Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

What-ifs - wildness or reality?

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Discontinued Games] >> Command Ops Series >> What-ifs - wildness or reality? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/30/2012 2:19:56 PM   
T-28A


Posts: 835
Joined: 11/1/2002
From: Ukraine
Status: offline
Hi guys,

Do any of you have some strong appreciation or strong dislike about what-ifs in general and CmdOps in particular? Do you like when they alter the reality a lot, aimed at much more fun gameplay? Or do you like when they provide only minor alternatives, without much alteration? If an original scenario is generally harder for side A, would you like to have also the what-if scenario that balances it and makes chances even, or makes things harder for side B?
Any thoughts are welcome.

Best regards

_____________________________

_________________________________________
"Russia has only two allies: Russian Army and Russian Navy".
---Emperor Alexander III
Post #: 1
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/30/2012 3:05:45 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41452
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
I can't speak for the Command Ops series, but in general, I prefer mods that are solidly grounded in reality. They can be big or small, but there has to be realism.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to T-28A)
Post #: 2
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/30/2012 3:22:18 PM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2954
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline
"What ifs" like the "small solution" of Herbstnebel or "Sea Lion" maybe? Definitely something I´d like to play.

_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 3
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/30/2012 4:05:30 PM   
simovitch


Posts: 4436
Joined: 2/14/2006
Status: offline
I don't care for "what if's" and only end up playing them if I really like the game and I've run out of historical scenarios.

Another exception is for tutorial purposes.

_____________________________

simovitch


(in reply to T-28A)
Post #: 4
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/30/2012 5:54:01 PM   
wodin


Posts: 9851
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
There are a few what if's that come with BftB. I do like the idea of Sealion I suppose. I alos like the idea of say choosing you drop zones in the HTTR and CotA. However I'm not sure about balancing a game through evening up the troops. I'd say the best way to balance a scenario is through points. Yes side A is expected to be battered, but if they manage to inflict so and so casualties they will win or if they manage to hold up the enemy for a certain amount of time. Thats how a well balanced scenario that would be historical is made.

_____________________________


(in reply to simovitch)
Post #: 5
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/30/2012 9:30:25 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8984
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
I like what if.. adds veriety.. either as new scens or events ingame

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 6
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/30/2012 10:46:46 PM   
Arimus

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 7/2/2006
Status: offline
Both!

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 7
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/31/2012 9:47:26 AM   
JiminyJickers


Posts: 283
Joined: 10/4/2011
From: New Zealand
Status: offline
I definitely want what ifs. I like historical too but what if is the reason I play games and not just read history books.

(in reply to Arimus)
Post #: 8
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/31/2012 9:56:34 AM   
Phoenix100

 

Posts: 2558
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
I've never played a 'what-if' scenario in either HTTR, COTA or BFTB/HTTR, save tutorials. I do, however, tamper with the sliders to 'even it up' a bit whilst repeat playing a scenario to figure out what I can and can't do - but what I want to do is run the exact historical scenario and see if I can get a different outcome. I'd be happy if you didn't do any in the EF game, T-28A.

(in reply to JiminyJickers)
Post #: 9
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/31/2012 10:46:31 AM   
wodin


Posts: 9851
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
I'm actually more happy to have what ifs in the EF game than say the Bulge. Not sure why but I am. Maybe because MG and the Bulge are so imprinted on memory that a what if stands out, where as the battles around Chir I would to be honest non the wiser if a smaller battle was historical or not.

_____________________________


(in reply to Phoenix100)
Post #: 10
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/31/2012 11:27:58 AM   
Phoenix100

 

Posts: 2558
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
For the same reason - ignorance - I thought it would be nicer to stick to history - so I could learn...

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 11
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 1/31/2012 11:07:16 PM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17785
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
Interesting discussion guys.

In a way every scenario is a what if. While it may start with an historical snapshot, once underway things have a knack of playing out differently due to the large number of variables at play, not to mention the player decisions. The odds of things unfolding exactly as they did historically are very low indeed.

With patch #2 we introduced the additional "historical" reinforcement schedule. This gives us four types now - historical, standard, favour us and favour them. There is now plenty of scope to design a scenario with a definite historical set of forces and deployments while at the same time having three options for alternative force lists and deployments. So we can have our cake and eat it too. There is nothing to stop you from saving a scenario under a different name and adding additional reinf schedules as you see fit. If there are multiple schedules of the same type one will be chosen randomly when you start to play the scenario.

You can use these alternate schedules to have the same force listbut start in different locations. For instance, you can use this aspect to model different drop zones for para forces. If you want to have them land closer to the objective at Arnhem, then create a schedule that sees the paras land near the arnhem bridge. You can have multiple schedules so that the enemy never knows exactly where the paras will be landing. This adds more realism than a predefined set of DZs.

Personnally, I like having some mystery to the battle. I find it more challenging and so that's why I like what-ifs. But each to their own.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Phoenix100)
Post #: 12
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/1/2012 1:06:53 AM   
jomni


Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
I want balance games, not necessarily change the forces invovled.   If the battle is historically lop-sided, then victory conditions should be adjusted.  If not, it's no fun to play for both sides for me.  But I'm also ok with What-If's.

_____________________________


(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 13
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/1/2012 9:00:40 AM   
wodin


Posts: 9851
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: jomni

I want balance games, not necessarily change the forces involved.   If the battle is historically lop-sided, then victory conditions should be adjusted.  If not, it's no fun to play for both sides for me.  But I'm also ok with What-If's.



Same as I mentioned further up, I agree. A good scenario designer will set victory conditions to make the game winnable by a force who will be battered during the game, by trying to be abit less battered than historically or holding on that bit longer than historically etc, that's what I call balance, not a balance in force ratio...

_____________________________


(in reply to jomni)
Post #: 14
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/1/2012 3:41:42 PM   
Perturabo


Posts: 2487
Joined: 11/17/2007
Status: offline
I liked the "capture the flag" scenarios in RDoA.

_____________________________

People shouldn't ask themselves why schools get shoot up.
They should ask themselves why people who finish schools burned out due to mobbing aren't receiving high enough compensations to not seek vengeance.

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 15
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/1/2012 5:44:22 PM   
emeg

 

Posts: 29
Joined: 4/10/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: T-28A

Hi guys,

Do any of you have some strong appreciation or strong dislike about what-ifs in general and CmdOps in particular? Do you like when they alter the reality a lot, aimed at much more fun gameplay? Or do you like when they provide only minor alternatives, without much alteration? If an original scenario is generally harder for side A, would you like to have also the what-if scenario that balances it and makes chances even, or makes things harder for side B?
Any thoughts are welcome.

Best regards


Computer simulations/games are a great tool to imitate what-if scenario's. I don't have problems with the what-ifs scenarios as long as the game developers inform us that these scenarios are what they are and the realistic scenario's also exist in the game/simulation. But, if the developers of a realistic wargame/simulation inform us that the have done an impressive job regarding the realism than I expect this realism.

The as much as possible realism don't exist regarding the major Arnhem road network in CO HTTR. More realism is for me, being born and grown up in Arnhem and, up to today always living in the proximity of Arnhem, important to enjoy the CmpOps HTTR game/simulation. Regarding the city centre of Arnhem I am somewhat dissapointed in the CO HTTR gamemap. The most of it is correct, but I miss the in September 1944 still existing pontoon bridge, code named Putney, located close near the since 1977 existing Nelson Mandela Bridge. Putney was in the initial marching orders for B Company of John Frost 2nd battalion the target to cross the Rhine and (being already on the southern riverbank) to take the southern access of the traffic bridge, code named Waterloo. Further, regarding the Arnhem centre, there are some roads of the second of third importance represented on the gamemap, But the seperated lanes of the boulevard Jansbinnen and Jansbuitensingel and the traffic square Willemsplein, both of fundamental significance in the Arnhem road network, don't exist on the gamemap.


_____________________________

Greetings, emeg.

(in reply to T-28A)
Post #: 16
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/1/2012 6:51:50 PM   
T-28A


Posts: 835
Joined: 11/1/2002
From: Ukraine
Status: offline
Thank you guys for all your answers, please keep them coming, this helps a lot when learning others' opinions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: emeg
The as much as possible realism don't exist regarding the major Arnhem road network in CO HTTR. More realism is for me, being born and grown up in Arnhem and, up to today always living in the proximity of Arnhem, important to enjoy the CmpOps HTTR game/simulation.


As a person living in the place which time to time gets into scenarios too, I agree with you that some mapping mistakes could look (and in many cases they are) very obvious and silly. But also being one who designs scenarios time to time, I should note that we foreigners usually rely on maps only, and these maps are happen to be inconsistent and/or incorrect and/or missing some areas' details - much more often than most of us would want. Especially for the map scale as detailed as CmdOps requires. So please be gracious and don't judge these mistakes too strictly, I believe if you contact scenario developer(s) directly they would be happy to provide necessary corrections that might get into next patches.

Cheers

< Message edited by T-28A -- 2/1/2012 6:52:00 PM >


_____________________________

_________________________________________
"Russia has only two allies: Russian Army and Russian Navy".
---Emperor Alexander III

(in reply to emeg)
Post #: 17
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/1/2012 10:33:18 PM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17785
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
Yes point taken about the mapping. As T-28A says we rely on the official WW2 maps. Where we know from our reading of an obvious error with the maps we will take this into account. So please advise where you can. Also please remember that we are working to a 100m grid and this imposes a certain amount of abstraction. This is especially so in built up areas. If we model every street you end up[ with an open football field effect as far as LOS, terrain and moveemnt are concerned. So some compromise is necessary.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to T-28A)
Post #: 18
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/1/2012 11:16:22 PM   
simovitch


Posts: 4436
Joined: 2/14/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: emeg

Regarding the city centre of Arnhem I am somewhat dissapointed in the CO HTTR gamemap. The most of it is correct, but I miss the in September 1944 still existing pontoon bridge, code named Putney, located close near the since 1977 existing Nelson Mandela Bridge.


The pontoon bridge was aerial photographed "intact" on September 10th, but reported damaged on September 17th. The rail bridge is there anyway so even the potential of a crossing point was left out. Depends on who you talk to I guess.


quote:

But the seperated lanes of the boulevard Jansbinnen and Jansbuitensingel and the traffic square Willemsplein, both of fundamental significance in the Arnhem road network, don't exist on the gamemap.


In Command Ops, If a designer puts too many roadways in a town, the objects on that layer wipe out the urban defensive benefits of the town itself. Many, many towns on both HTTR and BFTB are missing roads that I'm sure the locals would find "dissapointing".

_____________________________

simovitch


(in reply to emeg)
Post #: 19
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/2/2012 3:45:26 AM   
wodin


Posts: 9851
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
I think some forget the scale of the game.

in a squad level game you will have every street modelled. You wouldn't have it in a game at this scale.

_____________________________


(in reply to simovitch)
Post #: 20
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/2/2012 5:47:13 AM   
Perturabo


Posts: 2487
Joined: 11/17/2007
Status: offline
One thing that I'd love to see is purely competitive scenarios with maps made like maps for FPS and RTS games and with made up units (of course following some reasonable ToEE).

_____________________________

People shouldn't ask themselves why schools get shoot up.
They should ask themselves why people who finish schools burned out due to mobbing aren't receiving high enough compensations to not seek vengeance.

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 21
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/2/2012 8:27:24 AM   
wodin


Posts: 9851
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Perturabo

One thing that I'd love to see is purely competitive scenarios with maps made like maps for FPS and RTS games and with made up units (of course following some reasonable ToEE).


I wouldn't mind something based on something with Canon, say Wh40K, however totally made up units I just couldn't get into, you'd have no idea what they where or how powerful they where supposed to be or anything...I just couldn't see it working and I'd certainly not play it. It just wouldn't hold my interest and without some anchor point for my imagination then it might aswell be just squares fighting on a map. I also don't under stand the maps made like RTS or FPS game angle.

_____________________________


(in reply to Perturabo)
Post #: 22
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/2/2012 11:20:13 AM   
Perturabo


Posts: 2487
Joined: 11/17/2007
Status: offline
Wh40k has a pretty messy canon. Wouldn't made up units still be easily recognizable by their categories, like heavy tanks, medium tanks, etc? Maps made for wargames are usually made to recreate some specific terrain existing in reality which usually was a site of a real battle. Maps made for FPS and RTS are made mainly with a combination of challenge/balance and aesthetics in mind.

_____________________________

People shouldn't ask themselves why schools get shoot up.
They should ask themselves why people who finish schools burned out due to mobbing aren't receiving high enough compensations to not seek vengeance.

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 23
RE: What-ifs - wildness or reality? - 2/2/2012 8:07:50 PM   
wodin


Posts: 9851
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
SO you mean something more generic? I see. I thought you where thinking along the lines of totally made up stuff bordering on Sci Fi...

As I said I'd prefer say sci fi but based on a current sci fi universe or maybe even a fantasy game (though not one with magic), I remember playing on my Amstrad 464 a fantasy hex based wargame. I can't remember the name of it but I know it was very hard and the casualty figures where on par with WW1 as it recorded how many had died in each engagement, I remember seeing figures in their tens of thousand!! Your counters where shields I think.

_____________________________


(in reply to Perturabo)
Post #: 24
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Discontinued Games] >> Command Ops Series >> What-ifs - wildness or reality? Page: [1]
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

0.133