Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars: Mountain InfantryPandora: Eclipse of Nashira Announced! Deal of the Week: Command Ops goes half price!New Fronts are opening up for Commander: The Great WarCharacters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great War
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  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/4/2011 9:10:56 AM   
molchomor

 

Posts: 197
Joined: 12/28/2009
Status: offline
One thing i noticed yesterday, was that some of my HI "lacked resources and could not produce", which can be pretty bad for axis and needs immediate attention. After some investigations I suspect this was caused by partisans damaging some rail lines to said resources. However the list of resource sites did not indicate anything being wrong as no damage occured to the production sites themselves of course.

Suggestion: *IF* damaged rail lines stop resources from reaching factories, could this please be made more visible ? E.g. by changing the text <town> <capacity> <damage> in the resource list to red color if the resources produced cannot be shipped due to logistical matters. Or prominently display something in the report.

< Message edited by molchomor -- 5/4/2011 9:15:06 AM >

(in reply to Helpless)
Post #: 151
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/4/2011 10:29:29 AM   
76mm


Posts: 2088
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline
Not sure if this has been raised before, and not sure how difficult it would be, but it drives me crazy that I need to set a uniform air doctrine for the entire front, from the Baltic to the Black Sea! It would be much much better if each air HQ could set its own air doctrine, so you could have different doctrines on differnents parts of the front.

How difficult would this be?

(in reply to molchomor)
Post #: 152
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/4/2011 11:59:51 AM   
Manstein63


Posts: 397
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Not sure if this has been raised before, and not sure how difficult it would be, but it drives me crazy that I need to set a uniform air doctrine for the entire front, from the Baltic to the Black Sea! It would be much much better if each air HQ could set its own air doctrine, so you could have different doctrines on differnents parts of the front.

How difficult would this be?


+1 & the ability to change your aircraft types & other settings in the National Reserve screen would be helpfull as well.

Also would it be possible to tweak the weather in random mode so that the Axis player could have guaranteed clear weather until the end of September of 1941 before the possibility of mud or worse. I would prefer to play with random weather because it gives you that uncertainty
but fully understand the frustrations of an Axis Player who has had all their good work on the first turn destroyed by mud on turns 2 & 3

Manstein63

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 153
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/4/2011 1:09:46 PM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3056
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
In my last post I only suggested UI-related stuff, here go a few suggestions regarding game mechanics:


  • Ready/Unready status - Units now qualify for Ready status if the average of TOE and morale is or exceeds 100. Non-motorized units should qualify for ready status if the average of TOE, morale and supply exceeds 100. For motorized units, fuel should be also taken into account.
  • FOW - Highly accurate access to type and ID of enemy units should be only possible during tactical combat and even then the info gathered should be somewhat unreliable. When enemy units move elsewhere, this info should be lost.
  • Terrain modifiers - It's unclear to me to what degree "CV enhancing" due to terrain depends on unit elements experience and HHQ leader mech or inf rating. Are these factors taken into account? If not, they certainly should.


_____________________________

Nullius in Verba since February 2013 - http://panthergames.com
-----
Life in the Internets: http://steamcommunity.com/id/mvorkosigan
----
I'm a real person as well: http://au.linkedin.com/in/miguelramirezjavega

(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 154
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/4/2011 1:10:37 PM   
morvael


Posts: 3678
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
1. Ability to see if units are in contact with the enemy in commander's report (useful for new rules about refit) - for example "Rft-" would mean unit is in contact with enemy and will not benefit from Refit rules.

2. Ability to lock specific support units for given HQ, instead of locking entire HQ (and the chain with it as well), while the rest could be transferred freely by the AI. That would be something for people with less love for micromanagement, who still would like to attach critical units (heavy tank battalions, siege artillery) to specific HQs or combat units and be sure they would stick.

(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 155
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/4/2011 10:59:57 PM   
davbaker

 

Posts: 191
Joined: 9/7/2009
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Would it be possible to add an originating "AirBase" Column to the "Pick Air Units for Mission" screen you get when you Shift Click for Air Missons?

I would find it a little easier to determine where I'm getting my airsupport from.

Thanks


(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 156
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/5/2011 12:07:36 AM   
Franklin Nimitz

 

Posts: 541
Joined: 6/23/2007
From: The House of the Mouse
Status: offline
How about allowing assignment of air assets to support particular divisions/corps?  A recon staffel would increase a division's clear hex detection levels allowing it to see further as it moves, and an increase in artillery effectiveness for any arty elements present to account for aerial spotting?  This would make Storches relevent. 

(in reply to davbaker)
Post #: 157
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 2:25:14 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: molchomor

One thing i noticed yesterday, was that some of my HI "lacked resources and could not produce", which can be pretty bad for axis and needs immediate attention. After some investigations I suspect this was caused by partisans damaging some rail lines to said resources. However the list of resource sites did not indicate anything being wrong as no damage occured to the production sites themselves of course.

Suggestion: *IF* damaged rail lines stop resources from reaching factories, could this please be made more visible ? E.g. by changing the text <town> <capacity> <damage> in the resource list to red color if the resources produced cannot be shipped due to logistical matters. Or prominently display something in the report.


I don't see why something like this can't be done. Seems simple enough, I wouldn't expect it to be a high priority at the moment though. I'll add this to my list.

_____________________________


(in reply to molchomor)
Post #: 158
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 2:26:33 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Not sure if this has been raised before, and not sure how difficult it would be, but it drives me crazy that I need to set a uniform air doctrine for the entire front, from the Baltic to the Black Sea! It would be much much better if each air HQ could set its own air doctrine, so you could have different doctrines on differnents parts of the front.

How difficult would this be?


That would probably take a major rework of that particular function. I'll add this to my list but i wouldn't hold my breath for it.

_____________________________


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 159
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 2:30:17 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Manstein63


quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Not sure if this has been raised before, and not sure how difficult it would be, but it drives me crazy that I need to set a uniform air doctrine for the entire front, from the Baltic to the Black Sea! It would be much much better if each air HQ could set its own air doctrine, so you could have different doctrines on differnents parts of the front.

How difficult would this be?


+1 & the ability to change your aircraft types & other settings in the National Reserve screen would be helpfull as well.

Also would it be possible to tweak the weather in random mode so that the Axis player could have guaranteed clear weather until the end of September of 1941 before the possibility of mud or worse. I would prefer to play with random weather because it gives you that uncertainty
but fully understand the frustrations of an Axis Player who has had all their good work on the first turn destroyed by mud on turns 2 & 3

Manstein63


I really don't see this happening. That would take any disadvantages that the German may face away in the summer but leave the advantages that may occur for him during mud or winter. That would be a pretty lop-sided change. If I was a Soviet player, i would never play someone using a capability like that. If you don't like random weather, you can turn it off.

By the way, mud can't occur on turn 2 of 41, but can once per zone from turn 3 onwards if random is active. Anyhoos, I wouldn't mind seeing some changes to the system, in particular shrinking the size of the weather zones, but that won't happen either, something I wanted to have happen over a year ago but never did.

< Message edited by Sabre21 -- 5/8/2011 2:33:10 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 160
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 2:39:39 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

In my last post I only suggested UI-related stuff, here go a few suggestions regarding game mechanics:


  • Ready/Unready status - Units now qualify for Ready status if the average of TOE and morale is or exceeds 100. Non-motorized units should qualify for ready status if the average of TOE, morale and supply exceeds 100. For motorized units, fuel should be also taken into account.
  • FOW - Highly accurate access to type and ID of enemy units should be only possible during tactical combat and even then the info gathered should be somewhat unreliable. When enemy units move elsewhere, this info should be lost.
  • Terrain modifiers - It's unclear to me to what degree "CV enhancing" due to terrain depends on unit elements experience and HHQ leader mech or inf rating. Are these factors taken into account? If not, they certainly should.



Ready - I don't see a problem with the way it is currently modeled

FoW - This is exactly what happens. There are 10 detection levels. Air recon can only provide up to level 4. Moving adjacent to the unit will raise it above that with varying degrees of info provided. Once the units seperate, info can and is usually lost.

CV - There are so many factors involved with determining cv, you could right a book about it. Experience levels are figured in but as far as I know, not the higher Hq, Pavel would be the one to best explain this, but he is a mighty busy fellow.

_____________________________


(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 161
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 2:46:09 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

1. Ability to see if units are in contact with the enemy in commander's report (useful for new rules about refit) - for example "Rft-" would mean unit is in contact with enemy and will not benefit from Refit rules.

2. Ability to lock specific support units for given HQ, instead of locking entire HQ (and the chain with it as well), while the rest could be transferred freely by the AI. That would be something for people with less love for micromanagement, who still would like to attach critical units (heavy tank battalions, siege artillery) to specific HQs or combat units and be sure they would stick.



1. - I'll add that to the list, it might prove useful

2. - This definitely would require some major work so i wouldn't expect it to get implemented. The current system seems adequate. Maybe in future games of the series a more detailed support system can be used.

_____________________________


(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 162
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 2:48:35 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: davbaker

Would it be possible to add an originating "AirBase" Column to the "Pick Air Units for Mission" screen you get when you Shift Click for Air Missons?

I would find it a little easier to determine where I'm getting my airsupport from.

Thanks




I'll add that to my list.

_____________________________


(in reply to davbaker)
Post #: 163
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 2:50:49 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

How about allowing assignment of air assets to support particular divisions/corps?  A recon staffel would increase a division's clear hex detection levels allowing it to see further as it moves, and an increase in artillery effectiveness for any arty elements present to account for aerial spotting?  This would make Storches relevent. 


Interesting idea, I'll add it to the list, but I wouldn't expect something like this anytime soon.

_____________________________


(in reply to Franklin Nimitz)
Post #: 164
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 3:26:33 PM   
76mm


Posts: 2088
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

I really don't see this happening. That would take any disadvantages that the German may face away in the summer but leave the advantages that may occur for him during mud or winter. That would be a pretty lop-sided change. If I was a Soviet player, i would never play someone using a capability like that. If you don't like random weather, you can turn it off.


Frankly I completely disagree. Most players, even many Sovs, don't like it when there is mud in the summer of 1941, it just skews the game too much for the German.

The point of random weather should be that neither side knows exactly when the mud and blizzard will start and end in the fall and winter respectively, not that the Germans may get two mud turns in the first summer, which just screws the game.

I think it is fair to say that in its current form, random weather is very unpopular. Another related request--could we please simply call historical weather just that, instead of "non-random" weather?

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 165
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 5:12:30 PM   
Manstein63


Posts: 397
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

[
quote:

I really don't see this happening. That would take any disadvantages that the German may face away in the summer but leave the advantages that may occur for him during mud or winter. That would be a pretty lop-sided change. If I was a Soviet player, i would never play someone using a capability like that. If you don't like random weather, you can turn it off.


As I said I would be happy to play using random weather as I think it makes for a better game, but it seems that the majority of people would disagree which is why I suggested tweaking the weather. If as you said that there is no chance of mud happening in the first 3 turns ( I assume due to hard coding) then it seems to me that it would be relitively easy to extend it further & if you feel that the end of September is too lop-sided then just extend the clear weather to the end of August instead. However if it doesn't happen well I can live with that as well.

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 166
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 5:22:33 PM   
lycortas

 

Posts: 74
Joined: 9/26/2008
Status: offline
I agree that it would be best if we had a light mud effect. I actually feel that the mud effect is too severe as it is.

But, in general i like random weather as it adds uncertainty; I am seeing too many axis commanders having the first 14 turns or so planned out to the Nth degree, with satellite scans and 100% knowledge of what was where. I find that this skews the game too much. I am surprised so many of you complain about the weather but think 100% knowledge of Soviet positions and pre planning all of your moves, with computer testing, is 'fair'.

I will continue to use random weather, but again, i would not mind a light mud. Really, from September 1st you could get enough rain to have decent mud.

Michael

_____________________________

That's no moon, it's a space station!

(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 167
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 5:38:20 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

I really don't see this happening. That would take any disadvantages that the German may face away in the summer but leave the advantages that may occur for him during mud or winter. That would be a pretty lop-sided change. If I was a Soviet player, i would never play someone using a capability like that. If you don't like random weather, you can turn it off.


Frankly I completely disagree. Most players, even many Sovs, don't like it when there is mud in the summer of 1941, it just skews the game too much for the German.

The point of random weather should be that neither side knows exactly when the mud and blizzard will start and end in the fall and winter respectively, not that the Germans may get two mud turns in the first summer, which just screws the game.

I think it is fair to say that in its current form, random weather is very unpopular. Another related request--could we please simply call historical weather just that, instead of "non-random" weather?



Well the thing is non-random weather is not historical, so no reason to call it that. The intermittant rain showers the Germans encountered did cause grief to them on occasion. So actually random is closer to historical than non-random.

_____________________________


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 168
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 5:41:49 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Manstein63


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

[
quote:

I really don't see this happening. That would take any disadvantages that the German may face away in the summer but leave the advantages that may occur for him during mud or winter. That would be a pretty lop-sided change. If I was a Soviet player, i would never play someone using a capability like that. If you don't like random weather, you can turn it off.


As I said I would be happy to play using random weather as I think it makes for a better game, but it seems that the majority of people would disagree which is why I suggested tweaking the weather. If as you said that there is no chance of mud happening in the first 3 turns ( I assume due to hard coding) then it seems to me that it would be relitively easy to extend it further & if you feel that the end of September is too lop-sided then just extend the clear weather to the end of August instead. However if it doesn't happen well I can live with that as well.


I indicated it can't happen in turn 1 or 2. Since turn 3 is on 3 July, it can occur then. Just not in June of 41. Any changes to this would be up to Gary, and considering the testers hotly discussed this long ago, I can tell you that it won't change any time soon.

_____________________________


(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 169
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 5:42:10 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline
Duplicate message

< Message edited by Sabre21 -- 5/8/2011 5:44:59 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 170
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 5:42:54 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

I indicated it can't happen in turn 1 or 2. Since turn 3 is on 3 July, it can occur then. Just not in June of 41. Any changes to this would be up to Gary, and considering the testers hotly discussed this long ago, I can tell you that it won't change any time soon.



< Message edited by Sabre21 -- 5/8/2011 5:44:15 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 171
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 5:44:11 PM   
Manstein63


Posts: 397
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline
Fair enough thanks for the quick response
Manstein63

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 172
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/8/2011 8:47:25 PM   
76mm


Posts: 2088
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline
Many of the German players are swearing off the current random weather, so, as requested in one of my first posts, why not introduce random-lite, which doesn't provide for mud during the summer?

(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 173
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/10/2011 1:51:04 AM   
Georgy Zhukov

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 2/3/2008
Status: offline
add the historical division simbols of all units is good for a excellent historical inmersion.

for example:
17 panzer division:



historical simbol division:




other simbols divisions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_German_divisions_in_World_War_II










(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 174
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/10/2011 1:59:31 AM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8081
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Georgy Zhukov

add the historical division simbols of all units is good for a excellent historical inmersion.

for example:
17 panzer division:



historical simbol division:




other simbols divisions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_German_divisions_in_World_War_II



Interesting idea but something like this will probably be done as a mod by someone outside the dev group. I just don't see them spending the time to do this.

_____________________________


(in reply to Georgy Zhukov)
Post #: 175
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/10/2011 3:31:50 PM   
Pawlock

 

Posts: 1040
Joined: 9/18/2002
From: U.K.
Status: offline
I would like to see Hq lock mean lock ALL units into said hq. Im forever frustrated at allocating construction brigades to Army hqs for them all to eventually migrate to Front hq's and then having to spend Aps again to put them back.

I dont know or can see the reasoning behind the current set up, but atm as it is ,is very frustating.

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 176
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/10/2011 5:39:44 PM   
76mm


Posts: 2088
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pawlock

I would like to see Hq lock mean lock ALL units into said hq. Im forever frustrated at allocating construction brigades to Army hqs for them all to eventually migrate to Front hq's and then having to spend Aps again to put them back.

I dont know or can see the reasoning behind the current set up, but atm as it is ,is very frustating.


I think it is a bug and is being looked at.

(in reply to Pawlock)
Post #: 177
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/10/2011 5:56:00 PM   
PyleDriver


Posts: 5854
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline
Yep I agree. I just used them in the winter of 41, and the were moving everywhere after I spent a couple AP's to get the there...Joel, Pavel? This does need a change.

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha Tester

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 178
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/10/2011 6:30:57 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 651
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
How about adding some form of greater control over AFV upgrades? Some ideas (pros/cons) have been discussed here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2723560&mpage=1&key=�

I'm sure it's not an easy prgramming thing to do, but I've never quite understood why aircraft upgrades can be controlled manually, but not AFVs. Just seems weird. I know some people don't want a repeat of WIR AFV bugs, but surely it's not an all or nothing situation, and surely limitations can easily be placed so that we can't load up 4 Bns of Tigers in a Pz Div?

Anyways, my suggestion is, if nothing else to have a two option toggle button, allowing the player to select HIGH or LOW priority for AFV upgrading. Units of LOW priority will only upgrade to the next AFV if all units with HIGH priority have been upgraded and are above a certain percentage of AFV TOE (say 66%). Default would be LOW priority, and in that case all units will upgrade randomly, as is the case currently.

Ultimately though, I think having an option to manually control AFV upgrades would be nice, after all we have that option for aircraft.

(in reply to PyleDriver)
Post #: 179
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/10/2011 7:54:22 PM   
neuromancer


Posts: 532
Joined: 5/30/2002
From: Canada
Status: offline
It was suggested elsewhere, and might have been suggested here, but I think its a good idea so I want to repeat it.
Have a 'randomize' optional feature at the start of the scenarios for some of the units. Basically a unit can be set in the editor to be 'randomly' placed at the beginning of the scenario. Not way off in the middle of no where, but a few hexes from where it is (not in water, not in neutral or hostile territory, not over stacked). Most front line and important defensive units would not be set to random - and some scenarios would have everything fixed for either or both sides (the June 22 '41 scenarios would all have the Axis start locations fixed). But all the back field stuff should be shuffling around.

The theory being that after a while, even with FOW, you know where everything is at the start which may make the start a little too effective. A little uncertainty would be a good thing.

I know this would probably take a bit of work so not a quick thing to add, but I think it would be a nice feature.


< Message edited by neuromancer -- 5/10/2011 7:55:03 PM >

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Game Suggestions: Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   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

0.121