Matrix Games Forums

A new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!Deal of the Week Espana 1936War in the West coming in December!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Game Suggestions:

 
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] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Game Suggestions: Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/21/2011 5:22:07 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Actually I can't take credit for the server-save game idea, I think lots of people have asked for it.

I'm assuming that this wish list could apply to a Field Marshall edition, rather than just an average patch, so:

1) Fix the map east of Lgrad, make it more heavy woods/swamp (see seperate thread...);
2) Fix rail somehow so that cutting one track near Stalino doesn't render all of the track south of the Dnepr and in the Crimea "dead". Given all of the ports in this area, it seems rather unlikely that there would be NO rail in the entire Crimea for instance. This has important gameplay effects because it makes if very difficult to move troops through the Crimea and beyond. EDIT: Elsewhere I've suggesting leaving track "live" if it is connected to a port, or a certain level of port capacity (under the theory that where there are ports, there are trains).
3) One niggle, not sure if I'm the only one to notice it: in the Strategic Reserve, when you try to filter by type of plane, it is almost impossible to select/deselect fighter-bombers. Everything else is fine, but whenever I want to select FBs, I need to select everything and then deselect everything but FBs. Irritating.
4) Also, why can't we sort the National Reserve by type of plane (ie, Yak-1)?
5) Greatly reduce the AP cost of transferring empty armies/corps, etc. Why does it cost as much, or more, to re-assign an empty army, than to disband it and create a new one? Let's say an army has fifteen CPs. You decide to reassign these units to free up the army, and then would like to transfer it to a new front. You've already paid AP to transfer all of the units, why should I have to pay another massive chunk of AP to transfer an empty army?

That's all for now...


1. That's going to be up to the map guys, I doubt we will see anything for WitE though. Maybe in a future product that will be addressed.

2. Yep I agree about the first part..I think though if you are connected to a port in supply, any rail there should be useable.

3. I'll look into that one

4. That sounds like an easy enough request, I'll ask about it.

5. Hq's are supposed to be cheaper to transfer with fewer units assigned. I just checked in my last game and a German Corps with 3 divisions cost 26 ap to transfer in its entirety to OKH. Removing 1 division cut the cost down to 24, losing another division cut the cost to 14, losing the 3rd division cut it down to 12. No idea why the big jump after the second division was reassigned, but it appears WAD.

_____________________________


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 31
RE: A general purpose system that lets you flag units - 4/21/2011 5:28:07 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Varity

It might be my particular play style, but right now I have huge problems keeping track which units I have already moved, which units I don't intend to move and which units I haven't even looked at or forgotten to reexamine after deferring their move initially. In consequence, I spend about 1/2 hour for every turn reexamining all my units both on the map and in the commanders report (sorted by MPs remaining) to figure out if I'm really, really done with the turn or if I've forgotten anything.

Therefore, it would be nice if every unit had a informative flag that you could set and clear at will that has no impact on the rest of the game and just serves as an organizing tool for players. With such a flag, I could mark units that I'm done with for the turn and quickly find those still waiting for orders.

You should be able to set and clear the flag for units that are selected on the main map, pressing the insert key might set the flag, the delete key might clear it. It should be visible in the unit bar and as a soft factor.

Pressing Ctrl-Insert should highlight all flagged units on the map, like f.e. Ctrl-9 now highlights rail repair units. Ctrl-Delete should highlight the non-flagged units.

The flag should be visible as an extra sortable and filterable column on the units tab of the commanders report screen. There should be a function to set or clear the flag for all selected units on the commanders report, like the refit/reserve, Max TOE% and support level functions.



Tagging units sounds like a good idea, I'll see if this is doable. Might end up being another border color since that is used quite a bit in the game.

_____________________________


(in reply to Varity)
Post #: 32
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/21/2011 6:15:38 PM   
Tarhunnas


Posts: 3150
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

Looks like more than one of you would like to see this type of functionality or something like it. Right now when you select a stack the right panel appears and the stacked units are displayed allowing for pretty easy selection or deselection of whichever unit you want. I really don't see a problem with the way it currently works.


Not a problem, but there is a lot of unnecessary clicking which would be nice to get rid of. It's more of an ergonomics thing than a problem, it works fine now, it's just that some of us want to avoid mouse-arm or clicking-itis.

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 33
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/21/2011 8:27:13 PM   
76mm


Posts: 2133
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
5. Hq's are supposed to be cheaper to transfer with fewer units assigned. I just checked in my last game and a German Corps with 3 divisions cost 26 ap to transfer in its entirety to OKH. Removing 1 division cut the cost down to 24, losing another division cut the cost to 14, losing the 3rd division cut it down to 12. No idea why the big jump after the second division was reassigned, but it appears WAD.

Uh, maybe for the Germans, not for the Sovs. I just checked in my PBEM, and to reassign an army which has 4 command points, it will cost me at least 53 AP; for the same amount I could simply create 2 new HQ. Surely this can't be WAD?

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 34
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/21/2011 9:55:03 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
5. Hq's are supposed to be cheaper to transfer with fewer units assigned. I just checked in my last game and a German Corps with 3 divisions cost 26 ap to transfer in its entirety to OKH. Removing 1 division cut the cost down to 24, losing another division cut the cost to 14, losing the 3rd division cut it down to 12. No idea why the big jump after the second division was reassigned, but it appears WAD.

Uh, maybe for the Germans, not for the Sovs. I just checked in my PBEM, and to reassign an army which has 4 command points, it will cost me at least 53 AP; for the same amount I could simply create 2 new HQ. Surely this can't be WAD?


Ok..corps level hq's vs army level hq's do vary a lot. Corps Hq's for both sides are the same. I just looked and a Soviet army with no units attached run around 27 ap's to transfer. I looked at several armies and this was about average. As they gain units the value jumps. With less than 6 cp's assigned it cost around 34 ap's to transfer. With 8 cp's it was 43 ap's, at 10 it was 52 and at 12 or more it was 55 ap's.

This will vary slightly based on your leader. Why it jumps the way it does I don't know.

_____________________________


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 35
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/21/2011 11:07:57 PM   
Zoetermeer

 

Posts: 119
Joined: 10/30/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zoetermeer

I've said it before so I don't want to be annoying about it, but an open savegame format would be great for those of us who are willing to write some really cool third-party tools.


I'm not sure I understand this one, I doubt anytime soon the code will be opened for others to work with if that's what you are suggesting. This engine will probably be around for sometime.


No -- I didn't mean exposing the actual code to us, just making the actual format of savegame files human-readable (text-based) instead of binary, as it is currently. Making it text-based, or at least giving us a guide which explains to us how to parse it, would allow people to write third-party tools which can present game data in new and different ways to the player.

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 36
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/21/2011 11:09:23 PM   
Zoetermeer

 

Posts: 119
Joined: 10/30/2009
Status: offline
One thing that would be nice would be to have a setting which allows us to limit the number of admin points the AI can have each turn. Currently, I think the AI has basically unlimited admin points, which allows the Soviet AI to build endless numbers of new units and create huge carpets very early in '41.

(in reply to Zoetermeer)
Post #: 37
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/21/2011 11:40:59 PM   
molchomor

 

Posts: 197
Joined: 12/28/2009
Status: offline
- buildable SUs for axis (somewhere to put all that outdated equipment never used)
- introduction of the exact same system for units to change their tank types used as is already in place for flight squadrons to change their plane types (this woukld in turn solve alot of other "features" and complaints)
- editable start positions (especially in '41)
- make axis able to actually use their initial air superiority for something (like using your JU87G squadrons to hit those tank armies and actually do some damage)
- The automatic usage of captured tanks for axis is just annoying currently. Like having 50+ captured t34s and 2-3 PzD:s using that type, but they never seem to stock up with more than 3-4 tanks each. Same for the Finnish PzD. Either fix so that types can be swapped as per the earlier suggestion to avoid this or fix the "feature" that seemingly limits the number of captured tanks in units.
- and what is up with captured tanks btw ? The number seems very low. Like in my game, having killed some 50 tank corps and untold number of tank brigades and just a few tens of captured t34s ?
- A new button "Jump to next unit on rail". I find myself constantly scanning the entire bloody Russia for fear that I forgot to move some units that I am railing.
- Limiting some things the AI does on normal or introduce switches. I don't want teleportations or unlimited CPs for the AI, need an option for that.
- Possibility to streamline axis production (e.g. cancel Elefant production against some AP cost and start producting something else)
- add some graphics to indicate that a unit in the current stack is withdrawing within say the next 5 turns. Not something that sticks out much but enough so you can spot it while scanning the front. Firing up your round and seeing gaps in your line is not funny.
- Popup to warn that your HQ will be displaced if you carry out the move (just annoying if it happens, having to reload and replay)
- add some incentives for capturing cities. Morale bonus for Soviet units that cap a city, a chance of capping some armaments/resources/HI for axis ?
- Radar units for axis ? Radar was a big advantage not modeled  in the game.
- armored train units :) Would basically work as an FBD with some combat value, bound to use tracks.







< Message edited by molchomor -- 4/21/2011 11:42:32 PM >

(in reply to Zoetermeer)
Post #: 38
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 12:15:50 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2232
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

Would like seperate save game folders.

Unless they're there and I'm missing them.


Do you mean between ai vs pbem games?


Both.

I used to play multiple PBEM games of Ageod's American Civil War, and each had its own folder.

It did the same for single player also.

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 39
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 1:34:39 AM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zoetermeer


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zoetermeer

I've said it before so I don't want to be annoying about it, but an open savegame format would be great for those of us who are willing to write some really cool third-party tools.


I'm not sure I understand this one, I doubt anytime soon the code will be opened for others to work with if that's what you are suggesting. This engine will probably be around for sometime.


No -- I didn't mean exposing the actual code to us, just making the actual format of savegame files human-readable (text-based) instead of binary, as it is currently. Making it text-based, or at least giving us a guide which explains to us how to parse it, would allow people to write third-party tools which can present game data in new and different ways to the player.



I'll have to run this by Pavel on the implications, but I kind of doubt that degree of flexibility is coming any time soon.

_____________________________


(in reply to Zoetermeer)
Post #: 40
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 2:00:24 AM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zoetermeer

One thing that would be nice would be to have a setting which allows us to limit the number of admin points the AI can have each turn. Currently, I think the AI has basically unlimited admin points, which allows the Soviet AI to build endless numbers of new units and create huge carpets very early in '41.


This only occurs when you are playing as the German against the Soviet ai on Challenging or higher difficulty settings. If you don't want the ai to have any extra chance then I suggest to play it on easy or normal. Since the ai is unable to respond to potential unfavorable tacticle situations as well as a human can, it needs a boost here and there to make it a more challenging game for those players that become very proficient.

See section 3.3.2 of the manual of what the ai gets per difficulty levels.

Andy

_____________________________


(in reply to Zoetermeer)
Post #: 41
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 2:53:12 AM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: molchomor

- buildable SUs for axis (somewhere to put all that outdated equipment never used)

The game models the German side strictly from a historical perspective when it comes to su's and reinforcements. Maybe down the road when and if we ever get to see a War in Europe, then hopefully we will have a production model for both sides.

- introduction of the exact same system for units to change their tank types used as is already in place for flight squadrons to change their plane types (this woukld in turn solve alot of other "features" and complaints)

This was discussed quite a bit by the testers way back when and the design decision was to not allow this due to a number of historical production limitations.

- editable start positions (especially in '41)

You can do this with the editor.

- make axis able to actually use their initial air superiority for something (like using your JU87G squadrons to hit those tank armies and actually do some damage)

The air model is currenyly still being worked on. Some refinements have been made with 1.04. I'm sure more are forthcoming in future patches.

- The automatic usage of captured tanks for axis is just annoying currently. Like having 50+ captured t34s and 2-3 PzD:s using that type, but they never seem to stock up with more than 3-4 tanks each. Same for the Finnish PzD. Either fix so that types can be swapped as per the earlier suggestion to avoid this or fix the "feature" that seemingly limits the number of captured tanks in units.

I'm not totally familiar with how the sytem works, but I believe what happens is that a unit will request replacements automatically and production tries to provide them. If none are available, then it is possible for captured equipment to be used. I think there is a minimum number that needs to be in the pool. I have seen Soviet armored cars appear in German infantry units but this type of thing is out of the player control.

- and what is up with captured tanks btw ? The number seems very low. Like in my game, having killed some 50 tank corps and untold number of tank brigades and just a few tens of captured t34s ?

I would suggest asking this either up in tech support or in the general forum section where Joel or Pavel are bound to see it. I don't have an answer for that.

- A new button "Jump to next unit on rail". I find myself constantly scanning the entire bloody Russia for fear that I forgot to move some units that I am railing.

There is a train symbol on those units you have entrained, and if you have the mp value displayed, you can easily see which ones might still have movement, I would think that would be sufficient We run into problems with adding buttons due to interface limitations (you must accommodate different screen sizes) and I think pretty much most of the hotkeys are used.

- Limiting some things the AI does on normal or introduce switches. I don't want teleportations or unlimited CPs for the AI, need an option for that.

Read section 3.3.2 of the manual on what the ai gets at different difficulty levels.

- Possibility to streamline axis production (e.g. cancel Elefant production against some AP cost and start producting something else)

German production is strictly historical. That was an early design decision and won't change for WitE. Maybe if War in Europe ever comes about we will have full production flexibility on both sides.

- add some graphics to indicate that a unit in the current stack is withdrawing within say the next 5 turns. Not something that sticks out much but enough so you can spot it while scanning the front. Firing up your round and seeing gaps in your line is not funny.

The Reinforcement/Withdraw schedule provides very specific dates on when units withdraw but finding where they are at times can be a problem. There are a couple possible hotkeys still available, I'll see if this one is doable.

- Popup to warn that your HQ will be displaced if you carry out the move (just annoying if it happens, having to reload and replay)

Everyone of us testers has had that happen on more than one occasion, so you can bet this one was discussed. I don't think a pop-up would work with the way the engine is designed.

- add some incentives for capturing cities. Morale bonus for Soviet units that cap a city, a chance of capping some armaments/resources/HI for axis ?

You can capture resources and oil factories but everything else is destroyed if taken. Victory points are allocated for certain cities in the various scenarios, so the incentive is already there. Not just vp's though, you deny the enemy the manpower and use of any factories that are destroyed.

- Radar units for axis ? Radar was a big advantage not modeled  in the game.

I don't know how widespread this may have been on the Eastern front. We have some pretty good researchers and if it isn't there then chances are it either wasn't or not in any significant capacity. I would ask this up in tech support though, Jim or Trey would be the guys that could probably answer this one.

- armored train units :) Would basically work as an FBD with some combat value, bound to use tracks.

This was a tester suggestion, and I think due to the scale of the game, armored trains just wouldn't work.



I answered above per line. Figured it was easier that way.

Andy

_____________________________


(in reply to molchomor)
Post #: 42
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 3:58:34 AM   
Aditia

 

Posts: 237
Joined: 3/27/2011
Status: offline
I have 2 suggestions, one of which is cosmetical:

1. when I am moving tons of counters I sometimes forget I have a HQ in the stack. Getting an HQ displaced during your own turn because you move out combat units really sucks, and is a weird mechanic imo. How about doing the displacement during the logistics phase if a player leaves an HQ in contact with hostile units (or give a warning), in order to avoid forcing players to look at all their stacks like a hawk. I don't think getting an HQ displaced during a player's own turn is ever intentional, so the mechanic is dumb.

2. I haven't tested it properly yet, but in my 43-45 campaign I am getting to the point of setting different air doctrines for my own turn and for my opponent's turn because ground support missions during my opponent's turn are very VERY costly to my bomber force. I consider this very gamey and if the developers consider this gamey as well I would like to suggest only being able to change air doctrine once every few turns (say 3 or 4). If developers are of the opinion that setting different air doctrines for your own offensive phase and your opponent's offensive phase is as intended, well, then tbh there should be 2 different air doctrines, an offensive and a defensive one, so you don't have to switch it up EVERY turn.

Edit: - add some graphics to indicate that a unit in the current stack is withdrawing within say the next 5 turns. Not something that sticks out much but enough so you can spot it while scanning the front. Firing up your round and seeing gaps in your line is not funny.

This exists already. You can click a state button to see all units that are refitting/static/reserve/withdrawing


< Message edited by Aditia -- 4/22/2011 4:03:26 AM >

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 43
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 8:16:25 AM   
76mm


Posts: 2133
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline
I guess it depends on leader quality, as you say, but in my Army HQ with 4 pts it still costs more than 50 AP to transfer. Even in your example, an empty army costs more to transfer than to simply create a new army. This seems pretty goofy to me, clearly it would be easier for Stavka to simply transfer an existing unemloyed army HQ than create a whole new one?

Also, I like Aditia's ideas; similarly, what about air doctrine at a Front level? You might want totally different air doctrines in diff parts of the front.

(in reply to Aditia)
Post #: 44
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 11:32:04 AM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3065
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Here go a couple feature requests / suggestions:

  • Production screen: I would find very useful that there was available a more "logical" set of filter settings, such as by type of element (i.e. what kind of TOE slot they're meant for), if they're or not obsolete (# elements), or if they're "future" elements (** elements).
  • Commander Report: would it be possible to export the current data shown by CR (after filters have been applied) to a CSV file?
  • Air Mission Selection Dialog: it would be useful to have air units arranged by commanding Air HQ.


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 45
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 12:49:08 PM   
morvael


Posts: 4505
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
The Axis withdrawal/reinforcement is too scripted and rigidly historical in that always the same units will be withdrawn at the same time, completely disregarding their current situation and overall situation on the front. The same with reinforcements - they come when Axis fared badly on the front in reality (like SS divisions to rescue AG "A" in early 1943 used so well by Manstein) and not when the player has big trouble. Soviets have quite flexible play with the ability to buy units as they like. I propose that:
1) withdrawals be re-made in such a way so when OKW needs some divisions moved to other fronts they will ask "we want 2 infantry divisions" and the player will have the option to specify which divisions (sometimes those scripted to withdraw are in the most important parts of the front, while others that could be easily withdrawn are not called by high command)
2) allow to use AP to postpone withdrawals (20-30AP for 2-3 turns for a single unit, so the player would be unable to delay many units, but some in the most critical times)
3) allow to use AP to request reinforcements, with random chance if and what will come (up to the historical limits or with rising cost with each successful request).

That would offer more ways to use AP (currently they are used mainly for HQ buildup) which would be good and make the Axis play less scripted.

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 46
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 1:11:14 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 1703
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
I'd like the following:

- the ability for the Axis to create Corps HQ - reflecting the German ability to group to meet threats. All the more important with the new command rules in 1.04 patch.

- embedding generic data in scenarios so that the generic data can be modded. As it is quite clear that axis production is not going to be used in game this would allow it to be changed in scenario design but without changing every other scenario.

_____________________________

John
WitW Test Co-ordinator
WitE & WitW Scenario Designer

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 47
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 2:44:02 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aditia

I have 2 suggestions, one of which is cosmetical:

1. when I am moving tons of counters I sometimes forget I have a HQ in the stack. Getting an HQ displaced during your own turn because you move out combat units really sucks, and is a weird mechanic imo. How about doing the displacement during the logistics phase if a player leaves an HQ in contact with hostile units (or give a warning), in order to avoid forcing players to look at all their stacks like a hawk. I don't think getting an HQ displaced during a player's own turn is ever intentional, so the mechanic is dumb.

2. I haven't tested it properly yet, but in my 43-45 campaign I am getting to the point of setting different air doctrines for my own turn and for my opponent's turn because ground support missions during my opponent's turn are very VERY costly to my bomber force. I consider this very gamey and if the developers consider this gamey as well I would like to suggest only being able to change air doctrine once every few turns (say 3 or 4). If developers are of the opinion that setting different air doctrines for your own offensive phase and your opponent's offensive phase is as intended, well, then tbh there should be 2 different air doctrines, an offensive and a defensive one, so you don't have to switch it up EVERY turn.

Edit: - add some graphics to indicate that a unit in the current stack is withdrawing within say the next 5 turns. Not something that sticks out much but enough so you can spot it while scanning the front. Firing up your round and seeing gaps in your line is not funny.

This exists already. You can click a state button to see all units that are refitting/static/reserve/withdrawing



1. As I mentioned in the previous post, all of us testers have had that happen more than once at one time or another. It's just one of those game mechanics that you have to learn to be aware of. Maybe in the future this can get a serious look at, for the time being we will just have to live with it.

2. I don't consider air doctrine to be gamey. It's just one of those game mechanics that do offer the player some flexibility. You do have defensive doctrine included in the way of interdiction and intercept as well as ground support that works for both offensive and defensive.

_____________________________


(in reply to Aditia)
Post #: 48
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 2:46:04 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I guess it depends on leader quality, as you say, but in my Army HQ with 4 pts it still costs more than 50 AP to transfer. Even in your example, an empty army costs more to transfer than to simply create a new army. This seems pretty goofy to me, clearly it would be easier for Stavka to simply transfer an existing unemloyed army HQ than create a whole new one?

Also, I like Aditia's ideas; similarly, what about air doctrine at a Front level? You might want totally different air doctrines in diff parts of the front.


If an empty army is 27 points on average, and a new army is 25, that's not much of a difference to really worry about. Especially when you consider in many cases you change out the leaders of nw armies for better ones at a cost of 10 to 15 more ap's.

_____________________________


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 49
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 2:57:54 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

Here go a couple feature requests / suggestions:

  • Production screen: I would find very useful that there was available a more "logical" set of filter settings, such as by type of element (i.e. what kind of TOE slot they're meant for), if they're or not obsolete (# elements), or if they're "future" elements (** elements).
  • Commander Report: would it be possible to export the current data shown by CR (after filters have been applied) to a CSV file?
  • Air Mission Selection Dialog: it would be useful to have air units arranged by commanding Air HQ.




1. The breakdown by air, ground, and special I really don't see changing any time soon. I think most players know the difference between what is a tank vs armored cars vs arty. Some pieces may be unfamiliar but then you can click on the label and it brings up a description of that item and the start and stop dates for production.

2. I'll have to ask about that one

3. You can do this on the Commander's Report under the Air Groups tab by clicking on the Air Command label.

_____________________________


(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 50
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 3:01:11 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

The Axis withdrawal/reinforcement is too scripted and rigidly historical in that always the same units will be withdrawn at the same time, completely disregarding their current situation and overall situation on the front. The same with reinforcements - they come when Axis fared badly on the front in reality (like SS divisions to rescue AG "A" in early 1943 used so well by Manstein) and not when the player has big trouble. Soviets have quite flexible play with the ability to buy units as they like. I propose that:
1) withdrawals be re-made in such a way so when OKW needs some divisions moved to other fronts they will ask "we want 2 infantry divisions" and the player will have the option to specify which divisions (sometimes those scripted to withdraw are in the most important parts of the front, while others that could be easily withdrawn are not called by high command)
2) allow to use AP to postpone withdrawals (20-30AP for 2-3 turns for a single unit, so the player would be unable to delay many units, but some in the most critical times)
3) allow to use AP to request reinforcements, with random chance if and what will come (up to the historical limits or with rising cost with each successful request).

That would offer more ways to use AP (currently they are used mainly for HQ buildup) which would be good and make the Axis play less scripted.



These were all already asked for in an earlier post in this thread. I will reiterate that the German side of things were designed to be strictly historical and won't change for WitE. Maybe when and if War in Europe ever comes to be there will be a more flexible production capability for both sides. I know many folks, myself included would like to see that.


_____________________________


(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 51
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 3:07:05 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

I'd like the following:

- the ability for the Axis to create Corps HQ - reflecting the German ability to group to meet threats. All the more important with the new command rules in 1.04 patch.

- embedding generic data in scenarios so that the generic data can be modded. As it is quite clear that axis production is not going to be used in game this would allow it to be changed in scenario design but without changing every other scenario.


1. See previous post just above

2. You can already do what you ask for with the current editor. Go into the editor, load the scenario you want to edit, and go for it. Just make sure you save it as something other than the same scenario or you will copy over the original. A detailed editor manual is being worked on.

_____________________________


(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 52
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 3:55:40 PM   
morvael


Posts: 4505
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21


These were all already asked for in an earlier post in this thread. I will reiterate that the German side of things were designed to be strictly historical and won't change for WitE. Maybe when and if War in Europe ever comes to be there will be a more flexible production capability for both sides. I know many folks, myself included would like to see that.



I was not proposing adding production system for Germany, only enchancing the reinforcement/withdrawal system to be more dynamic, less scripted, and connected to AP.

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 53
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 4:03:15 PM   
76mm


Posts: 2133
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
If an empty army is 27 points on average, and a new army is 25, that's not much of a difference to really worry about. Especially when you consider in many cases you change out the leaders of nw armies for better ones at a cost of 10 to 15 more ap's.


We're kind of going in circles...the point is that I don't see why it should cost as much to transfer an empty HQ as to create a new one. By the same logic, we should just as soon create new divisions as transfer existing ones between armies, but that is not the case.

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 54
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 4:04:11 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 1703
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

You can already do what you ask for with the current editor. Go into the editor, load the scenario you want to edit, and go for it. Just make sure you save it as something other than the same scenario or you will copy over the original. A detailed editor manual is being worked on.


No - that is not correct. The generic data - i.e. TOE(OB), Devices, Ground Elms, Aircraft and Leaders are the same for every scenario. Any change to one of those files will effect every single scenario - and is done when the generic data is loaded. If you change them when in a scenario (scenario data loaded) the change won't stick. So any generic data change if not carefully considered can be catastrophic. Please don't think that I am decrying any of the excellent work in this game but in its current format it's a scenario creator / modders nightmare. I don't know how much attention you pay to the modding and scenario forum but the fact that there have been more graphical mods been produced than new scenarios tells its own tale. I have two installs on the game on my system for just this reason. I'd love to share some more of the work that I have done (especially on production) in an easy to use format but I can't.

As for my other request then so be it - but why then can an Axis player create Fortified Regions? The argument of staying strictly historical has already been broken.

Having had a moan I'd like to finish by saying that this is amongst the finest games I've ever seen and I love it.

_____________________________

John
WitW Test Co-ordinator
WitE & WitW Scenario Designer

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 55
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 4:20:09 PM   
Helpless


Posts: 11941
Joined: 8/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

- embedding generic data in scenarios so that the generic data can be modded.


It is planned to allow to lock generic data in the scenario file.

_____________________________

Pavel Zagzin
WITE/WITW Development

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 56
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 5:22:34 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8084
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

quote:

You can already do what you ask for with the current editor. Go into the editor, load the scenario you want to edit, and go for it. Just make sure you save it as something other than the same scenario or you will copy over the original. A detailed editor manual is being worked on.


No - that is not correct. The generic data - i.e. TOE(OB), Devices, Ground Elms, Aircraft and Leaders are the same for every scenario. Any change to one of those files will effect every single scenario - and is done when the generic data is loaded. If you change them when in a scenario (scenario data loaded) the change won't stick. So any generic data change if not carefully considered can be catastrophic. Please don't think that I am decrying any of the excellent work in this game but in its current format it's a scenario creator / modders nightmare. I don't know how much attention you pay to the modding and scenario forum but the fact that there have been more graphical mods been produced than new scenarios tells its own tale. I have two installs on the game on my system for just this reason. I'd love to share some more of the work that I have done (especially on production) in an easy to use format but I can't.

As for my other request then so be it - but why then can an Axis player create Fortified Regions? The argument of staying strictly historical has already been broken.

Having had a moan I'd like to finish by saying that this is amongst the finest games I've ever seen and I love it.


The editor is one area I don't get too involved with, but luckily Pavel is on top of it.

_____________________________


(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 57
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 5:53:42 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 1703
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
Thanks to you both - with more editor functionality I can do what ever my heart desires (almost)!

_____________________________

John
WitW Test Co-ordinator
WitE & WitW Scenario Designer

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 58
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 7:18:55 PM   
AKCLIMBER

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 11/22/2010
From: Juneau, Alaska
Status: offline
I'd find it useful if the TOE of the unit was displayed in the right side unit pop up screen. It would save on the amount of clicking when checking up on units in refit mode. For HQ units, I'd also like to see the leader ratings displayed in the right side unit pop up screen.

I'm also one of the folks who'd like the ability to choose how stacks are arranged.

Thanks for a highly addictive game and great customer support!

Cheers!

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 59
RE: Game Suggestions: - 4/22/2011 8:39:40 PM   
Pawlock

 

Posts: 1040
Joined: 9/18/2002
From: U.K.
Status: offline
I would like to see some form of a combat replay for opponents pbem turns. As it stands now your just presented with a load of clickable icons relating to battles ,recon etc . I find it very hard to see what order and what units participated and where from without a clickfest to achieve.

(in reply to AKCLIMBER)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Game Suggestions: Page: <<   < prev  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

0.125