Lo trovate in pre-ordine qui: http://www.gamersgate.com/DD-APOSGTSP/graviteam-tactics-shield-of-the-prophet (attenzione ci vuole APOS di base per giocarlo)
Visualizzazione post con etichetta Afghanistan. Mostra tutti i post
Visualizzazione post con etichetta Afghanistan. Mostra tutti i post
venerdì 26 aprile 2013
Graviteam Tactics: Shield of the Prophet
Annunciata nuova DLC per Graviteam Tactics (ex-APOS) sempre ambientata nel contesto anni '70-'80; stavolta l'ambientazione è un'ipotetico scontro tra Iran e Unione Sovietica in Afghanistan. Le immagini sembrano belle e il prezzo convieniente, il peccato è sempre la mancanza del multiplayer.
Lo trovate in pre-ordine qui: http://www.gamersgate.com/DD-APOSGTSP/graviteam-tactics-shield-of-the-prophet (attenzione ci vuole APOS di base per giocarlo)
Lo trovate in pre-ordine qui: http://www.gamersgate.com/DD-APOSGTSP/graviteam-tactics-shield-of-the-prophet (attenzione ci vuole APOS di base per giocarlo)
lunedì 23 luglio 2012
Nuovo video di gameplay con Combat Mission Afghanistan
sabato 30 giugno 2012
Azione dei paracadutisti della Folgore in Afghanistan
L'avevano trasmesso un po' di tempo fa al TG5; un convoglio americano subisce un'imboscata, e i paracadutisti della Folgore permettono lo sganciamento
domenica 6 maggio 2012
Combat Mission Afghanistan spin-off di Shock Force
Parlerò più avanti di questo bellissimo spin-off di Combat Mission Shock Force, per il momento godetevi l'ultimo video che ho fatto.
giovedì 3 maggio 2012
Il sistema di QB di Combat Mission Shock Force
Come chi ha giocato con CMSF sa, la Battlefront all'atto di implementare il CMx2 decise dall'alto della sua saggezza di cambiare il sistema di QB rispetto al CMx1 (dove le truppe erano selezionate dall'utente) metendo un sistema di determinazione automatica delle truppe. Ebbene non solo il sistema non piacque ai giocatori, ma funzionava e funziona male, di fatto bloccando le QB che avevano fatto la fortuna dei CMx1. Adesso con Normandy sono tornati più o meno al vecchio, ma pur ammettendo di aver cannato di brutto non hanno speso un secondo di tempo per rimediare al mal fatto in CMSF, di fatto hanno detto che del gioco ormai se ne lavano le mani (pur avendo chiesto soldi in abbondanza per i moduli). Non è sicuramente l'unci comportamento arrogante da primi della classe che la Battlefront tira fuori a volte. Comunque tornando a bomba, un pò di tempo fa avevo fatto parecchi test per capire come ragionava il sistema di QB automatico e avevo postato in inglese le mie conclusioni sul forum Battlefront (nessuno ha risposto per l'inciso); adesso lo espongo qua:
"
I tried to understood better the selection logic behind the QB in CMSF, but the more misterious parameter remain the "type", not well explained in the manual. I think originally the parameter should limited the sublevel of a TOE&E selected between the possible ones of the selected branch. But perhaps being other logic criteria prioritary respect it (random choice of TOE, value in points of various units (first company, platoon in second choice)) it is work only rarely.
I don't understood anyway what is the criteria of subdivision: what troops types are considered heavy,light,medium? what mean heavy combined,medium combined,light combined?
"
"
I think to have understood alone, the type represent each possible AI choice TO&E in a branch. Example in the case of Syrian mech inf.branch, the armor are the tank companies TOE, the heavy,medium,light infantry are the BTR mech,reserve and recon TOE, the combined heavy,medium,light are the BMP mech,reserve and recon.
"
"
I evaluated in these days the QB in CMSF (I think I generated more than 200 QB from CMSF and CMA), as programmer I consider it as a fascinating routine, also if has problems, but due to complexity and number of parameters I think is normal. Also the comparison with CMBN QB help me both for differences and similitude. Please note this analysis is a mine intellectual game (a little crazy but it was fun), it is not official or done reading the source code, as far I know can be completely wrong.
The first part is similar to CMBN, you have a hidden amount of points to expended for your force; the amount of points for attacker and defender is determined by the battle size, battle type (ME, probe, attack, assault) and by the force adjustment parameters.
The service parameters explain himself.
The next important parameters is the “Branch”; at first I was deceived thinking it was linked to button of “branch” in the scenario editor, but this is false; the branch of a TO&E is given by the branch of single units present in. The US. Army Armor branch is not present in the scenario editor button, because is in list with mechanized forces, but the branch is anyway different (as you see from the unit icon on gui bar), and the editor take this not the editor subdivision. I found only a case of mixed branch (for company level not battalion level): the Canadian recon troops on Coyote vehicle have the troops with infantry branch, and the vehicle with mech. infantry branch, so they are taken for both the branch. I don’t know if this is a bug or a desired effect, it offer anyway interesting possibilities of mixed branch.
The fit parameter is identical to editor functionality and the quality parameters works in similar mode to parameter in CMBN QB human choice selection of quality (that in the left-middle part of screen, with typical as default). This permit to generate, between specified limits, the soft factors and the equipment of units selected, in a mode similar to manual selection in the scenario editor, when you leave the soft factors set to typical. Fit and Quality parameters have a important part for evaluating the “points cost” of a unit; higher is the quality select higher will be the randomized soft factors and more expensive will be the unit cost, the contrary when the quality lower. The CMBN quality parameter in human choice QB works at the same mode, so you have a visual example of the process.
The next steps are the more largely hypothetical derived only by observation of frequency, but I think there is a good possibility they are near the true routine.
As I told before the “type” parameter indicate a TO&E in the selected branch; could be a company or a battalion, anyway is always the first level of TO&E you see in the scenario editor. Each army has different subdivision so it is difficult to indicate the correct “Type” for each TO&E.
Second observation the AI work always for company and platoon level, never for partial company or platoon, and in this is different from the “suggestion” functionality in CMBN. In CMBN automatic choice the AI can take battalions, companies, platoons, sections, and can eliminate from the TO&E units for decrease the amount of points or rarity necessary. In CMSF the AI take or a full company or a full platoon (or section). If you see over the map the units generated by the QB never have the battalion indication over the company, nor the company for independent platoon, much different from the units inserted using the scenario editor, like they wasn’t taken according to the hierarchy but extracted directly from the database.
Sure some particular types of units are excluded by default like the camion units and independent forward observers, because useful in scenarios not in QB.
So as first step the system extract the first valid unit from the list, according to a random factor determined also by criteria: the rarity of units (that you see in the scenario editor), the level of unit (he try to take before a whole company or independent platoon if possible, if not he tried to take one of the sub levels of the same company) perhaps the “type” parameters and other criteria I don’t know, perhaps other much more complex (like reduce the % of possibility a already taken unit type\code name can be take a second type).
Then the AI generate the soft factors according to quality parameter, this determine automatically also the value in points. The unit is taken if his point value is under the points amount set for the battle otherwise is excluded.
After the first unit is taken the amount of points for the battle is reduced of value of this unit and the other units which values go over the new amount, are excluded from the new extraction. And this sequence of controlled random extraction and amount reduction go ahead just it is no more possible take other units with the residual amount (perhaps exist also a limit of expense in point for a single unit for avoid to use all for a single unit, I don’t know). Note also the support\artillery enter in this process.
The extremes of this selection can be seen in two cases: the amount of points doesn’t permit to take any units (set the battle tiny, minimum purchase adjustment, quality excellent, republican guards), in this case no unit is taken, the map is blank. And the amount of points is too much respect the base of TO&E (set huge map, assault, quality poor, maximum purchase adjustment, us army armor) so you start to have duplicate of same unit (at example two company A of same type) like you selected a second battalion, and you have a big number of support\artillery.
So my suggestions for have a good QB forces more frequently is:
1 - avoid branches with few TO&E and too specialist, especially with the other rare and limited, this is valid especially for western. Select mix in these cases, more TO&E units you have, more the “always” units you can have.
2 – With little battles, set the quality to poor or fair (depending also from the battle type) you will have more point amounts an so more possibilities the AI choice more units. As alternative, choice a battle of superior dimension (medium at example) and set Excellent as quality, you will have bigger map with smaller OOB.
3 - some Canadian troops are under valuated in points terms, so they are taken in mass. Avoid them.
"
"
Always theoretically speaking (I don't know how hard should be in the real routine), a good mode to improve the system will be to set the option for avoid to take companies but only platoon level unit at maximum, this will increase the possibilities to have different types units, and a secondary option for avoid to take rare\limited formations, which are too expensive for tiny\small battles.
"
"
ME, medium battle, mix and excellent quality gives more frequently at example a average of good units, respect the normal, because it take platoons more frequently respect the company, if the first unit is a expensive one (so no sufficient point for take a full company). Usually a small battle with average gives a company or a company + a platoon, if I raise the quality to excellet usually I have two or three good platoons."
Aggiungo un mio video di CMSF
"
I tried to understood better the selection logic behind the QB in CMSF, but the more misterious parameter remain the "type", not well explained in the manual. I think originally the parameter should limited the sublevel of a TOE&E selected between the possible ones of the selected branch. But perhaps being other logic criteria prioritary respect it (random choice of TOE, value in points of various units (first company, platoon in second choice)) it is work only rarely.
I don't understood anyway what is the criteria of subdivision: what troops types are considered heavy,light,medium? what mean heavy combined,medium combined,light combined?
"
"
I think to have understood alone, the type represent each possible AI choice TO&E in a branch. Example in the case of Syrian mech inf.branch, the armor are the tank companies TOE, the heavy,medium,light infantry are the BTR mech,reserve and recon TOE, the combined heavy,medium,light are the BMP mech,reserve and recon.
"
"
I evaluated in these days the QB in CMSF (I think I generated more than 200 QB from CMSF and CMA), as programmer I consider it as a fascinating routine, also if has problems, but due to complexity and number of parameters I think is normal. Also the comparison with CMBN QB help me both for differences and similitude. Please note this analysis is a mine intellectual game (a little crazy but it was fun), it is not official or done reading the source code, as far I know can be completely wrong.
The first part is similar to CMBN, you have a hidden amount of points to expended for your force; the amount of points for attacker and defender is determined by the battle size, battle type (ME, probe, attack, assault) and by the force adjustment parameters.
The service parameters explain himself.
The next important parameters is the “Branch”; at first I was deceived thinking it was linked to button of “branch” in the scenario editor, but this is false; the branch of a TO&E is given by the branch of single units present in. The US. Army Armor branch is not present in the scenario editor button, because is in list with mechanized forces, but the branch is anyway different (as you see from the unit icon on gui bar), and the editor take this not the editor subdivision. I found only a case of mixed branch (for company level not battalion level): the Canadian recon troops on Coyote vehicle have the troops with infantry branch, and the vehicle with mech. infantry branch, so they are taken for both the branch. I don’t know if this is a bug or a desired effect, it offer anyway interesting possibilities of mixed branch.
The fit parameter is identical to editor functionality and the quality parameters works in similar mode to parameter in CMBN QB human choice selection of quality (that in the left-middle part of screen, with typical as default). This permit to generate, between specified limits, the soft factors and the equipment of units selected, in a mode similar to manual selection in the scenario editor, when you leave the soft factors set to typical. Fit and Quality parameters have a important part for evaluating the “points cost” of a unit; higher is the quality select higher will be the randomized soft factors and more expensive will be the unit cost, the contrary when the quality lower. The CMBN quality parameter in human choice QB works at the same mode, so you have a visual example of the process.
The next steps are the more largely hypothetical derived only by observation of frequency, but I think there is a good possibility they are near the true routine.
As I told before the “type” parameter indicate a TO&E in the selected branch; could be a company or a battalion, anyway is always the first level of TO&E you see in the scenario editor. Each army has different subdivision so it is difficult to indicate the correct “Type” for each TO&E.
Second observation the AI work always for company and platoon level, never for partial company or platoon, and in this is different from the “suggestion” functionality in CMBN. In CMBN automatic choice the AI can take battalions, companies, platoons, sections, and can eliminate from the TO&E units for decrease the amount of points or rarity necessary. In CMSF the AI take or a full company or a full platoon (or section). If you see over the map the units generated by the QB never have the battalion indication over the company, nor the company for independent platoon, much different from the units inserted using the scenario editor, like they wasn’t taken according to the hierarchy but extracted directly from the database.
Sure some particular types of units are excluded by default like the camion units and independent forward observers, because useful in scenarios not in QB.
So as first step the system extract the first valid unit from the list, according to a random factor determined also by criteria: the rarity of units (that you see in the scenario editor), the level of unit (he try to take before a whole company or independent platoon if possible, if not he tried to take one of the sub levels of the same company) perhaps the “type” parameters and other criteria I don’t know, perhaps other much more complex (like reduce the % of possibility a already taken unit type\code name can be take a second type).
Then the AI generate the soft factors according to quality parameter, this determine automatically also the value in points. The unit is taken if his point value is under the points amount set for the battle otherwise is excluded.
After the first unit is taken the amount of points for the battle is reduced of value of this unit and the other units which values go over the new amount, are excluded from the new extraction. And this sequence of controlled random extraction and amount reduction go ahead just it is no more possible take other units with the residual amount (perhaps exist also a limit of expense in point for a single unit for avoid to use all for a single unit, I don’t know). Note also the support\artillery enter in this process.
The extremes of this selection can be seen in two cases: the amount of points doesn’t permit to take any units (set the battle tiny, minimum purchase adjustment, quality excellent, republican guards), in this case no unit is taken, the map is blank. And the amount of points is too much respect the base of TO&E (set huge map, assault, quality poor, maximum purchase adjustment, us army armor) so you start to have duplicate of same unit (at example two company A of same type) like you selected a second battalion, and you have a big number of support\artillery.
So my suggestions for have a good QB forces more frequently is:
1 - avoid branches with few TO&E and too specialist, especially with the other rare and limited, this is valid especially for western. Select mix in these cases, more TO&E units you have, more the “always” units you can have.
2 – With little battles, set the quality to poor or fair (depending also from the battle type) you will have more point amounts an so more possibilities the AI choice more units. As alternative, choice a battle of superior dimension (medium at example) and set Excellent as quality, you will have bigger map with smaller OOB.
3 - some Canadian troops are under valuated in points terms, so they are taken in mass. Avoid them.
"
"
Always theoretically speaking (I don't know how hard should be in the real routine), a good mode to improve the system will be to set the option for avoid to take companies but only platoon level unit at maximum, this will increase the possibilities to have different types units, and a secondary option for avoid to take rare\limited formations, which are too expensive for tiny\small battles.
"
"
ME, medium battle, mix and excellent quality gives more frequently at example a average of good units, respect the normal, because it take platoons more frequently respect the company, if the first unit is a expensive one (so no sufficient point for take a full company). Usually a small battle with average gives a company or a company + a platoon, if I raise the quality to excellet usually I have two or three good platoons."
Aggiungo un mio video di CMSF
mercoledì 2 maggio 2012
Combat Mission : Battle for Normandy – Commonwealth Forces recensito su www.wargamer.fr
Non conoscevo questo sito francese, ma se conoscete la lingua date un occhio alla recensione: http://www.wargamer.fr/cm-bn-commonwealth-forces-les-britanniques-en-normandie/
E date un occhio anche al blog di Berthier che mi ha introdotto al CMx2: http://combatmission.altervista.org/CM/Home.html
E date un occhio anche al blog di Berthier che mi ha introdotto al CMx2: http://combatmission.altervista.org/CM/Home.html
giovedì 26 aprile 2012
Benvenuti alla Guerra per Gioco!
Salve a tutti e benvenuti; sono un appassionato di videogiochi bellici e strategici e ho deciso di aprire un blog riguardante appunto questo argomento per condividere esperienze e pareri con altri giocatori. Sono anche uno dei moderatori di Strategy Games Italia (venite a farci visita) e un appassionato di Storia Militare, per cui a volte gli argomenti spazieranno anche su libri e articoli storici.
Vorrei cominciare il blog con uno degli ultimi videos che ho fatto con il gioco Steel Armor Blaze of War; si tratta di un simulatore di carri armati degli anni '60->'70, più precisamente l'M60A1 e T62. E' della Graviteam, lo stesso studio di Achtung Panzer e Steel of Fury. Il gioco mischia una parte strategica, simile a AP con una parte simulativa tattica dei due carri. Gli scenari sono: Afghanistan, Angola e Iran-Iraq non è un gioco facile e l'interfacce e la documentazione sono ostici, ma una volta imparato a pilotare i carri da grande soddisfazione; su SGI sto inserendo una breve guida su come usare i sistemi di tiro dei due carri http://www.strategygamesitalia.eu/simulatori/tutorial-per-il-puntamento-in-steel-armor-blaze-of-war-t7645.html
Vorrei cominciare il blog con uno degli ultimi videos che ho fatto con il gioco Steel Armor Blaze of War; si tratta di un simulatore di carri armati degli anni '60->'70, più precisamente l'M60A1 e T62. E' della Graviteam, lo stesso studio di Achtung Panzer e Steel of Fury. Il gioco mischia una parte strategica, simile a AP con una parte simulativa tattica dei due carri. Gli scenari sono: Afghanistan, Angola e Iran-Iraq non è un gioco facile e l'interfacce e la documentazione sono ostici, ma una volta imparato a pilotare i carri da grande soddisfazione; su SGI sto inserendo una breve guida su come usare i sistemi di tiro dei due carri http://www.strategygamesitalia.eu/simulatori/tutorial-per-il-puntamento-in-steel-armor-blaze-of-war-t7645.html
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)