Microsoft manual Close Combat Game Theory, You Lead Human Beings, not Superheroes

2Close Combat

Close Combat Game Theory

Historical accuracy and realistic psychology make Close Combat different from other strategy games. The forces, the locations, the weapons, all reflect the reality of the Normandy Campaign. And the Close Combat artificial intelligence (AI) tracks not only every round fired, but also the physical and psychological states of individual soldiers and their teams. Because the AI uses this information to vary soldier and unit performance in every situation, every game is different.

You Lead Human Beings, not Superheroes

One of the first things you’ll notice when you play Close Combat is that you can’t always make things happen when or as you want them to. Close Combat challenges the player with a realistic representation of complex and unpredictable human behavior under the stress of combat. For example, when you order your units to move or fire, they may respond immediately and move or fire quickly, or take a while to respond, or not respond at all. They may also react in a way that has nothing to do with your orders: They might take on an entirely different target, or dive for cover, or hide, or run away. This is because your soldiers behave not like robots or superheroes, but like—human beings!

Your troops’ human behavior doesn’t mean their reactions are out of your hands, however. The better you lead your men, the better they respond to your orders. Players who lead their squads into trouble—whose decisions result in squads becoming overly fatigued, suppressed by incoming fire, ambushed, captured, or killed—will find that their units’ performance deteriorates: Incoming fire makes the men want to seek cover, and reduces their desire to attack. Fatigue also reduces the likelihood of soldiers hitting their targets, or obeying future orders that require physical effort. If the fire is heavy enough and their cover is insufficient, soldiers may disregard orders and stay put instead of moving and firing. As each side takes casualties, its cohesion—the willingness of its soldiers to fight—deteriorates. And if a player’s leadership has resulted in heavy casualties or sufficient accumulated stress, soldiers may break and run.

Close Combat bases its psychological model on a study of the behavioral effects of combat stress by Dr. Steven Silver of Temple University. The game tracks the cumulative physical and emotional stress that soldiers and units on both sides experience. Given their current state at any point in a game, it determines whether or not soldiers will carry out orders, and how quickly and effectively they will carry out those orders.