welcome addition to the game.pipfromslitherine wrote:Who's playing Coop?!?! What are people's thoughts so far?
Cheers
Pip
-
morge4
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2114
- Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:56 pm
- Location: Penalty Box
- Contact:
Re: Coop!
Agree!collier4 wrote:Just finished my first coop game with Morge4 - very enjoyable. The coop concept is a welcome addition to the game.pipfromslitherine wrote:Who's playing Coop?!?! What are people's thoughts so far?
Cheers
Pip
Re: Coop!
When playing coop, are we playing two humans vs another two or against the AI? If against to human opponents I'd like to know with whom are we playing against.
GG AWD, WBTS, WiTE Beta Tester
Time of Fury Beta Tester
Panzer Corps, CtGW Beta Tester
Decisive campaigns Case Blue,Barbarossa, beta tester.
SC WiE, WaW, WWI Beta Tester
Time of Fury Beta Tester
Panzer Corps, CtGW Beta Tester
Decisive campaigns Case Blue,Barbarossa, beta tester.
SC WiE, WaW, WWI Beta Tester
-
morge4
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2114
- Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:56 pm
- Location: Penalty Box
- Contact:
Re: Coop!
You are teamed with another person (human) and playing against the AI.rjh1971 wrote:When playing coop, are we playing two humans vs another two or against the AI? If against to human opponents I'd like to know with whom are we playing against.
-
Brenmusik
- Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
- Posts: 1282
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:00 pm
- Location: Albion
Re: Coop!
Alas, it's been said that the poor old AI has picked up the gauntletrjh1971 wrote:When playing coop, are we playing two humans vs another two or against the AI? If against to human opponents I'd like to know with whom are we playing against.
