Matrix Games Forums

Battle Academy Mega Pack releases on SteamDeal of the Week Da Vinci's Art of WarCivil War II Patch 1.4 public BetaHappy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Future Directions - Data Content

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> Future Directions - Data Content Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 2:16:34 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17645
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
Hi all,

Here is where you can discuss what data content we should focus on - ie what battles we should cover, how you would like them packaged ( eg expansion packs, separate games etc ) and how best to coordinate between community developed data content and that produced by Panther Games.

Please keep any discussion on price to the designated threads.

We are very much looking forward to your feedback on data content.

What we have in the works already are some scenarios covering the HTTR battles. We can't just use the old HTTR scenarios as too much has changed to salvage these. So they havge to be rebuilt from scratch. We have already converted the maps. The BFTB estabs include the HTTR estabs. We have developed five of the large scenarios so far. One option is to develop a suite of say 10 or so scenarios and release an expansion pack for HTTR. We could probably do that over the next few months.

Another option is to convert the COTA estabs. This will be a fairly big job. From there we could develop and release a COTA expansion pack. The COTA estabs would provide options to cover a lot of the pre 1943 battles on the western front. They would need to be further exanded upon to cater for specific forces in say the western desert theatre, France 1940 etc.

A further option would be to develop a set of east front estabs so we could cover a plethora of east front battles. Again it may be worth while separating this into early war years 1941/42/43 and later war years 44/45.

I have to go right now. Please feel free to post on what you think would be a good direction to head in for developing future data content.

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com
Post #: 1
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 2:26:19 AM   
axisandallies


Posts: 329
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
If you did a game on the Eastern Front, you might get alot of new players. I feel you would have many more options then on the western front.

_____________________________

Stupid rebellion, anyhow....D. Vader

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 2
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 2:30:35 AM   
DerLvR


Posts: 5
Joined: 12/30/2009
From: Britain
Status: offline
Only one choice when it comes to what I'd like to see in an upcoming title: the Winter and the Continuation wars.

_____________________________

Ich hoffe, dass ich keinen langweile...

(in reply to axisandallies)
Post #: 3
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 2:31:14 AM   
KEYSTONE07950

 

Posts: 157
Joined: 12/17/2006
Status: offline
Will a "doctrine editor" ever be released? Would it even be possible to create one?

(in reply to axisandallies)
Post #: 4
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 2:34:22 AM   
Panther Paul


Posts: 667
Joined: 3/29/2003
From: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KEYSTONE07950

Will a "doctrine editor" ever be released? Would it even be possible to create one?


No.

The Doctrine is all the code that goes into planning a move, attack etc.

The game is set up so that there can be seperate code modules for planning an attack, and the module to use can be set in the estab data.

Its just never been used.


_____________________________

Paul Scobell
Panther Games Pty Ltd

(in reply to KEYSTONE07950)
Post #: 5
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 2:58:56 AM   
TheGreatRadish

 

Posts: 59
Joined: 1/21/2006
Status: offline
Good news!

Personally, I'd love to see either Normandy or Sicily/Italy content but they don't necessarily fit all that well as expansions to existing titles (especially the latter).  The conversion of COTA estabs would be nice especially if it did lead to France 1940 or North Africa, I'd be very happy to see that.

From a less selfish point of view, however, I suspect that Eastern Front material would be very popular across the community and potentially bring barrow-loads of new players.  Where you would start with that one is a difficult one though, almost limitless possibilities.



(in reply to Panther Paul)
Post #: 6
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 4:11:58 AM   
Llyranor


Posts: 208
Joined: 4/29/2006
From: Montreal, Canada
Status: offline

quote:


What we have in the works already are some scenarios covering the HTTR battles. We can't just use the old HTTR scenarios as too much has changed to salvage these. So they havge to be rebuilt from scratch. We have already converted the maps. The BFTB estabs include the HTTR estabs. We have developed five of the large scenarios so far. One option is to develop a suite of say 10 or so scenarios and release an expansion pack for HTTR. We could probably do that over the next few months.

Since this seems to be a smaller project and part of it has been done already, this might be a good idea as the next project. As long as it covers the main scenarios (XXX Corps breakout, entire 101st/82nd/1st areas), this sounds good. I would highly suggest making this a standalone expansion, though. Many devs are doing this nowadays; it builds up on the current engine (BFTB), but doesn't require owning the vanilla game. This will thus allow sales from people interested in Market-Garden, but who don't own BFTB for whatever reason.

quote:


Another option is to convert the COTA estabs. This will be a fairly big job. From there we could develop and release a COTA expansion pack. The COTA estabs would provide options to cover a lot of the pre 1943 battles on the western front. They would need to be further exanded upon to cater for specific forces in say the western desert theatre, France 1940 etc.

Personally, I'd be pretty interested in this, especially the western desert theater. However, if it'll be a large task, it might be too much of an undertaking at the moment.

quote:


A further option would be to develop a set of east front estabs so we could cover a plethora of east front battles. Again it may be worth while separating this into early war years 1941/42/43 and later war years 44/45.

I think a lot of wargamers would be more for this. If you're going to invest into a larger project, this probably will appeal to more players than your previous option.

quote:


Personally, I'd love to see either Normandy or Sicily/Italy content

So would I!

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 7
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 4:15:49 AM   
Franklin Nimitz

 

Posts: 541
Joined: 6/23/2007
From: The House of the Mouse
Status: offline
Expansion packs to fill in Western Europe/ NA (no particular order):
-Normandy/Market Garden/Westwall (44-45)- (need off map/naval gunfire and amphibious assault code)
-Gazala thru Italy (42-43)- (minefields etc.)
-Blitzkrieg & France '40 (39-41 COTA update)
-Off The Beaten Path: Leb/Syria, East Africa, Madagascar, Dodecanese, Spanish Civil War, etc.

Next Major Title: Eastern Front
Develop in parallel with west front expansion packs below. Focus on highest impact engine changes, and campaign game, but not so advanced that it's not backward patchable. It'll help to get another revenue producer on the market quickly, too. Create the campaign game that covers periods from the entire war- to limit the scope to something manageable, maybe cover battles from Zhukov's career. It can go from 1939 (Japan, welcome to Command Ops) to 1945. Expansion packs for Stalingrad/Saturn, Kharkov, Kursk, all the usual east front suspects.

Title After That: Pacific War/Korea
I included Korea to expand both the pool of potential interesting battles and nations, but also to stretch the era covered a little. A must-have for all the jarheads, but lots of nationalities would get a showing. The stuff's there to model some early cold war hypotheticals for expansion pack material perhaps.

Title After That: Modern/Late Cold War. I said this since I think it'd have more appeal than going back in time from WW2, but doing earlier times might be easier to implement- less fancy equipment to worry about. This has to be 3-D and have sophisicated air support modelling. Vietnam, Arab-Israeli, Fulda Gap

Title after that: US Civil war/Franco-Prussian war. This actually might be a good vehicle for when the system stretches into longer campaign modeling and implementing new AI doctrines. No air (maybe balloons), no mechanization could maybe make the development easier, and get the framework established that can be expanded upon later. So even though I put this last, maybe it should go up top.

< Message edited by Franklin Nimitz -- 5/29/2010 4:26:53 AM >

(in reply to TheGreatRadish)
Post #: 8
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 4:23:07 AM   
SeaMonkey

 

Posts: 745
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
Congratulations Dave on the BftB release, most awesome, you definitely sit at the pinnacle of wargaming development. Although its not my personal preference I agree with the other posters here that the East Front is most likely to bring in a larger clientele and after all successful marketing is the best catalyst to sustain this most innovative engine.

So go East young man!

After that, I would appreciate a visit to North Africa. In my mind I conjure up visions of the smaller unit engagements that were the norm for that theater. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the Panther engine is best suited for this scale of action. There is not a lot of unit density, vast landscapes, and the nuances of the Command Ops gameplay can easily be player familiarized in a less demanding environment that this limited theater presents.

Just some thoughts, and i raise my frozen margarita to a toast of this most formidable wargaming engine, thank you Dave and the rest of the "Prowlers'.

(in reply to TheGreatRadish)
Post #: 9
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 4:37:51 AM   
Fallschirmjager


Posts: 6325
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline
North Africa

Either Tobruk 41
El Alamein
Tunisia 43

Any of the three

(in reply to SeaMonkey)
Post #: 10
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 5:28:22 AM   
Bamilus


Posts: 265
Joined: 4/30/2010
From: The Old Northwest
Status: offline
Eastern front would be awesome!

_____________________________

Paradox Interactive Forum Refugee

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)
Post #: 11
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 5:30:13 AM   
TheGreatRadish

 

Posts: 59
Joined: 1/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

North Africa



Yeah, the more I think about NA, the more I like it. For me, Compass, Sunflower, Battleaxe and then Crusader in one package would be wargaming heaven

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)
Post #: 12
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 5:41:21 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17645
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Llyranor

Since this seems to be a smaller project and part of it has been done already, this might be a good idea as the next project. As long as it covers the main scenarios (XXX Corps breakout, entire 101st/82nd/1st areas), this sounds good. I would highly suggest making this a standalone expansion, though. Many devs are doing this nowadays; it builds up on the current engine (BFTB), but doesn't require owning the vanilla game. This will thus allow sales from people interested in Market-Garden, but who don't own BFTB for whatever reason.


I can see merit in this approach but I also merit in the more traditional approach of requiring the original BFTB game. If we do a standalone then we'll have to do a full set of manuals, a new tutorial and a full set of tutorial movies. These took between four and five months of my time to develop. If we are also to add any new features, then it would be better to avoid what is in effect a duplication of effort. If we require BFTB, then all we need is a What's New manual and a What's New movie. This would be a lot less effort and could mean we get the data content out to you guys a lot quicker.

< Message edited by Arjuna -- 5/29/2010 5:42:37 AM >


_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to Llyranor)
Post #: 13
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 7:55:33 AM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2449
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
I'm a North Africa nut, and I can't help but believe that the Aussies associated with AA/COP didn't start out with that in mind in the first place. The engine really shines when you turn it loose in the desert. Build it, and I will buy.

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 14
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 10:26:53 AM   
Chaudart


Posts: 35
Joined: 11/24/2008
Status: offline
I'm french therefore I'll be very happy to see France 1940 of course :)
I would like to see the asian front like Burma or the Pacific.
And to finish, few modern conflict like Indochina, Korean, Vietnam.


(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 15
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 11:11:59 AM   
ElchDivision


Posts: 33
Joined: 5/27/2010
From: Deep inside the Reich
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaudart

I'm french therefore I'll be very happy to see France 1940 of course :)
I would like to see the asian front like Burma or the Pacific.
And to finish, few modern conflict like Indochina, Korean, Vietnam.




France 1940? Would be to short for a standalone game, that could be done in a small add-on




_____________________________

http://www.gilgenbachs-eifel.com/wk2
Rest peacefully in foreign soil - Never forgotten

(in reply to Chaudart)
Post #: 16
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 12:11:24 PM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 4867
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

...

A further option would be to develop a set of east front estabs so we could cover a plethora of east front battles. Again it may be worth while separating this into early war years 1941/42/43 and later war years 44/45.

...


This gets my vote.


_____________________________

We don't stop playing games because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing games - Anon.

WitE Alpha/Beta Tester

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 17
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 12:15:10 PM   
jomni


Posts: 2767
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
Nice to hear Market Garden scenarios are getting remake.
Some Normandy action should be in order.

I don't know of any other significant operations in the Western Front late in the war. Maybe Italy.


I suggest BftB be the standard game from now on and everything else comes as modules and engine improvements. That way all theaters will benefit from all upgrades.

< Message edited by jomni -- 5/29/2010 12:16:42 PM >


_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 18
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 12:16:33 PM   
ElchDivision


Posts: 33
Joined: 5/27/2010
From: Deep inside the Reich
Status: offline
The siege of Leningrad 41/42 offers a vast amount of smaller battles and skirmishes, maybe that could be realized aswell.

_____________________________

http://www.gilgenbachs-eifel.com/wk2
Rest peacefully in foreign soil - Never forgotten

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 19
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 12:19:01 PM   
DanO

 

Posts: 125
Joined: 4/4/2010
Status: offline
North Africa and Italy for me, please! I'm not that interested in the Eastern front, although I realise I'm in a tiny minority.

And if it's just data content I'd rather it be add-ons as opposed to standalone. More data quicker is better as far as I'm concerned.

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 20
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 1:04:39 PM   
Chaudart


Posts: 35
Joined: 11/24/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ElchDivision

France 1940? Would be to short for a standalone game, that could be done in a small add-on



I prefer not answer this treacherous attack

Seriously, I think it's possible to make between 15-20 scénarios.
Moreover, this will be an interresting challenge to play with the french forces.
The french equipements wasn't lower than the german equipements.
It was just the way the French officers have used this one which precipitated the fall of France.
Statistically, the French army was as strong as the German army.

But you have likely reason. It could be done in add-on ;)

< Message edited by Chaudart -- 5/29/2010 1:14:07 PM >

(in reply to ElchDivision)
Post #: 21
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 1:57:10 PM   
Franklin Nimitz

 

Posts: 541
Joined: 6/23/2007
From: The House of the Mouse
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaudart

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElchDivision

France 1940? Would be to short for a standalone game, that could be done in a small add-on



I prefer not answer this treacherous attack

Seriously, I think it's possible to make between 15-20 scénarios.
Moreover, this will be an interresting challenge to play with the french forces.
The french equipements wasn't lower than the german equipements.
It was just the way the French officers have used this one which precipitated the fall of France.
Statistically, the French army was as strong as the German army.

But you have likely reason. It could be done in add-on ;)


Might as well throw in the Poles, Scandanavians, Be-Ne-Lux countries with a COTA:Blitzkrieg! expansion pack.

(in reply to Chaudart)
Post #: 22
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 2:10:39 PM   
Llyranor


Posts: 208
Joined: 4/29/2006
From: Montreal, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Llyranor

Since this seems to be a smaller project and part of it has been done already, this might be a good idea as the next project. As long as it covers the main scenarios (XXX Corps breakout, entire 101st/82nd/1st areas), this sounds good. I would highly suggest making this a standalone expansion, though. Many devs are doing this nowadays; it builds up on the current engine (BFTB), but doesn't require owning the vanilla game. This will thus allow sales from people interested in Market-Garden, but who don't own BFTB for whatever reason.


I can see merit in this approach but I also merit in the more traditional approach of requiring the original BFTB game. If we do a standalone then we'll have to do a full set of manuals, a new tutorial and a full set of tutorial movies. These took between four and five months of my time to develop. If we are also to add any new features, then it would be better to avoid what is in effect a duplication of effort. If we require BFTB, then all we need is a What's New manual and a What's New movie. This would be a lot less effort and could mean we get the data content out to you guys a lot quicker.

How about including the original tutorial and movies? You could point that it IS, in fact, an expansion, even if standalone, and that the included tutorial of St-Vith represents the same game system. Don't think the tutorial not being based on Market-Garden should be much of an issue, since it IS after all just a tutorial, plus the extra setting could even potentially be considered a bonus for those who don't have BFTB. Kind of like how COTA has 2 desert maps (post-patch, I know, but same premise) or how some of SSG's games like Battles in Normandy also have the Ardennes Offensive.

From there on, just include an extra 'what's new' movie and section in the manual.

I think this should be seriously considered. For BFTB, it doesn't really affect them either way. However, if it's not standalone, you potentially shut out a lot of people who don't already own BFTB (eg. they like Market-Garden, but don't care about Bulge, or whatever other reason), because the price of both the core game and expansion will be significantly steeper than either one alone. From a business, it sounds like it'd make sense.

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 23
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 2:23:43 PM   
Joe 98


Posts: 4006
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline
One expansion pack that has the 10 best battles from HTTR

Another expansion pack that has the 10 best battles from COTA

A separate game might be named “Patton’s Breakout” and covers the fast flowing break out from Normandy into Western France and the German counterattack in that region.

When you move to the Russian front you will really need a strategic layer! The first game, named Barbarossa, would cover battles from June 1941 to September 1942.

The next game, named Stalingrad, would cover battles from Stalingrad to the fall of Berlin.

A game covering the Western desert would be great with this game engine. It too would need a strategic layer.

The full Market Garden Operation as one large scenario.

-




(in reply to Franklin Nimitz)
Post #: 24
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 3:42:51 PM   
henri51


Posts: 1049
Joined: 1/16/2009
Status: offline
The Eastern Front would definitely be good, and perhaps North Africa. Personally I have never played to any great extent any of the Normandy games that I bought - and I have the main ones. I guess I don't go much for invasion games, so forget about a Sealion game.

Also I like games where there is a lot of maneuver as opposed to games like Korsun Pocket with two lines slugging it out.I didn't play much Korsun Pocket but The Ardennes Offensive was great fun for me, and I will never buy a WW1 game.

So my first choice would be a Barbarossa game.

Henri

(in reply to Joe 98)
Post #: 25
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 5:26:56 PM   
save

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 9/6/2004
Status: offline
Operation cobra, and normandy battles comes into my mind, reusing done investments.

If size of the eastern frony battles are good enough I would like to see charkov , and operation citadel (kursk), and winter war and continuation war in Finland/ Russia also. The reason for the last request is that not any good tabletop game covers these battles.


(in reply to henri51)
Post #: 26
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/29/2010 6:09:30 PM   
IDontThinkSo


Posts: 64
Joined: 5/28/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

What we have in the works already are some scenarios covering the HTTR battles. We can't just use the old HTTR scenarios as too much has changed to salvage these. So they havge to be rebuilt from scratch. We have already converted the maps. The BFTB estabs include the HTTR estabs. We have developed five of the large scenarios so far. One option is to develop a suite of say 10 or so scenarios and release an expansion pack for HTTR. We could probably do that over the next few months.


Will this involve paying for the expansion? I recently bought HTTR. The prospect of the (improved) scenarios being released as a paid expansion for BFTB is, quite frankly, disheartening.

However, if this is free (and hopefully a rebuilt COTA as well), then it's great news.

To add to the discussion - I would absolutely love to see battles from the Mediterranean and North Africa. East front would be great as well, but there's enough games covering that already, so this could wait.

But Mediterranean and NA? Bring it on.

And please, when you make a poor student spend all his money on the Bulge, build the expansions so that they actually require Bulge, so that they can be priced cheap.

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 27
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/30/2010 9:21:20 AM   
tyrspawn

 

Posts: 34
Joined: 5/30/2010
Status: offline
What I would like to see, in order of demand:

1. HTTR converted to the new engine. If you JUST converted the historical campaign scenarios without any other upgrades or perks I would pay $5.
2. Contemporary warfare game, I would love to see something like Combat Mission Shock Force in Airborne Assault gameplay fashion. In fact, I would die happy if this happened.
3. Vietnam/korea
4. Case Yellow and Case Red - Battle for France. I would love to blitz 30 corps style into french lines.
5. Stalingrad campaign

(in reply to IDontThinkSo)
Post #: 28
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/30/2010 4:55:55 PM   
Llyranor


Posts: 208
Joined: 4/29/2006
From: Montreal, Canada
Status: offline
quote:


And please, when you make a poor student spend all his money on the Bulge, build the expansions so that they actually require Bulge, so that they can be priced cheap.

I'm not advocating making the new Market-Garden pack a full-fledged new game in the series with massive upgrades to the engine. However, I think it can be *both* an expansion AND standalone, and priced accordingly AS an expansion. As such, people can expect similar features to BFTB, with minimal (or even none, since there are already massive improvements since the HTTR days). It would just include the BFTB engine, but running Market-Garden scenarios instead.

Why I think it being a standalone expansion would be beneficial to everyone:
- Priced as an expansion, it should not affect BFTB owners in any way, since they already have that game anyway. Maybe even a discount for BFTB owners (which I think they would really appreciate).
- Standalone means that people who do NOT have BFTB can also buy it. They would already have the BFTB demo to try it out (the setting being different doesn't change the game engine; and the videos/tutorials are already done). Maybe there will be a slight premium (or no discount) if they don't own BFTB, but it is STILL cheaper than buying both BFTB *and* the xpac together. Maybe the discount could go both ways; people who own the xpac could get a discount on BFTB. I think this would be reasonable, as people can buy one, or the other (expanding the market beyond just people who want BOTH titles), and a discount could encourage people who own one to get the other as well.
- It all sounds complicated, but I think the main point here is that, if it is priced as an expansion pack anyway, making the xpac standalone simply *expands* your market.
- In terms of the work required to making it standalone vs requiring BFTB, you already have the videos/tutorials. The other main thing would be simply to make the xpac program not be able to play BFTB scenarios. Maybe I'm underestimating the work involved, but it doesn't sound like too much (when the advantage would be *expanding* your potential customer base).

Some devs are doing this nowadays (most recent example I can think of is Dawn of War 2 and its xpac Chaos Rising).

(in reply to IDontThinkSo)
Post #: 29
RE: Future Directions - Data Content - 5/30/2010 6:48:45 PM   
Greup

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 6/26/2006
Status: offline

Go for an HTTR expansion first since you've already done part of the work (besides I never bought HTTR myself ;)). I think it's a wise move to get another product on the Market (Garden ;)) fast.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Llyranor
... a standalone expansion would be beneficial to everyone


In my naïve but enlightened way I would suggest the following market scheme that would benefit both Panther and your customers:

Make the HTTR "expansion" a stand-alone game. Include the BFTB tutorial videos + 1 what's new video. Including the original tutorial videos they will have the additional value as an advertising for BFTB. Why not include the BFTB demo on the DVD if possible to give another taste of BFTB.

Set the price in parity with BFTB for people who don't already own BFTB but make it much (= MUCH) cheaper for those who already payed premium for BFTB.

Along the same lines sell BFTB at the same reduced "expansion" price for those who bought the upcoming re-vamped HTTR "expansion". To me this seems to be the fair way to market these games.

I guess you could go along much in the same lines with an updated COTA. Let newcomers make a heavier investment in the series but be kind to those who made that investment.


Regarding the sequencing of games I am confident I will enjoy whatever comes along in almost any order.

I second the idea I of making a Blitzkrieg-"expansion" containing both Poland, Belgium, France and Norway (Denmark was no real fight IIRC). Then again what about French doctrine? You won't be able to use the BFTB engine unmodified for French doctrine as little as for Soviet. By this I'm trying to say that it might be a bigger undertaking than "just" making maps, estabs and scenarios.

An eastern front major new game would be nice. You could probably get quite a number of expansions out of going east covering Finland to Caucasus (the old boardgame "Black Sea - Black Death springs to mind) to Budapest and Berlin. It feels like Stalingrad and Kursk has been done to death but that also goes for the Bulge so you might be able to pull them off with the superior engine and forward thinking of yours. Do a Firebrigade remake! ;)


What about making two Mediterranean games:

1. COTA+North Africa (that would exclude an updated original COTA).
2. Italy: Sicily, Anzio etc. I'm not deeply versed in the Italian campaign history but since there were no real break-throughs (?) it might be a dull game except for the aforementioned battles.

Normandy? For sure. A bit one-sided but still interesting as a sim.

In the end I guess most of the grogs would like to be able to pick more or less any operation of WWII. Just keep 'em coming!




(in reply to Llyranor)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> Future Directions - Data Content Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.113