From: Bedfordshire UK
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I am part of the Wastelands development team, whereas my status is exactly the same as yours, a player of war games since the 1970s, merely expressing an opinion, this is, after all, an open forum.
I am agreeing with you, that there are 'control' and 'ownership' anomalies in the game, some of which can be fixed using the game editor and acknowledging that this is sometimes difficult to achieve (the editor hasn't been the easiest tool to use).
I was responding directly to the specific points you made on liberating allied territory, a valid point worthy of discussion, with a view that if the Germans and Italians recaptured Rumanian territory from the Soviets, it would not be surprising if they kept control of it, as the Germans took control of the rump of the Italian Fascist State when it collapsed, it's an opinion and open to discussion.
Liberation is a feature of WW2 and the game has hex settings for 'original ownership', 'ownership' and 'control', again adjustable in the editor (I'm just scratching the surface of editing and probably not ready to go too far down this route), but I expressed the opinion that liberation happened in different ways in different countries. I am not saying it shouldn't be addressed, but that it is not a straightforward issue. However, it looks like there could be ways to adjust for this.
In general terms, the game has some really good points and some significant problems, yes it would be nice if the developers could deliver a great game, working just as you want, but the next best thing, is a game that can be adjusted to fit what we each want.
How far that can be achieved is a journey of discovery, learning what is possible and what is not and whether any of us will get the perfect game from it, who knows, but it's a long way from the early days, when you were stuck with whatever the game had, no choices.
On a more general point, fake history, I am as interested in an historically accurate game as I assume you are, but then there is the feeling that if games are too tightly scripted into what was possible and what was not, you end up with a sterile predicable progress through the game to May 1945. The commanders in WW2 hadn't read the script, what is now clear to us, had huge uncertainty for them.
Reading Eisenhower's own report on Torch, noting the need to keep forces in the Western areas of the lodgement, in case the Germans moved into Spain and threatened the rear of the advance into Tunisia. That action reduced the power of the advance on Tunis, probably lost the chance of an early victory and condemned the Allies to a six month campaign. Justified, or not, Eisenhower had that uncertainty, with hindsight was the precaution really necessary ? Will the Soviets attack, while the Germans are fighting in France in 1940, historically probably not, but it makes for a hell of a game if they do (but you don't want it every time, uncertainty is lost). It may be fake history, but it brings uncertainty into the game, which has its own realism and puts you more into the position of the commanders of the time.
Obviously, if it gets too stupid the game becomes pointless, there is a balance to be struck, but ToF has the ability to step out of the box, which can sometimes be very good.
< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 10/14/2012 12:35:13 PM >
"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me