1941?

Matrix Games Forums

Paypal System Update

Distant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!

Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!

Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!

Armageddon invasion starts in 2014

Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!

Servers Update

The Deal goes Fourth!

Command Ops gets a Massive Update!

Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

1941?

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] >> Decisive Campaigns: Case Blue >> 1941?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

1941? - 7/16/2012 10:52:01 PM

rogo727

Posts: 925
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline

Call me crazy but I thought about this one. You go from Warsaw to Paris and then 1942? Huh Did I miss something? Oh I'm sorry I was on leave in 1941 everything is OK! Enjoyed Warsaw to Paris but there seems to be a gap here, think I will pass. Should have went to Africa next, then 1941,1942 extra....

< Message edited by rogo727 -- 7/16/2012 10:57:42 PM >

_____________________________

"I thank God that I was warring on the gridirons of the midwest and not the battlefields of Europe"
Nile Kinnick 1918-1943

Post #: 1

RE: 1941? - 7/16/2012 10:55:10 PM

DBeves

Posts: 370
Joined: 7/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Call me crazy but I thought about this one. You go from Warsaw to Paris and then 1942? Huh Did I miss something? Oh I'm sorry I was on leave in 1941 everything is OK! Enjoyed Warsaw to Paris but there seems to be a gap here, think I will pass.

Eh ?

What are you talking about ?

(in reply to rogo727)

Post #: 2

RE: 1941? - 7/16/2012 10:57:53 PM

rogo727

Posts: 925
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DBeves

quote:

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Call me crazy but I thought about this one. You go from Warsaw to Paris and then 1942? Huh Did I miss something? Oh I'm sorry I was on leave in 1941 everything is OK! Enjoyed Warsaw to Paris but there seems to be a gap here, think I will pass.

1941? The game says it starts in 1942...
Eh ? What are you talking about ?

_____________________________

"I thank God that I was warring on the gridirons of the midwest and not the battlefields of Europe"
Nile Kinnick 1918-1943

(in reply to DBeves)

Post #: 3

RE: 1941? - 7/16/2012 11:09:55 PM

rogo727

Posts: 925
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline

I did buy Warsaw to Paris with the understanding that the 2nd instal would be 1941...whats next in this this game 1944? I just can't follow games that go back or skip forward. I can't be the only one who feels this way.

< Message edited by rogo727 -- 7/16/2012 11:24:53 PM >

_____________________________

"I thank God that I was warring on the gridirons of the midwest and not the battlefields of Europe"
Nile Kinnick 1918-1943

(in reply to rogo727)

Post #: 4

RE: 1941? - 7/16/2012 11:12:01 PM

gabeeg

Posts: 231
Joined: 11/18/2009
Status: offline

...ummm...Why would he have to make a game that encompassed 1941? Did I miss a requirement that wargames only be released in sequential year order (somebody better go tell John Tiller...cuz he is really messing it up).

*Or* is your argument just that you would have preferred to see Vic produce a North Africa Campaign game? Its still possible, you'd have to ask him and be willing to play a game out of the sequential WWII years order.

(in reply to rogo727)

Post #: 5

RE: 1941? - 7/16/2012 11:26:19 PM

rogo727

Posts: 925
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gabeeg

...ummm...Why would he have to make a game that encompassed 1941? Did I miss a requirement that wargames only be released in sequential year order (somebody better go tell John Tiller...cuz he is really messing it up).

*Or* is your argument just that you would have preferred to see Vic produce a North Africa Campaign game? Its still possible, you'd have to ask him and be willing to play a game out of the sequential WWII years order.

Hey it only makes sense, You go from 1939-1940 to 1942 then back to 1941??? or 1944??? then back to 1943??? No thanks. 1941 is the most important year I think, but it's gone from this game....

< Message edited by rogo727 -- 7/16/2012 11:29:14 PM >

_____________________________

"I thank God that I was warring on the gridirons of the midwest and not the battlefields of Europe"
Nile Kinnick 1918-1943

(in reply to gabeeg)

Post #: 6

RE: 1941? - 7/16/2012 11:44:03 PM

parusski

Posts: 4468
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: Wyoming, Even Liberals Welcome
Status: offline

quote:

Hey it only makes sense, You go from 1939-1940 to 1942 then back to 1941??? or 1944??? then back to 1943??? No thanks. 1941 is the most important year I think, but it's gone from this game....

I understand your concern/question rogo727. But, as the name Case Blue indicates, the focus is meant to be on that very important second stage of Barbarossa. It would have been nice to see Operation Barbarossa, but we still have WitE for that. Case Blue is a work of art and great fun.

_____________________________

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."- W.T. Sherman

(in reply to rogo727)

Post #: 7

RE: 1941? - 7/16/2012 11:51:19 PM

rogo727

Posts: 925
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline

Yes Case blue is important, I didn't say it was not. I would feel the same way with any game that went from 1940 to 1942.

_____________________________

"I thank God that I was warring on the gridirons of the midwest and not the battlefields of Europe"
Nile Kinnick 1918-1943

(in reply to parusski)

Post #: 8

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 12:21:44 AM

DBeves

Posts: 370
Joined: 7/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Yes Case blue is important, I didn't say it was not. I would feel the same way with any game that went from 1940 to 1942.

I dont recall Vic ever saying the games would be sequential. Why should they be ? He has, like the rest of us a finite life span, so I guess he will be doing the campaigns he wants to in any order. Your question is only odd in that I dont know where you get the idea it was going to follow in order or cover everything in world war 2. Its called decisive campaigns so where does your reasoning come from that they should follow chronologically rather than just be a series of games about different campaign. Sorry - its the logic of your statement I dont get or where it comes from..

< Message edited by DBeves -- 7/17/2012 12:24:52 AM >

(in reply to rogo727)

Post #: 9

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 2:12:24 AM

wodin

Posts: 6503
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline

Just like Command Ops jumps around and many other games do like Tillers HPS games I really don't see the issue here at all or Battlefront first CMx2 East front game is set in '44 etc or SSG Decisive battles games series did. it's pretty standard procedure. A developer will have a game engine then pick and choose different years and campaigns. Very odd complaint to have. If it was a game whereby the next one became part of the previous one in some sort of meta campaign then I'd understand. However it isn't. They are standalone products. This isn't some sort of DLC expanding the first game. Your logic is way leftfield for me I'm afraid aswell. You don't need to follow the games chronologically as they are all standalone games covering particular battles\campaigns etc. Vic may not want to make endless games covering every stage of the whole war. Also it's likely he wouldn't know whether people would get bored of the engine before he was finished. Or certain times may not really be interesting enough compared to other times which he'd rather do now then hope he still wants to make games using the engine when it finally comes time to do them and also hope people are still interested in the game and it still sells.

Lots of reasons why banking on covering the war chronologically with a game series is a risky venture and far to long sighted. So yes I understand while he still enjoys making this series of games why he would make standalone games covering theaters\campaigns of the most interest, and also making sure the most interesting campaigns are covered whilst the buzz is still high for the series.

< Message edited by wodin -- 7/17/2012 2:26:11 AM >

_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame

My FB page, see I'm not that bad.

https://www.facebook.com/jason.costa.rimmer

(in reply to DBeves)

Post #: 10

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 2:21:14 AM

miller41

Posts: 1020
Joined: 3/25/2003
From: Saint Marys, Ga
Status: offline

crazy or not, based on the 4 hours i just spent with the linked campaign, you are missing a really great upgrade to the game. Despite missing 41, which in my opinion would be way to time consuming to play as a campaign (and this is from a veteran WITE player) it is taking on the time frame where both sides had a good chance to win. It might make a good 41 title once they make it even more user friendly to handle the immense number of units it would require.

_____________________________

You have the ability to arouse various emotions in me: please select carefully.

(in reply to rogo727)

Post #: 11

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 4:14:27 AM

rogo727

Posts: 925
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline

Everyone calm down just bought the game. My logic I know some people question is that I like the games to be played in order. Kinda like how panzer korps did it with 1939-1945. Enough said. Now I will enjoy this game.

_____________________________

"I thank God that I was warring on the gridirons of the midwest and not the battlefields of Europe"
Nile Kinnick 1918-1943

(in reply to miller41)

Post #: 12

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 10:26:38 AM

DBeves

Posts: 370
Joined: 7/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Everyone calm down just bought the game. My logic I know some people question is that I like the games to be played in order. Kinda like how panzer korps did it with 1939-1945. Enough said. Now I will enjoy this game.

quote:

bought the game

LOL - wel I think it was you getting your knickers in a twist - not the rest of us ...

(in reply to rogo727)

Post #: 13

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 10:53:18 AM

Vic

Posts: 3419
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline

Hi all,

Just to give some insight in my decision why not do to some obvious theaters in time before Case Blue...

I considered doing

a) Yugoslavia-Greece
b) Africa
c) Barbarossa
d) Typhoon

For the following reasons i did not.

a) To one-sided. to much like the invasion of the Netherlands and Poland concerning the disparity of forces and chances for long term survival of the allied side.
b) Very interesting. was very tempted. but its also very grand tactical and very very fluid. Apart from the Italian armies the forces employed here are really small. Maybe not at the time of El Alamein or Tunisia, but especially in the early months. I felt the engine was not that suited to model this theater properly.
c) Also have been tempted. I think the engine is suited to model this on a divisional scale with say 20-40km hexes and maybe 4 day or 7 day turns. But i felt it would be to close to WITE in subject matter and scale.
d) I really could have picked this one. Only reason i did not is that I liked the grand scale, in time and space, of Case Blue better.

Kind regards,
Vic

< Message edited by Vic -- 7/17/2012 10:55:23 AM >

_____________________________

Victor Reijkersz Designs
www.vrdesigns.nl

(in reply to DBeves)

Post #: 14

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 11:04:38 AM

gabeeg

Posts: 231
Joined: 11/18/2009
Status: offline

Rogo727,

Since you bought it, you must a thoughtful, intelligent, and animals probably like you...but you owe all of us a PBEM game for suggesting 1941 should have been next ;)

(in reply to Vic)

Post #: 15

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 11:35:53 AM

DBeves

Posts: 370
Joined: 7/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

c) Also have been tempted. I think the engine is suited to model this on a divisional scale with say 20-40km hexes and maybe 4 day or 7 day turns. But i felt it would be to close to WITE in subject matter and scale.

Please do this !!! It may be close to WiTE in subject matter and scale - but it would have been a game worth playing - unlike WiTE

(in reply to Vic)

Post #: 16

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 12:44:14 PM

kemmo

Posts: 31
Joined: 7/16/2012
Status: offline

Even if a Barbarossa game was close to WITE in scale I think it's worth doing,

(in reply to Vic)

Post #: 17

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 12:55:59 PM

TJD

Posts: 201
Joined: 1/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kemmo

Even if a Barbarossa game was close to WITE in scale I think it's worth doing,

+1.

(in reply to kemmo)

Post #: 18

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 1:27:28 PM

PirateJock

Posts: 448
Joined: 9/14/2006
From: North West, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic
I considered doing

a) Yugoslavia-Greece
b) Africa
c) Barbarossa
d) Typhoon

Hi Vic

So which one are you going for next? Thanks for the insight on your choice of Case Blue.

Cheers

_____________________________

Combat Command Matrix Edition Company, The Forgotten Few

(in reply to Vic)

Post #: 19

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 1:53:11 PM

Keunert

Posts: 876
Joined: 9/9/2010
Status: offline

please do a, after all playing the polish side was one of the best parts of the first DC title. your tight time limit and the new goal system could make playing the underdog fun.

(in reply to PirateJock)

Post #: 20

RE: 1941? - 7/17/2012 10:09:10 PM

miller41

Posts: 1020
Joined: 3/25/2003
From: Saint Marys, Ga
Status: offline

quote:

quote:

c) Also have been tempted. I think the engine is suited to model this on a divisional scale with say 20-40km hexes and maybe 4 day or 7 day turns. But i felt it would be to close to WITE in subject matter and scale.

Please do this !!! It may be close to WiTE in subject matter and scale - but it would have been a game worth playing - unlike WiTE

I echo this as well. I think this system, on a division level or slightly higher scale, would play much so better than WITE (and before anyone trashes me, I spent many hours playing WITE enjoyed it but it is extremely unbalanced and so unhistorical it stops being worth the time commitment) just do to the system you have and the way it flows and allows history to happen within reason.

_____________________________

You have the ability to arouse various emotions in me: please select carefully.

(in reply to DBeves)

Post #: 21

RE: 1941? - 7/18/2012 12:19:08 AM

EdinHouston

Posts: 87
Joined: 7/26/2008
Status: offline

Its not fair to compare a game that represents one part of the Eastern front over less than a year, to a game that represents the entire campaign four year campaign. Inherently a game like WiTE is going to be harder to 'balance' than a game representing 1942, which after all is when the two sides were probably at their closest strategic balance. How 'historical' would DC:CB look if the players picked up in 1942 where they left off in 1941 instead of starting in historical positions with historical units and strengths? Not passing judgment on either game, just noting that its an apples and oranges comparison.

(in reply to miller41)

Post #: 22

RE: 1941? - 7/18/2012 6:31:40 AM

redmarkus4

Posts: 3918
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DBeves

quote:

c) Also have been tempted. I think the engine is suited to model this on a divisional scale with say 20-40km hexes and maybe 4 day or 7 day turns. But i felt it would be to close to WITE in subject matter and scale.

Please do this !!! It may be close to WiTE in subject matter and scale - but it would have been a game worth playing - unlike WiTE

+1

I am still thirsty for a working game based on Barbarossa ;)

_____________________________

Managers read statistics and tune processes. Leaders interpret statistics and determine strategy.

(in reply to DBeves)

Post #: 23

RE: 1941? - 7/18/2012 6:35:33 AM

redmarkus4

Posts: 3918
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: EdinHouston

Its not fair to compare a game that represents one part of the Eastern front over less than a year, to a game that represents the entire campaign four year campaign. Inherently a game like WiTE is going to be harder to 'balance' than a game representing 1942, which after all is when the two sides were probably at their closest strategic balance. How 'historical' would DC:CB look if the players picked up in 1942 where they left off in 1941 instead of starting in historical positions with historical units and strengths? Not passing judgment on either game, just noting that its an apples and oranges comparison.

I would agree with you if the WitE 1941 Barbarossa scenario worked properly, but it doesn't. Even the Leningrad or Minsk scenarios are affected by many of the issues that affect the grand campaign.

Having said that, I do agree that trying to model 1941 to 1945 is going to be a huge challenge for any game. However, I don't see anyone suggesting that here. The request is for Barbarossa. I'd settle for that, followed by a Typhoon game, a Kursk extension and a Bagration game...

_____________________________

Managers read statistics and tune processes. Leaders interpret statistics and determine strategy.

(in reply to EdinHouston)

Post #: 24

RE: 1941? - 7/18/2012 7:05:23 PM

amatteucci

Posts: 284
Joined: 5/14/2000
From: ITALY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4
The request is for Barbarossa. I'd settle for that, followed by a Typhoon game, a Kursk extension and a Bagration game...

+1

I'd be happy with a Summer 1941 - Spring 1942 game. :D

(in reply to redmarkus4)

Post #: 25