Desert War: Eastern Front '42

[benpark]

Great- I'm happy with the new venue.

Options are always nice. Multi-scaling would probably open up a lot of possibilities for depicting a variety of actions. It seems like a large can of worms, however.

Most Eastern Front wargames tend to be either tactical or high command level operational (division sized units). I'd be happy with the scale as is, personally- since there are so few good company sized games out there.

It would be great to see a game at the scale used currently for this theater, as it isn't being done nearly as much.

The R/B/C option seems like the best option in terms of dealing with the towering Soviet counter stacks one generally gets in these games (which dictates tactics on both sides). Breakdown and recombination of units could then be an important simulation of ability to command, or other common human factors one encounters with command simulations (morale, leadership, etc).

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: bcgames
Is a multi-scale game appealing/acceptable (like TOAW) or do you enjoy all scenarios in the same scale as is done in Desert War?

What say you?

For now I would stick with what you have; it is a good scale for this type of game. Maybe later you can evolve to cover multi-scale.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

am a fan of the smaller scale operational games. So 2km or 4km per hex would be my preference.

All the best,
Kip.

[jack54]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

For now I would stick with what you have; it is a good scale for this type of game. Maybe later you can evolve to cover multi-scale.

+1

[Okayrun3254]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: bcgames
Is a multi-scale game appealing/acceptable (like TOAW) or do you enjoy all scenarios in the same scale as is done in Desert War?

What say you?

For now I would stick with what you have; it is a good scale for this type of game. Maybe later you can evolve to cover multi-scale.

I also vote for sticking with that you have now.

[wodin]

How about Coy scale set around Stalingrad. With new features designed for urban combat and fighting methods!

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: bcgames
Is a multi-scale game appealing/acceptable (like TOAW) or do you enjoy all scenarios in the same scale as is done in Desert War?

What say you?

For now I would stick with what you have; it is a good scale for this type of game. Maybe later you can evolve to cover multi-scale.

I also vote for sticking with that you have now.

To be clear, what we have now is a 2-miles per hex, 8-stacking points per hex game system. That's two battalions, two companies per hex if you can even swing it with the forces available--once you leave the historical assembly areas. However, this is considered grounds for a "Monster Stacking" situation. Sticking to what we have has already been rejected by the majority of posters/critics of Desert War.

But...Thanks for your support of the original theme of the game.

[Saint Ruth]

Yeah, but then you've to add long range direct fire over multiple hexes and hence Line Of Sight rules and well, a pile of other rules when you shrink the hex size. It'd be great to do of course, but it'd take too long...

[Deathtreader]

ORIGINAL: Saint Ruth

Yeah, but then you've to add long range direct fire over multiple hexes and hence Line Of Sight rules and well, a pile of other rules when you shrink the hex size. It'd be great to do of course, but it'd take too long...

OK...…… maybe while keeping all sizes/hexes/types etc. the same a simple reduction in the number of stacking points allowed per 2km hex would do the trick. Or put another away, increase the stacking point value of all or some unit types/sizes to accomplish the same thing.

Just a thought.

Rob.

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader
OK...…… maybe while keeping all sizes/hexes/types etc. the same a simple reduction in the number of stacking points allowed per 2km hex would do the trick. Or put another away, increase the stacking point value of all or some unit types/sizes to accomplish the same thing.

Just a thought.

Rob.

You are close to the mark. Here is my read of the situation.

With regards to the Eastern Front game, what has emerged from the postings found here and from closely-related topics found elsewhere, I conclude the following "what to do":

* Half the Desert War hex scale from 2-miles to one.
* "Double" the time scale from three to five turns per day (4 day, 1 night).
* Retain the company/battalion scale and all the unique, unit type capabilities.
* Scenarios should consist of no more than two corps per side.
* Average scenario length should be on average two to three days time (10-15 turns)...some shorter (a day--5 turns), some longer (6 days--30 turns). None longer.
* Bottom Line: More of the Same, but Smaller, Shorter = Sweeter.

[bcgames]

Let us know when you think this conversation about the next Eastern Front game should be moved to [Coming Soon]. I'm ready to talk about it "over there". What say you?

Stay here or Over There?

[benpark]

Over there!

[bcgames]

I believe we're stuck here. So...I'll post here about the next game and hope you will do the same.

Onwards!

[bcgames]

The way ahead:

* Half the Desert War hex scale from 2-miles to one mile per hex (1600 meters).
* "Double" the time scale from three to five turns per day (4 day, 1 night).
* Retain the company/battalion scale and all the unique, unit type capabilities found in Desert War.
* Add new unit types (bridging engineers, partisans, security, ski units).
* Scenarios should consist of no more than two corps per side.
* Average scenario length should be on average two to three days time (10-15 turns)...some shorter (a day--5 turns), some longer (6 days--30 turns). None longer.
* Bottom Line (My Read): Many like/want smaller, shorter scenarios. Some want larger, longer scenarios. The Priority goes to what The Many want and what we can do.

What do you want in The East?

[jack54]

Well my dream would be 2nd Kharkov at the current 2 mile scale but that would be a true monster.

Another possibility could be ONE large scenario then that scenario broken down into smaller scenarios almost a case study.

Sprinkle in a few non related Small scenarios for flavor. ( 1 or 2 day things).

(Brother against Brother did something similar with the American Civil War. Manassas was the large scenario which was broken down into variants of Sudley Springs Ford, Blackburn's Ford, various time starts and what if's.Then they through in unrelated battles like Mill Springs and Williamsburg)


I'm just thinking outloud... whatever you decide I'll come along for the ride[;)]

[Okayrun3254]

ORIGINAL: jack54

Well my dream would be 2nd Kharkov at the current 2 mile scale but that would be a true monster.

Another possibility could be ONE large scenario then that scenario broken down into smaller scenarios almost a case study.

Sprinkle in a few non related Small scenarios for flavor. ( 1 or 2 day things).

(Brother against Brother did something similar with the American Civil War. Manassas was the large scenario which was broken down into variants of Sudley Springs Ford, Blackburn's Ford, various time starts and what if's.Then they through in unrelated battles like Mill Springs and Williamsburg)


I'm just thinking outloud... whatever you decide I'll come along for the ride[;)]

I'm with you. I am okay with the new direction. The main things that I would like to see improved would be the graphics and the user interface. Those are reasonable things that can be improved with a already very good game.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: bcgames

The way ahead:
* Half the Desert War hex scale from 2-miles to one mile per hex (1600 meters).
* "Double" the time scale from three to five turns per day (4 day, 1 night).
* Retain the company/battalion scale and all the unique, unit type capabilities found in Desert War.
* Add new unit types (bridging engineers, partisans, security, ski units).
* Scenarios should consist of no more than two corps per side.
* Average scenario length should be on average two to three days time (10-15 turns)...some shorter (a day--5 turns), some longer (6 days--30 turns). None longer.
* Bottom Line (My Read): Many like/want smaller, shorter scenarios. Some want larger, longer scenarios. The Priority goes to what The Many want and what we can do.

What do you want in The East?

Will some specialist units still be represented at the platoon scale?

[MrClock]

A database of units and a summary of their history.
I'd like to see how many men and vehicles there are in the units.
I don't like a simple percentage of strength (It's easy for gameplay, but I'd also like a list of losses).

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Will some specialist units still be represented at the platoon scale?

As a general rule, no. The battalion will remain the central unit of measurement for all types of infantry, cavalry, artillery, and armor. Specialist units will continue to be represented at company/battery level. However, if the situation represented by a scenario requires platoon-level units to work properly and/or represent the historical situation--then we will include platoon-sized units of the type required (e.g. Operazione E, Battle of Sollum, and The Rats vs The Ram). The capability to add/include platoons in a scenario will remain within the game editor.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: bcgames
However, if the situation represented by a scenario requires platoon-level units to work properly and/or represent the historical situation--then we will include platoon-sized units of the type required (e.g. Operazione E, Battle of Sollum, and The Rats vs The Ram). The capability to add/include platoons in a scenario will remain within the game editor.

Great, sounds good.