ME

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Well guys, it is my opinion and glad to see some agree.
I do not want to be so analytical.
The game is nice to look at. I like the desert. Always have, and played a lot of WF desert scenarios.

For me it is the scenarios themselves. As Dave pointed out, to me the historical ones, even listed as H2H, are  mostly crap. They "just have to" repeat the historical outcome. My mind says "OK, so why are they listed as versus humans"?
And, it did not help that when I mentioned one earlier I was ridiculed because it was designed to be played against the AI.
And, when I pointed out that there was a problem with off board artillery I was put through the ringer. "No, you are the only one with the problem. It must be your machine, or your download." The feeling I got was not alleviated later by someone on the team even having the same problem, along with others who did too, but reported it later.

The line of sight rules are frustratingly stupid. I don't care what the developers think about that. It is part of the idiotic mindset of "well it will help the game be more real". My mind goes to "BS", it is put there because you want it there.
And, when I look at what the developers do and say when they give us an AAR. "Hey here is the 2-D look that we are moving toward and spending our time on. And, I know it is a H2H scenario but it kicked my butt anyway." My mind goes to scenario design itself. What do versus the AI scenarios have that H2H do not have? I shake my head. Seriously? A developer/programmer?

I just sent an e-mail turn to an opponent. We have been playing a 30 turn scenario. Ten turns in and I just wanted to end it. But, I decided to give it a few more turns in case it might turn into something. Two more turns and we will be two thirds the way there. The eight turns of torture so far has simply generated disgust.
Oh, my opponent is having a great time. Artillery firing endlessly, tanks that seem to grow in the desert (at least twenty times the amount that I have and they are better tanks), along with only two roads to advance upon.
Me plodding along with infantry (the majority of of my force is infantry, that can move one hex forward into withering opt fire and then get pounded by enemy artillery the next turn because the enemy has plenty and my route of advance is predictable.)
Great scenario ... yeah!

I guess I have to be a 'realism trumps all' kind of player. Or, a believer in 'historical scenarios have to have a historical outcome' player.
I'm sorry. NO! And, hell no! There is no joy in playing a game where all the "joy" comes from recreating the historical outcome. "Hey, great game you played. And, my Egyptians lost just like they did in 1973! Whooo Hooo!"

I wrote to my opponent, "ME feels like a car that looks pretty but does not run". I'd like to drive it but can't.
When can't becomes won't, I'll be done.



HSL