战争艺术 - 让真实的战争跃然纸上  
  
查看: 9446|回复: 74

对电脑兵棋的一些评论?大家来说一下!

 关闭 [复制链接]

1

精华

0

对战

11

主题

下士

积分
12
军饷
100 两
发表于 2010-6-13 13:53:06 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
本帖最后由 cshack 于 2010-6-15 15:59 编辑

此帖只为学习交流,以下都是部些兵棋同仁的一家之谈,让大家交流心得的
绝没有对电脑或桌面兵棋任何抵制的想法啊!谢谢

本帖容易引起争议!大家只是学习交流啊!汗了!
由于战棋群的朋友说了就让这帖留在这让大家评论,也没申请转帖了!如果引起争议,造成不良影响,请大家一定海涵啊!


电脑兵棋难道不能比上桌面的?


电脑为什么不好呢?

电脑不是人脑,再精良的AI,也无法做到人脑的地步。
网络对战是可以,不过在电脑上对战,你只是在做别人给你设计好的路线,你不需要考虑规则,你不需要去思考规则如何制定的,你不需要去质疑规则是什么样的,只需要胜了就完了……这个态度,却恰恰是兵棋所不应该具备的

0

精华

0

对战

0

主题

游客

积分
7
军饷
100 两
发表于 2010-6-13 16:36:55 | 显示全部楼层
说得有理,桌面游戏的规则就很容易制定。而电子游戏的规则恰恰是封装的,修改对于一般人很困难。需要解码才行,或是需要编程功底

2

精华

0

对战

7

主题

四级士官长

积分
64
军饷
100 两

战棋党元老

发表于 2010-6-13 16:45:26 | 显示全部楼层
电脑兵棋缺的就是了解规则,然后再按规则去办这个过程。无法像纸制兵棋那样让你知道为什么要这样做,以及每个细节的过程是如何的(纸制兵棋通过查表计算获得)

43

精华

0

对战

1506

主题

管理员

积分
4284
军饷
887 两

汉化奖章拉瑞邦德勋章彼得波拉奖章四周年革新委员会论坛三周年勋章KOGER勋章骑士勋章英雄勋章-铜三级精英会员二级精英会员

发表于 2010-6-13 17:19:22 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 Alex 于 2010-6-13 17:21 编辑

我以为,这个和识繁书简是一个道理,了解和熟悉桌面兵棋是必要的,这是原理,也是本源,但一味地排斥现代科技对兵棋所带来的便利和革新,也不可取。应该结合起来,这才是正确的解决方法。此外,如果单纯是从玩的角度来讲,那就是怎么开心就怎么玩,玩就不要有过于沉重的思想负担,这个时候过于考虑专业性和真实性等等就很累。有人重视面对面互动的乐趣,而不仅仅是兵棋自身所带来的乐趣,那么桌面兵棋是一个好的选择;有人空闲不多,难得有大块休闲的时间和朋友对战,那么电脑兵棋是一个片刻休闲的好选择。
至于楼主所说的AI和人脑的问题,不是电脑兵棋和桌面兵棋的显著区分,毕竟电脑兵棋只是一个平台,同样可以人与人对战。

26

精华

3

对战

545

主题

论坛元老

积分
7032
军饷
634 两

四周年革新委员会论坛三周年勋章英雄勋章-铜一级勇气勋章SSG勋章一级精英会员二级精英会员英雄勋章-银三级精英会员

QQ
发表于 2010-6-13 17:24:24 | 显示全部楼层
电脑兵棋难道不能比上桌面的?


电脑为什么不好呢?

电脑不是人脑,再精良的AI,也无法做到人脑的地步。
网络对战是可以,不过在电脑上对战,你只是在做别人给你设计好的路线,你不需要考虑规则,你不需要去思考规 ...
cshack 发表于 2010-6-13 13:53


我说两句,楼主这个贴放到兵棋党的论坛,也许能得到更好的解答。
从电子兵棋和手工兵棋同为“游戏”的角度来讲,没有区别,没什么可比的。
仅从游戏上讲,电子兵棋更容易被人接受。我个人只希望电子兵棋不要沦落为“图片大作战”就好。

我认为两者没有可比性,关键在于怎么理解“兵棋”。
兵棋,始于普鲁士的宫廷娱乐,至于世界各国面对的军事课题。这个没意见吧?
但归根结底还是游戏,商业化兵棋就是游戏,有的可能用到的军事层面,但终究还是游戏。

就像有人喜欢桌面游戏,有人喜欢电脑游戏一样。
大富翁也有桌面和电子,难道就不允许几个好友陪美眉在一起玩玩儿大富翁了(强手棋是吧)?

所以我这里不说什么“先有鸡先有蛋”,也不说“谁比谁严谨”,同为游戏,乐在其中就好。

3

精华

0

对战

48

主题

少校

积分
1008
军饷
100 两

一级勇气勋章

发表于 2010-6-13 17:46:04 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 cfw 于 2010-6-13 17:47 编辑

不知從何時開始,找幾個夥伴下棋變成了一件需要耐心計劃的大事。我想,電子兵棋也就是在這樣的環境中才成為我們不得不選的首選。
下手工棋的好處,首先倒未必是人腦一定比電腦犀利,而是弟兄們混在一起的那種感覺。面對面的互動所包含的信息,要比網絡對戰豐富得多。
不過,LZ企圖撲殺電子兵棋似乎也有矯枉過正之嫌。從成本上來說,PC遊戲低廉,容易推廣。一個劇本就是一個戰場,也有助於吸引更多的人——人們感興趣的歷史戰爭是不同的。而且,若說模擬實戰,恐怕窩在斗室之內,見不到對手的受想行識,僅憑地圖上對方的反映來判別和決斷,也更真實一些。

btw,我不是京師兵棋黨。。。LZ為何要作此限定,不解。
若夫觴酌凌波於前,簫笳發音於後,足下鷹揚其體,鳳歎虎視,謂蕭曹不足儔,衛霍不足侔也。左顧右眄,謂若無人,豈非吾子壯志哉!

0

精华

0

对战

0

主题

游客

积分
7
军饷
100 两
发表于 2010-6-13 17:49:12 | 显示全部楼层
象棋电脑比人脑厉害许多了。这是AI的先进性。但是终究复杂的兵棋还是人和人下比较好。就算是钢铁雄心,那个AI也实在是叫人很无语。

18

精华

0

对战

136

主题

论坛元老

积分
5876
军饷
2293 两

汉化奖章罗伯茨勋章四周年革新委员会论坛三周年勋章英雄勋章-铜一级勇气勋章SSG勋章2009十大风云会员荣誉佩剑二级精英会员

发表于 2010-6-13 18:59:42 | 显示全部楼层
AI 不一定比 人脑就弱, 当然 AI 模拟 人脑本身现在是不现实的。

不过,关键在于我们到底在说 电脑游戏? 还是说兵棋?

而且无论是兵棋还是游戏,这都成 月经贴了。参考之前的帖子
cc系列游戏爱好者, 电子/桌面兵棋游戏爱好者
Flames Of War兵棋游戏群
20579616
55140193

18

精华

0

对战

136

主题

论坛元老

积分
5876
军饷
2293 两

汉化奖章罗伯茨勋章四周年革新委员会论坛三周年勋章英雄勋章-铜一级勇气勋章SSG勋章2009十大风云会员荣誉佩剑二级精英会员

发表于 2010-6-13 19:01:05 | 显示全部楼层
纸面兵棋 被电子兵棋 取代是 大势所趋。

桌面兵棋有很多的弱点,比如操作性,棋子的摆放复杂性,以及规则的复杂性,都因为需要当面布置而被限制,我们就说一下  WITP吧。那个兵棋如果是桌面的,而且规则一点都不简化的话, 1个月能推演1回合就谢天谢地了。

在没有电子兵棋的年代,  代表1天的推演,如果规则略为复杂甚至要消耗5天甚至更长的时间,而桌面兵棋所固有的 战争迷雾表现等问题,必须用多棋盘 多导演组 裁判组 等 才能 得到表现 无论是消耗,效率都根本无法让人满意。

再说 桌面兵棋的另外一个弱点,就是必须让推演者了解规则, 首先对于规则的了解(稍微严肃的桌面兵棋规则甚至就有几百页规则的),如果规则不了解透彻,往往胜败都不知所谓,反而是得不到应有的结果, 而相反的,如果完全了解的规则,那么利用规则又成了一大问题——比如围棋的打劫,比如象棋的反复将军(长将),那么就容易被利用(因为完全无法利用的规则是不可能的),而战争往往本身就是没有规则的,反而不应该让具体的裁决过程和规则来限制 实际推演者, 这又成了不可调和的矛盾。

而对于推演者来说,对于桌面尤其来说,人和人面对面察言观色是一大乐趣,而战争中呢?反而是像电子兵棋里那样对手才是真正看不见的,能看见的只有战况!

而电子兵棋 在很多方面 无论是 规则利用,效率,消耗,时效,反应,战争迷雾 等方面都远比桌面兵棋优秀得多。
而且桌面兵棋发展的时期正是没有电子兵棋的时期,正所谓 技术的进步不可阻挡,兵棋的电子化本身也不可阻挡。
cc系列游戏爱好者, 电子/桌面兵棋游戏爱好者
Flames Of War兵棋游戏群
20579616
55140193

18

精华

0

对战

136

主题

论坛元老

积分
5876
军饷
2293 两

汉化奖章罗伯茨勋章四周年革新委员会论坛三周年勋章英雄勋章-铜一级勇气勋章SSG勋章2009十大风云会员荣誉佩剑二级精英会员

发表于 2010-6-13 19:01:14 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 解放军-ZSC 于 2010-6-13 19:02 编辑

mittermaye 发表

我觉得手工兵棋在应用方面的地位将不可避免被电子兵棋取代,但是在娱乐和开发方面则肯定能保留一定的地位。

电子兵棋主要特点是深度、广度、效率大大提高,规则和过程相对屏蔽,手工在各个方面受到很大限制,但是规则和过程相对透明。

军事应用要求更大的深度和广度,更高的效率,要求减少规则带来的人工痕迹,要求对阵双方隔离,比如多级别和多单位的复合推演,要求像实战一样发布命令,由中央处理单位将命令转化为指令输入推演系统,并把结果表述为普通报告反馈,要求双方处于各自的活动区域。
同时这些特点也适合娱乐和开发方面的要求。

但娱乐和开发方面,有时要求有面对面的乐趣,有时要求规则透明度方便研究和修改,这样手工兵棋还是能保留一定的地位,但主体的转变是不可避免的。
cc系列游戏爱好者, 电子/桌面兵棋游戏爱好者
Flames Of War兵棋游戏群
20579616
55140193

18

精华

0

对战

136

主题

论坛元老

积分
5876
军饷
2293 两

汉化奖章罗伯茨勋章四周年革新委员会论坛三周年勋章英雄勋章-铜一级勇气勋章SSG勋章2009十大风云会员荣誉佩剑二级精英会员

发表于 2010-6-13 19:03:37 | 显示全部楼层
泥腿子 发表:

解放大侠说的非常有道理。我再补充补充自己的看法,本人纯外行,欢迎斧正!

如果单纯把桌面兵棋搬到电脑上,这可以说仅仅是一种兵棋自动化,即,利用电脑来完成兵棋中规则匹配以及复杂数学算式的计算。从这个角度来看,最初级的电脑兵棋就是一个大型的有限状态机(FSM)。这个状态机通过给定输入和当前状态来决定输出(也就是电脑屏幕上玩家所看到的数据)。

而电脑兵棋的发展从而诱引申出回合制战略和即时战略(好像目前还没有)两种不同方式的软件实现。在机制上我认为以上两者可以分别归类到周期触发(回合制)和事件触发(即时制)上。最传统的回合制,即周期触发(Cycle-driven)的逻辑肯定可以用一个大型状态机来表示,而触发所需要的周期就是每一个回合的开式到结束。

而类似于即时战略方式的即时制,可以用事件触发(Event-driven)来表示棋盘上所有算子相互之间的行为,即他可以脱离于周期触发这个框架。虽然在电脑上我们依然需要底层程序的计数器来提供事件触发所需要的逻辑,但是无可否认的每个个体(在兵棋中可以认为是算子)不再需要一个全局的统一的周期时间。从数学建模的角度来说,我们可以让每个算子都可以有自己有限状态机,以及自己的周期(算子内部的回合时间)。然后各个算子之间通过事件来握手和交互数据。

从数学模型角度来说,这是一种更加精确地模拟,就像兵棋中我们本应该在热点地区(交战地区)划分密度更大的蜂窝网格,而在没有算子的地区适当缩小蜂窝网格的密度一样。而传统的桌面兵棋完全受限于复杂度,不可能支持更高级更复杂的数学模型。


我不是做游戏的,不过好像在电脑游戏里面,这一部分属于“逻辑”?对于未来的专业兵棋来说,专注于数学模型和数学模型的程序实现几乎是最重要的,另外电脑兵棋还有一个好处就是AI,包括可以用简单脚本来控制的AI(这个人机交互接口也很重要),这种AI类似于人工智能学科中的专家系统。从自动化的角度上来说,我们可以仅仅使用脚本来约束AI,然后电脑通过这个约束自行进行推演,从而最后得到一个统计数据。

无论电脑兵棋怎么进化,实际上严格式兵棋所用到的量化方法就是把一般的文字表述转化为数学表述,有固定的几步。首先,都是给定数学模型,然后第二步是设定边界条件,从而第三步开始计算并产生结果结果,最后一步可能需要一个循环到第一步的过程从而收集和统计结果。如果评判结果的客观条件足够多,那么这个迭代的过程应该是一个函数逐渐收敛的过程。

而边界条件的产生可以由人工来指定,即手工推演。或是由人工来编脚本,利用这个脚本来约束AI的行为,从而让电脑自动依照一种有限穷举的方式进行推演。 无论怎么改进都是为了一个目前低,更准确的预测结果。


而最不重要的就是图形效果渲染(Special Graphics Rendering)。动辄好几个G的游戏大部分都是存储纹理和模型信息,这些东西对于战争行为的行为拟真毫无用处(微观的基于人工生命的算子行为的模拟可能还是有用的,举个例子来说,比如从士兵的眼睛打出两个视线椎体,然后这个椎体所框到的物体作为这个士兵所得到的信息,传输给士兵内建的AI系统,从而判断。对方士兵纹理颜色可能导致误判,或者是模型结构也会导致视线问题),唯一的好处就是看得爽,或是说更容易理解和使用兵棋。

我也认为桌面兵棋不会再有太大的革命性的发展,但是作为理解兵棋机制、规则和数学模型来说,还是很有一定意义的。


我的见解比较外行,欢迎批评 :>
cc系列游戏爱好者, 电子/桌面兵棋游戏爱好者
Flames Of War兵棋游戏群
20579616
55140193

43

精华

0

对战

1506

主题

管理员

积分
4284
军饷
887 两

汉化奖章拉瑞邦德勋章彼得波拉奖章四周年革新委员会论坛三周年勋章KOGER勋章骑士勋章英雄勋章-铜三级精英会员二级精英会员

发表于 2010-6-13 20:49:04 | 显示全部楼层
我觉得手工兵棋在应用方面的地位将不可避免被电子兵棋取代,但是在娱乐和开发方面则肯定能保留一定的地位。

电子兵棋主要特点是深度、广度、效率大大提高,规则和过程相对屏蔽,手工在各个方面受到很大限制,但是规则和过程相对透明。

MM大这段话说的还是比较透彻的

1

精华

0

对战

11

主题

下士

积分
12
军饷
100 两
 楼主| 发表于 2010-6-13 22:05:16 | 显示全部楼层
各位大大真是热心啊!!!!

0

精华

0

对战

0

主题

游客

积分
159
军饷
100 两
发表于 2010-6-14 20:44:16 | 显示全部楼层
我想的是楼主干嘛起这样一个标题《北京战棋党对电脑兵棋的评论?大家来说一下!》
我虽然不是什么资深玩家,但是我想能够给我带来快乐的,不管是桌面兵棋还是电脑兵棋,只要能让你乐在其中,那么不存在比较。不知道楼主比较的意义在于那里?喜欢的永远都是喜欢的,你拿出这样的标题来吸引大家眼球,明显有挑起事端的嫌疑,(我只是说嫌疑啊),萝卜咸菜各有所爱,本来这就是个非常非常小众的圈子,为什么我们还要分门别类呢?真不知道楼主的这个帖子的意义在那里。
“大家来说一下?”其实你应该起“大家来评评理”,我觉得来的更直接一些。(我是觉得这个帖子的标题太奇怪了,所以有如此一说,望楼主别太见怪。)
我是电脑玩家,我也很喜欢桌面游戏,那么我这样的人应该如何分类呢?请楼主给我一个定位吧?谢谢
韩大的弟子

0

精华

0

对战

0

主题

游客

积分
159
军饷
100 两
发表于 2010-6-14 21:17:47 | 显示全部楼层
对了补充一下,可能有人看到我的回帖会说你就是北京战棋党的一员怎么怎么的话,呵呵,如果真有人这么说的话,我是很高兴的,电脑兵棋或者说电子兵棋我是从MD上大战略开始接触的,当时一接触就很喜欢,并且玩了很多年,有了电脑以后,我接触的游戏也没有跳出这个圈子,依然是电脑上的战略游戏,(电脑游戏选择性也多这个我承认,而且简单易上手。)我是去年才开始关注桌面游戏的,很庆幸的是遇见了韩大等北京战棋党同好,他们给了我这样的新人很多的帮助和指导,让我认识了桌面兵棋,并且共享了很多有用的资源。楼主提的这个帖子的原话我也是在现场的,但是说这话的人绝非是在说电脑兵棋没研究,只是出于对深入了解而作的一个简单的评价,更楼上大大们说的是一样的意思。楼上的许多大大们也说了,作为原理,电脑无法取代桌面战棋,而楼主一上来就用了“北京战棋党对电脑兵棋的评论?”这样的语调,恰恰给所有北京战棋党带了个帽子。我要说在我请教电脑战棋的时候,韩大也曾经推荐过电脑战棋的,而在战棋党内部,玩电脑战棋的人还很多。
说这么多无非是想说,小众的东西,大家应该互相尊重和认同,而不是区分派别。就先说到这吧,有不同意见欢迎指正,口水的话就免了,呵呵,我最近上火。谢谢
韩大的弟子

42

精华

5

对战

548

主题

论坛元老

积分
5426
军饷
912 两

拉瑞邦德勋章汉化奖章加里勋章彼得波拉奖章四周年革新委员会论坛三周年勋章莱比锡参战纪念勋章2009十大风云会员荣誉佩剑一级勇气勋章英雄勋章-铜英雄勋章-银三级精英会员

QQ
发表于 2010-6-14 21:26:54 | 显示全部楼层
16# 不知名网友

恩,赞同。没必要划定某某圈子吧
兼容并包,互相借鉴,才能有所发展。

0

精华

0

对战

1

主题

中士

积分
26
军饷
108 两

战棋党元老

发表于 2010-6-15 14:25:18 | 显示全部楼层
呵呵,想不到我在群里的几句个人看法,居然会被写成整个北京战棋党,我居然成了“总代表”……
不过,就算是要对我说的做批斗,是否可以把前后都看完,不要这样只看一段,然后就认定我有这么大能力代表整个北京战棋党。

阿星(859031814)  10:10:08
各位前辈,如何能从兵棋中学到挥指艺术啊!
林恩37(87693043) 10:10:40
对待每一次推演,总结自己的错误,而不是别人的。
林恩37(87693043) 10:10:53
对待每一条规则,总结设计思路,而不是质疑。
阿星(859031814) 10:11:03
哦!
阿星(859031814) 10:11:13
那我现在怎么办?
我只能玩电脑兵棋!
林恩37(87693043) 10:11:19
对待每一次投骰子,总结为什么不是最坏结果,而不是抱怨骰运
阿星(859031814) 10:11:31

阿星(859031814) 10:11:40
心态很好!
林恩37(87693043) 10:12:02
电脑兵棋……对我个人而言,是属于被过滤掉的东西。
林恩37(87693043) 10:18:43
阿星(859031814)  10:15:15
电脑为什么不好呢?
电脑不是人脑,再精良的AI,也无法做到人脑的地步。
网络对战是可以,不过在电脑上对战,你只是在做别人给你设计好的路线,你不需要考虑规则,你不需要去思考规则如何制定的,你不需要去质疑规则是什么样的,只需要胜了就完了……这个态度,却恰恰是兵棋所不应该具备的
林恩37(87693043) 10:19:20
兵棋最有意义的在于:规则。
规则是开放的,是要去验证、质疑、学习、认识的。

综上所述,我说的“电脑兵棋”是特指计算机平台上的兵棋,也就是大多数人所能接触到的兵棋。而特定的电子兵棋,只有接触了才知道,所谓的优越性其实还是理想而非当前的现实。

然后下面,是我的看法:

对于AI方面,AI不如人的选择,我这样理解是否有错?AI只是在做好了预想之后的多种组合体,即便是再复杂,也不会有创造性的思维。如果没有创造性的思维,那么就会有AI漏洞,我很想请教一下,有多少人在对抗AI时,是以钻AI漏洞为耻的?

从AI再延伸至交互方面,举例一个回合流程:
A方移动阶段,B方所有下达掩护射击命令的单位都可以在任何时刻向进入其射程的A方单位射击。
手工上的表现方式:A方行动棋子,一步一走,B方直到他认为可以的地方喊停,即可宣告射击。
电子上的表现方式:对AI上,若B方为AI,无所谓。对人战时就会发生这样的问题:A方的单位每走1格,就要向B方弹出1个对话框,询问是否射击,每走1格,询问1次……直到B方选择射击或脱离射程为止。如果1个单位的机动力为20,那么这个单位最大可能要在机动时,向对方电脑弹出20次对话框。大家可以测试一下,这样等待1个单位机动时,连续弹“是否射击”窗口时对各位的影响如何。

说到这里,或许有人会说:即时不就可以解决这个问题了?即时是很符合实际环境,不过,各位是否想过,以目前的技术水平,即时是让人体会的是什么?不是思考、不是验证,而是让你如何在比对手短的时间内,正确的操作鼠标。等什么时候声控命令的准确性高到一定程度的时候,即时兵棋才会真正的发挥作用。同时,又牵扯到另一个问题。各位玩的电子兵棋,1个屏幕就可以清晰的俯瞰下整个地图的吗?同样大小的纸质地图,是否只是需要转下眼珠?鼠标拖动和眼光一扫的便捷与否,整体效果的把握,到底哪个更合适呢?

对我个人而言,电子兵棋的操作,我不习惯于把屏幕拖来拖动、看着无数个确认跳来跳去、必须要和别人比鼠标点击速度而不是思考方式。如果让我推一款手工兵棋和一款电子兵棋,我推电子兵棋的时间要远远长于手工兵棋(包括摆棋时间),而且,在认识兵棋中所表现的情况与规则上的认识,我个人认为手工兵棋所给予我的远远超出电子兵棋。

就有人说,规则是可以利用的,那么,他的规则为什么会被利用?如果真的是不合理、不符合当前需要,立刻修正就是了。手工兵棋的规则本身就是开放的,并且很多兵棋规则中,都附有设计笔记,说明一些特殊规则的设计想法和目的。这些的根本目的,就是让推演者可以更直观的了解规则的设定原则,去真正的理解这条规则的意义。在使用中因忽视了某条规则,而出现失误的时候,会对这条规则的记忆更深刻,会更深入的去了解这条规则的含义。

“而战争往往本身就是没有规则的,反而不应该让具体的裁决过程和规则来限制实际推演者, 这又成了不可调和的矛盾。”这句出自楼上某人的一句话,那么我想请问一下,在同样的条件下,是电子兵棋的规则修正快呢?还是手工兵棋的规则修正快?

如果一个人对历史和军事一点兴趣都没有的话,他是不会去接触兵棋的。但如果对于一个为了感受军事和历史的人来说,他的娱乐性到底是“对战中胜负的爽快”?还是“学习从没体验过的战争经验的认知”?

起码,我不认为兵棋的目的是为了表现前者。

对于兵棋本身,他的实际作用,旨在突出每一次命令的选择,上下级之间的换位思考、计划突然被打乱时的把握决策,而不是一种畅快。兵棋主要的对象,是指挥官和参谋官,在他们的工作中,每一个细节、每一次判断、每一次决心都是一场斗争。如何权衡和把握这斗争,兵棋做了最好的诠释:分析与质疑。兵棋在确定条件和不确定因子之间的相互作用下,使环境复杂化,问题多样化。在对抗练习的时候,思考分析、确定合理性的时间自然是最重要的。在自己需要规则支撑下才能完成裁决,这样才能使推演者更清晰的了解自己面临的问题,如果没有记住规则而获得了失利,那么就说明他没考虑到这条规则的重要性,也就是没考虑到这个规则所要表现的内容的重要性。这本身就是问题:在电子兵棋中,做分析判断的不是推演者,而是电子兵棋固化好的规则,分担了推演者需要必备的常识,而这种偷懒式的提醒,又造成了另外一个误区,如果说某条规则在某些条件下已经不符合实际需求,但是电子兵棋中的规则却依旧跟着程序,做出了判断,这点推演者该如何认识其含义和分析其是否符合实际?

当然,有人可以说:可以让推演电子兵棋的人先看规则,再推演,那样不是不可以,不过,这不还是让推演者去学习规则吗?而且,单纯的看规则和实际运用规则之间的差距,能让推演者体会多少,恐怕只有推演者实际接触过之后才明白吧。

有些人认为:手工兵棋在推演中,是察言观色很重要的,我却不这么感觉:在推演手工兵棋时,是没有功夫(有些时候是没有机会)看对方的态度的,如果只是把希望寄托在察言观色上,那么他是在思考问题,还是在想怎么让自己赢?

不论是专业的还是民间的兵棋,兵棋追求的是结果吗?显然不是,如果有人想用一个确定与不确定之间反复交替变化的过程得到的结果去说明问题……那么我想这么问一下:兵棋是预言机?
兵棋只能分析结果,而不是去确定一个结果。而分析的每一个过程,正是通过各种分析,才能有一个预案,这样才能更好的有的放矢。如果有人认为计算机可以细致到模拟人的细胞活动,因此做出的作战模拟结果就是真正的结果,那我也无话可说。

从美军正式使用计算机做运筹分析的那天起,就有人有这个担心手工兵棋是否保得住自己的地位,不过至少到了几十年后的今天,仍然有人“还”在担心这个问题……估计这个担心,还会继续下去。

手工兵棋确实有些地方属于条件限制,无法达到电子兵棋的快速,比如初始配置上和复盘上,这些重复性的非分析性工作,是电子兵棋做得很好的地方。以及双盲时在数据传输上,电子兵棋要快于手工兵棋。我是来讨论和说明自己看法的,因此对于电子兵棋的优点,我不会否认和回避。

电子兵棋对我们来说,快速、方便和远程对战:只需要自己和电脑,即可以初步的感受到兵棋是个什么东西,而对场地、团体没有任何的要求,你也不需要因为厚厚的英文规则而发愁 (虽然不少原版专业的电子兵棋都带很厚的规则书) 。但这点仅仅局限于爱好者较少,不集中的情况下造成的问题。而如北京战棋党本身,有了固定的组织,有了如老韩这样可以义务翻译的朋友聚在一起,自然而然的就会体现出手工兵棋的特点。大家每一次推演不单纯是在考虑:德军为什么没在诺曼底给盟军赶下海的问题,而是考虑为什么规则会这样制订?这个规则和历史或实际上有什么关联?继而发展到各自回去翻资料,查找情况。最终确定规则是否符合实际情况或者其设计思想是为了告诉推演者什么。这才是我个人和北京战棋党(限平时参加活动的人,这里我倒是可以代表一下……)的乐趣所在,而不是单纯的谁输谁赢。

以上,并不是为自己做辩解,只是发表自己的看法。除某条括号内说明文字,其他内容只代表个人,而非战棋党全体。请各位不要被误导。北京战棋党内又不是没有玩电子兵棋的,而且不乏高手,我没权利代表。

同时,也对借此夹带私货的某人回敬一句:当事情不了解缘由时,就给与自己有私怨的乱扣帽子,这种事也就你干得出来了。别人没有时间扯你,不是因为你有本事,而是因为更多的时候,应付你为了抬高自己非要胡说八道兼无理搅三分的挑衅上而浪费宝贵的时间太可惜了。

再回正题:
说了这么多个人看法,恐怕有人会抬出《兵棋手册》来说邓尼根认为电子兵棋比手工兵棋优越之类的话来。我还是把《兵棋手册》的部分内容贴出来吧,以供大家探讨。(如果有我个人遗漏掉的地方,希望大家可以补充章节号,毕竟我的英文不好,手中的中英双译稿看起来还是比较麻烦,没注意到的地方很多,希望大家可以帮助指出,谢谢。)

引用一下邓老先生在做手工兵棋和电子兵棋的一些比较:
2.25
Computer wargames have a number of notable differences from their paper predecessors. The principal differences are: Easier Rules- The rules of the computer game are embedded in the program itself. There is still a lot to be learned, as the computer wargame is like any other computer program and you still have to learn what pushing each button will do. More and more computer wargames have their documentation embedded in the program. Once you learn what key (or icon) brings up the "Help" information, you can dispense with the printed instructions altogether. There is a great deal of variation in how easy to use computer wargames are. But the trend over the last ten years has been to get easier, and the computer wargames have always been easier to learn than their paper equivalents.

Faster Startup—The bane of paper wargames has always been the tedious process of laying out the map and setting up the playing pieces before you could even begin play. A major advantage of computer wargames is that, in most cases, the "playing pieces" are already where they should be in order to start the game. Those games that allow "free setup" are still a problem, as you then have to use the keyboard or mouse to place the units. In general, the technology in computer wargames is making this setup problem easier with each passing year.

Hidden Information—A major advantage of computer wargames is that you can easily experience the "hidden information" aspect of military campaigns. It's not for nothing that spies are shot in wartime. Secrecy is often a matter of life and death and the ability of the computer to keep you in the dark most of the time accurately recreates this aspect of warfare. On the down side, this makes pre-play analysis of the game more difficult than is the case with manual games.

Saving the Game—Next to the hassle of setting up the game, manual wargames are also wretched when you want to put aside a game to finish later. The map is a large object and all those playing pieces can be easily displaced. Computers suffer no such problems. Press the right key and your game in progress is saved to a disk. You can take it up again whenever you want.

Superclerk—A computer is very good at computing, and keeping track of things. Manual wargames always suffered when burdened with too much record keeping. Yet data, and calculation, is what makes a wargame different from chess and capable of recreating history. Computers can excel in this department, and often do.

The Little Picture—One major advantage of paper wargames is that you can see everything. The map is big, but it's all there in front of you. Computers only have that little screen, which is often seen (literally) as a "window" looking at a larger map. You have to scroll around the larger map, although many computer wargames have the option of popping up a "strategic map" which shows key features of the entire playing area. As computer displays become capable of higher resolution (which is cheaper to achieve than larger displays) this becomes less of a problem. But the paper games still have an edge.

Black Box Syndrome—Another advantage of paper games is that you know why things are happening a certain way in the game. All the rules and probability tables are right there in front of you. Yes, it takes a lot of effort to wade through all that detail. but you do end up with a good idea of how the inner workings of the game function. A popular benefit of this is the opportunity to change the games rules and probability tables. Many players do this, and that's how garners eventually turn into game designers. Computer wargames show you very little of how it does its thing. The computer program just does it, leaving you sometimes muttering about mysterious "black boxes." Naturally, you can't change the program either. This inaccessibility puts off a lot of garners who started out cm manual wargames. But increasingly, new wargamers have only seen computer wargames. Some of these new garners still admit to loss when they realize how much more enjoyable the game would be if they knew what was going on inside it and could make their own changes. Computer wargame designers have become aware of this and increasingly, computer wargames have options to modify its procedures and also let the player know what's going on inside the black box.

Paper Clones and Silicon Masterpieces- The earliest (and some of the current) computer wargames were basically clones (often quite literally) of manual wargames. Over the years, more and more computer wargames have concentrated more on the computers strengths and less on trying to clone a paper wargame. There are more and more Silicon Masterpieces being produced as computer wargames find more ways to take advantage of the computers unique properties. Paper wargames are different, in some ways superior and don't clone well.

再引用一下邓老先生在书中对电脑兵棋怀有信心的段落。
6.1
As personal computers became more powerful, the games that could be written for them became equally more impressive, But wargames account for only about five to ten percent of all computer games sold. About a third of the computer games sold are role-. playing games (generally of the Dungeons & Dragons variety, Another 20 percent were action/arcade type games, despite the completion from the cheaper Nintendo type game machines. About 25 percent of games sold were of the simulator variety, usually putting the player in the cockpit of an airplane. The future, obviously, is computer wargames. You can get a better idea of where that future is heading by taking a look at its recent past.
这段中虽然邓老先生在说电子兵棋会有好的发展,但是,他在这段里所说的wargames是包含模拟器系列的军事游戏,然后在整个电子游戏内与RPG等类型游戏比较的发展(90年代早期的比例数据)。这段,希望不要有人误解。
6.3
By the mid 1980s, many manual (paper) wargames had I: directly transferred to computers. This meant displaying a hex grid on the computer screen. While the screen was much smaller than the traditional game maps, this was gotten around by allowing the computer game player to look at different porno on entire map. In effect, the computer screen became a window on a larger map. While the small screen was one disadvantage, there was an even larger problem with these computer wargames. The player had to use the keyboard and/or mouse device to move the playing pieces around. On the positive size, the player did not have to learn the game rules, as most of the procedures were imbedded in the computer program. The player did have to figure out how to use the program, but computer wargames became easier and easier to use as programmers learned more about what players were most comfortable with.

One thing wargamers were not comfortable with was the inability to know exactly what was going in inside the wargame. One major advantage of the manual games was that all the numbers and procedures were right there in front of you. Not only could the player see how the game did its stuff, but the player could, and often did, change things he did not agree with. This was not possible with computer games.

The time factor for playing manual games, and the fact that the!' could not be easily left sitting somewhere to be finished later (animals and small children easily upset these games in progress), gave Computers another edge. While there will probably always be some manual games, computerized wargames are definitely the format of the future.
这段是真正邓尼根对电子兵棋有信心的段落。请各位仔细看完,再来说,电子兵棋在当前的条件下,是否达到了邓尼根的期待?


而在全书中,邓尼根对手工兵棋的肯定也从没停过:
9.11
Designing wargames requires a special, and rare, set of mental tools. Go through the last chapter of this book again if you have to he reminded of this. The manual wargames, unlike the computer wargames, bring players into intimate contact with the details of the games design and mechanics and for this reason there were very few people who could handle playing the manual games. In effect, the audience for manual wargames is pretty much restricted to those who are capable of designing them. Early on, I realized this and found that it only took a little Pressure to convince potential designers that they could do it, and many of them did. As a result, the several dozen designers I trained in the 1960s and 1970s can he found today designing a lot of the games used by the military (as well as doing commercial products, and sometimes both). Many more wargamers simply took me at my word "if you can play them, you can design them."

Computer wargames are a different matter, as you do not have personally manipulate and comprehend all the details of sod, highly automated games. To design a decent computer wargamt it's still safest to go back to a manual design first.

邓尼根在 2000 年 3 月 22 日为《兵棋手册》重新说明中的段落。
Board wargames still had advantages, the major one being that you knew exactly what the game was doing, but many wargamers knew that had a downside in that you had to master a lot of rules and procedures to make a manual game go. But those with the right combination of skills, determination and interest in historical what ifs did play the games and thus became capable of designing games. Most of those garners were not aware that simply playing manual games turned them into game designers, although over time most of them realized it. Not all of these gamers had the urge to design their own, but most eventually realized that they certainly knew enough about how the games worked to do so if they wanted to. Unfortunately, this proliferation of game designers came at the same time, the 1980s, that computer wargames began to take over. While computer wargames had many advantages over manual games, they had one major minus for game designers. Computer games did not reveal their internal workings. Oh, sure, some computer game designers, and publishers, often former board wargamers, went out of their way to provide thick manuals showing all the details of what was going on in the game. And many gamers appreciated this, but many just took the buzz from knowing all that stuff was there and otherwise ignored it. With board wargames, you could not ignore the details of how the game did what it did. With computer wargames, you could, and most gladly did. You could get into computer wargames a lot more quickly when you were relieved of the need to master a lot of the games mechanics. Moreover, the easier access to computer wargames meant there were far more people able to enjoy wargames.

One can make the case that wargame sales are better than ever, if one simply changes the definition of a wargame. That's what the market has done in response to market demands. But that's like saying that historical fiction should he reflagged as history books because few people will buy and read real history books anymore. No, the problem is that historical wargames were always a small market because they emphasized information and analysis at the expense of entertainment. Any gamer who was not a wargamer immediately saw that. Now that computers have made it possible for many more people to play wargames, you should not be surprised that most of them want to be entertained, not put through a training course. There is a new type of wargame available, and this includes the science fiction and fantasy games that involve combat. It has been noted that some of these garners will move up (over or down, depending how you look at it) to historical wargames. That's the best one can hope for, as there has never, ever, been broad appeal for realistic combat simulations.

But there are a lot more negatives. There are fewer wargames being published. And those that are published tend to be simpler and less accurate. Unlike manual games, you can't see what's going on in computer games. You cannot do much with the basic mechanics in a computer wargame. Manual wargames were quite different. While the rules may have sometimes been unclear (or worse), most players adapted by (intentionally or otherwise) changing the game procedures to suit their own tastes or opinions. I was quick to make the most of this problem by doing what many computer game programmers did, I turned a bug into a feature. Players who regularly mucked about with game mechanics, I noted often, were performing one of the more important tasks performed in game development. No prototype of a game went far without a lot of tweaking. Computer wargames go through the same process. But once the code is closed and the gamma version is shipped, the users cannot further tweak the game. This has caused a significant divide between those players who played a lot of manual games and those who have known only computer wargames. In effect, there is software generation of garners and a mushware generation.

Mushware is my term (borrowed from a programmer who worked for me years ago) for what people do with complex procedures in their brain, without benefit of a computer. Mushware was also the reason why the market for manual was never that large. Only a small portion of the population comes equipped to handle mushware. The ones who were exposed to manual wargames became, whether they wanted to or not, wargame designers. The mushware gamers could not avoid understanding how the games worked, and in excruciating detail. It did not surprise me that many of today's (middle aged) programmers were manual wargamers. The grognards were the first geeks. If you could handle manual wargames, programming was no great challenge. When PCs first came out, I took it for granted that most wargamers would glom onto that new toy. Our surveys indicated that wargamers were much quicker to acquire PCs than the general population. And it didn't surprise me that so many wargamers who were not programmers, were soon eagerly learning BASIC or ASM. In my last two years at SP1, the many PCs we had around the office were soon taken over, later during the weekly Friday night play test sessions, with garners using or developing software to play, develop or analyze wargames.

Many manual wargamers went on to develop computer games (wargames and games in general.) But in the 1990s, you saw the emergence of developers who had no manual wargames experience. This trend will continue, meaning more and more wargames will be designed by people with no mushware experience. This may not be noticed for quite some time, if ever. The mushware generation grew up with games that emphasized accuracy and historical realism. Manual games kept the designers honest, as the players could see how the game worked and figure out for themselves if they thought the designers approach was on target or not. Computer wargames plunged the games inner workings into darkness. Most garners don't care, the games are easier to use and that sells games more than anything else. The mushware generation will pass from the scene

The number of complex computer wargames published (increasingly by small outfits, who distribute via the web and mail) has been shrinking. And those that do get done have less glitzy and less elaborate interfaces. Much lower budgets than the mainline computer games. Those few garners who still sought out complex, or simply realistic, computer wargames were willing to forego a lot of the glitzy graphics. Many of the garners who prefer the historically accurate computer wargames started out with, or still play, manual wargames, and actually prefer their computer wargames to look like manual games, complete with the hexagon grid.

邓尼根在1993年版本的《兵棋手册》中介绍文字结尾部分:
(很抱歉,我手里没有93版本的英文原文,只有友人提供的翻译版。)
“本书很多内容仍然只涉及手工兵棋。这是因为即使是电脑兵棋也来自于手工兵棋。也许手工兵棋看上去比较粗糙,但是如果你不首先理解手工兵棋的规则,你就无法利用电脑进行电脑兵棋编程设计。
当我考虑写一本关于电脑兵棋的书籍时,我立刻意识到,如果我不以手工兵棋作为开始,读者对兵棋的理解将不会和我希望的那样深入。所有兵棋都起源于最早最简单的兵棋形式:象棋。在兵棋飞入更广阔的电脑化未来之前,手工兵棋就是现实和复杂象棋发展的巅峰。”

从上面引述《兵棋手册》中的内容上看,估计一定会有人说:我是来玩兵棋的,不是去设计兵棋的。这么说也许没错,不过,请各位自己静下心来想一想,谁没有想自己设计兵棋的想法呢?当初开始玩兵棋的想法就是为了娱乐吗?为自己的梦想而付出的时间与精力,是不会觉得累和麻烦的。上面的话并非为了说明手工兵棋一定比电子兵棋优秀,只是想表达一种态度:玩兵棋,最重要的是了解兵棋、认识兵棋,而了解认识的前提在规则,不论你玩的是手工兵棋还是电子兵棋,只要你对这款兵棋的规则了解,知道规则的涵义,那么,电子兵棋和手工兵棋除了在相互之间各自繁琐的地方,还有什么不同呢?

1

精华

0

对战

49

主题

一级士官长

积分
168
军饷
100 两
发表于 2010-6-15 14:37:22 | 显示全部楼层
有理、有力、有节

4

精华

0

对战

111

主题

中尉

叫我小陈就好

积分
400
军饷
34 两

英雄勋章-铜一级勇气勋章英雄勋章-银

发表于 2010-6-15 15:51:02 | 显示全部楼层
手工兵棋终将被电子兵棋所取代!!

未来的电子兵棋,将是利用3d投影设备将战场与算子投射于大大的桌子上,玩家用声音、动作进行指挥,设备自行移动算子,查表计算,标记作战结果……

好像这还是手工

我支持C酱的意见,手工和电子各有所长,没有好坏之分,只能说个人对此兴趣的多寡。
没必要画圈子扣帽子。
再说这个又不是“鱼和熊掌不可兼得”的问题,两手抓两手都要硬,互相借鉴,取长补短方能修成正果

1

精华

0

对战

2

主题

中士

积分
24
军饷
100 两

战棋党元老

发表于 2010-6-15 16:31:00 | 显示全部楼层
与其说电子兵棋将取代手工兵棋,还不如说手工兵棋电子化更准确。按现在状态,这一进程离理想状态还差远了。

我赞同林恩的观点。不研究规则和推演,不能算玩或研究兵棋。
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册|Register

本版积分规则

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表