RE: About the Fighting (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns Series



Message


Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 2:17:15 PM)

500 meters. Turn is determined by command cycle.

I didn't say the game had no combat engineering in it. It's in here. It's just a bit abstracted for the most part.

River crossings for NATO are a HUGE problem. Most Warsaw Pact equipment is amphibious. You HAVE TO BLOW THE BRIDGES!!! If you don't I'll be getting feed back from you here on the forums crying about how unbalanced that scenario was as you didn't hold the Soviet Tide back at all.

Here is a screen shot showing where I blew the bridge. Arrow 1. [8D]

Right next to it you can see where the AI built another bridge. Arrow 2. [:@]

Their advance continued right after that! [X(]

There are minefields and obstructions in the game as well. A problem to doing Combat Engineering correctly is the vast number of coding/game issues that have to go right for them to work.

1) They take time to create. Usually lots of time. Most games don't have that. FPC to some extent does. That wasn't the main issue here.

2) They have to have specialized equipment and supplies at the site when needed. This is the main issue. CE's don't just magically materialize out of thin air. They are a much needed special asset and every commander on the front is screaming for them. Where in the columns are they? I want them here NOW!! FINALLY, the CE's are here but their trucks are lost in the rear SOMEWHERE....and on it goes.

3) As engineer units are depleted/stretched thinner they rely more on untrained manpower to help them. That increases the time for completion of the task....now we go back to #1 and start the loop again.

What Capn and Rob have done is to add in the most frequently used CE functions as seamlessly as possible. [&o]

If the unit has amphibious capability it will cross the river after a time penalty. If all the units that are crossing have amphibious capability then there will be no bridge built. If all the units do not have amphibious capability a bridge will be built there.

Not a perfect answer but one that works in the context of the game very well.

Good Hunting.

MR

[image]local://upfiles/28652/213B6E1E22854F3DA4991922B5968424.jpg[/image]




CapnDarwin -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 2:24:48 PM)

MR covers the engineering picture there very well. One thing we will need to expand on is the functions of other unit types in the game. One area of importance is recon. Finding the enemy allow you to fix the enemy by hitting them with artillery or air strikes. Buys you time to move your forces to better defend the enemy's line of attack. Keeps you from being surprised when the enemy appears off you flank or worse. Recon units in the game have the added benefits of being harder to spot and also do a better job of spotting units. As a commander recon and counter-recon operation may make or break the battle.




Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 2:26:31 PM)

This is not WWII and it's not FPG. This is Flash Point Campaigns: Red Storm. In this game you will find one thing that is drastically different than in any game you have played to this point. Combat in a WWIII environment would have been two things...

FAST AND RELENTLESS!

You're finely tuned responses to developments on the field, garnered from countless hours hovering over wargame maps, will have you two steps behind. The Russians won't wait for you to get your act together. At least they didn't for me!! [8|]

Good Hunting.

MR




BeirutDude -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 5:44:15 PM)

Thanks for answering the questions.




jday305 -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 7:42:28 PM)

MR
I like that the AI did something you were not expecting. That will make it tougher to predict how the AI will react to my moves and keep me on my toes. I only question why would you never release a scenerio that you can't beat? Not all battlefield situations can ultimately be won.




Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 8:03:14 PM)

I didn't say I wouldn't release a scenario that I hadn't been beaten in. I won't release a scenario that I personally haven't beaten because I want to know that there is at least a possibility, if you play well, that you too can beat it.

Nowhere did I say they would be easy to beat....[:D] [:D] [:D]

Winning in FPC is a relative thing. It takes into account force sized, objectives controlled etc. It's just a straight up you took 200 points I took 300 points worth of VL, so I win. Not nearly that simple here.

As I've said before, the team is made up of veteran gamers. We know what we like and you will see that reflected in the game.

Good Hunting.

MR




Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 8:16:10 PM)

A bit about the battles.

They come in different flavors. Something for everyone.

The main combatants in the base game will be British, Soviet, US and West German.

If time allows I would like to have each scenario playable from the NATO side, Soviet side and Head to Head.

The scenarios range from small actions to large scale battles.

The scenarios will be sortable. For example, if you want a small fight with the West Germans fighting the AI you can find that quickly without having to go through the entire scenario listing.

The maps are all the same size but they are all different. Each battle has it's own unique map. The battles cover everything from the Fulda Gap up through the mountains and onto the North German Plain. There is everything from major rivers to wide open spaces.

Force sizes vary and the exact content of your forces at any given time in the battle will vary as well. I believe in the liberal use and arrival/departure of reinforcements. As with actual battles things get chaotic.

There are two basic types of wargamers. Those that play wargames like chess, very structured, and those that play it that believe no plan lasts past the first shot and that warfare is trying to execute a plan out of utter chaos. I belong to the second group of gamers. My scenarios will make you adjust constantly to changing situations in as many aspects of the combat model as I possibly can.

Good Luck with that, you'll need it. [X(]

Good Hunting.

MR




BeirutDude -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 8:43:50 PM)

These posts/threads need a "Like" button like on Facebook! [:D]




wodin -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 9:31:20 PM)

Music to my ears..


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian



There are two basic types of wargamers. Those that play wargames like chess, very structured, and those that play it that believe no plan lasts past the first shot and that warfare is trying to execute a plan out of utter chaos. I belong to the second group of gamers. My scenarios will make you adjust constantly to changing situations in as many aspects of the combat model as I possibly can.


MR





CapnDarwin -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 9:33:01 PM)

Rob's AI is good. AI is never an easy prospect when coding a game. It will never be as good as another player (at least if it's not cheating all the time and even then it still appears fishy). Unless you start shipping games with a trained Deep Blue computer or clone a developer, you are left with some form of rules based AI. I think the job done by Rob is awesome. I have been caught off guard on a few occasions when enemy forces have appeared along a route that I blew off covering thinking the computer would not take that approach. You really need to look across the map and ask yourself what you would do to attack your force in the worst way and prepare for that possibility. And then keep doing that routine with the current state as a jump off point for the whole game.




OldSarge -> RE: About the Fighting (4/27/2013 9:45:07 PM)

I've been a long time player of GDW's Assault series (including Boots & Saddle & Replacements). This is the first game that appears to capture that pretty nicely.

As I was serving and still in FRG at the time this game covers, I have long awaited a Cold War era 'what if' game that would do the period justice.

Now, a question. Will the game be able to capture different alert levels for NATO? Or will the game assume that NATO started on 100% alert with the full unit turning out. I ask this because I remember there were times when we were pretty much off our guard, and other times, like when General Krosen(sp?) was hit with an RPG outside of Heidelberg, IIRC we went to full alert after that event!!

Anyway, looking good so far!! [8D]




CapnDarwin -> RE: About the Fighting (4/28/2013 12:09:19 AM)

OldSarge, Mad Russian has you covered. The first scenario is the 11th ACR caught of guard and trying to get out of their garrison as the Russians roll in. There are also setting in the scenario editor for timing reinforcements and withdrawals, fixing units in place, setting ammo, training level and morale and even reducing the units in a formation to show earlier losses or broken gear not ready to fight. A lot of options.

He making some very awesome scenarios.




midgard30 -> RE: About the Fighting (4/28/2013 1:39:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

Music to my ears..


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian



There are two basic types of wargamers. Those that play wargames like chess, very structured, and those that play it that believe no plan lasts past the first shot and that warfare is trying to execute a plan out of utter chaos. I belong to the second group of gamers. My scenarios will make you adjust constantly to changing situations in as many aspects of the combat model as I possibly can.


MR




I belong to the first group, but my games always turn out like those of the second group. That's why my plans never work. [:D]




Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (4/28/2013 2:11:41 AM)

Different alert levels, different support levels, different reinforcement times, units/weapons systems both arriving and leaving during the game. In some scenarios there are Army/Corps/Division level support for TF sized combat units. At other times there are only recon elements present and you are very much on the Sharp End!

Yes, I've been making scenarios since about 1972. I started making my own scenarios with PanzerBlitz. We had 4 complete sets of boards and 10 sets of counters when I was in the Army. We had a room in Bn HQ where we could leave the games set up. AIW was less well liked we only had 2 sets of boards and 4 sets of counters for it. [:D]

The Bn Co, Bn XO, S-2 and many of the Company Co's would drop by to watch us play. We also did MBX' (Map Based Exercises) where I was a Soviet commander. I got the nickname Mad Russian way back then because I was upset at how gamers or US Army commanders would play the Russians. They weren't US/NATO formations in T-34/T-62's. I used to beat the heck out of the company commanders. When we would drive up on site during Reforger or ARTEP's they would ask me questions about Soviet tactics and how to counter them.

Good Hunting.

MR




demiller -> RE: About the Fighting (4/28/2013 2:16:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OldSarge

I've been a long time player of GDW's Assault series (including Boots & Saddle & Replacements). This is the first game that appears to capture that pretty nicely.



I've had the same thought as I've been reading about this game. It very, very much reminds me of Assault. That was a great game series.




OldSarge -> RE: About the Fighting (4/28/2013 3:36:49 AM)

Thanks,MR! It is really great to hear that you were there and are accounting for the realities of how the units, certainly in 7th Army, actually operated at that time. [8D]


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

Different alert levels, different support levels, different reinforcement times, units/weapons systems both arriving and leaving during the game. In some scenarios there are Army/Corps/Division level support for TF sized combat units. At other times there are only recon elements present and you are very much on the Sharp End!

Yes, I've been making scenarios since about 1972. I started making my own scenarios with PanzerBlitz. We had 4 complete sets of boards and 10 sets of counters when I was in the Army. We had a room in Bn HQ where we could leave the games set up. AIW was less well liked we only had 2 sets of boards and 4 sets of counters for it. [:D]

The Bn Co, Bn XO, S-2 and many of the Company Co's would drop by to watch us play. We also did MBX' (Map Based Exercises) where I was a Soviet commander. I got the nickname Mad Russian way back then because I was upset at how gamers or US Army commanders would play the Russians. They weren't US/NATO formations in T-34/T-62's. I used to beat the heck out of the company commanders. When we would drive up on site during Reforger or ARTEP's they would ask me questions about Soviet tactics and how to counter them.

Good Hunting.

MR





OldSarge -> RE: About the Fighting (4/28/2013 3:52:39 AM)

IMO, the Assault series was probably the best of the WWIII games out there. TAHGC had TAC-Air which was good, but I think the rules for Assault really nailed it. I only wish that I had gone ahead and picked up the Bundeswehr expansion when I had the opportunity to do so.

I have high hopes the FPC will fill the hole....[:)]


quote:

ORIGINAL: demiller


quote:

ORIGINAL: OldSarge

I've been a long time player of GDW's Assault series (including Boots & Saddle & Replacements). This is the first game that appears to capture that pretty nicely.



I've had the same thought as I've been reading about this game. It very, very much reminds me of Assault. That was a great game series.





Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (4/28/2013 7:06:26 AM)

The Bundeswehr is here!

Good Hunting.

MR




Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (4/29/2013 1:28:11 PM)

Here is an example of the, not so brief, Main Briefing for the introductory scenario. This will give you some idea of how I see the events unfolding.

The Soviet Union is withdrawing it's forces from the German Democratic Republic (GDR). They have alerted both NATO and the UN that they are moving two divisions east in the sector of the 8th Guards Army. This announcement was made months in advance. Several smaller units have left their permanent duty stations, earlier this month, for new locations further east.

NATO was on low alert status and is having to learn to deal with the fact that the Cold War is over. What to do now?

But wait, the 533rd Military Intelligence (MI) Battalion stationed in the Fulda Gap is getting information that isn't matching up with how events should be unfolding. It seems the Soviets aren't moving to the east. They start scrambling to find out what's up.

The 79th Guards Tank Division left it's garrison at Suhl and moved southeast on Route 281. When it reached Coburg the lead element, the 17th Guards Tank Regiment, turned southwest on Route 303 and west onto Route 279. The entire time they were in road march formation. There was no NATO interference with the approach to the border.

17th Guards Tank Regiment entered Saal an der Saale and gave the prearranged order for the batteries of 8th Guards Army to fire on Camp Lee and the approaches to Bad Neustadt and Rödelmaier. The guns errupted into life as the lead elements drove through Wülfershausen and turned towards the 11th ACR.

2nd Squadron, 11th ACR at Camp Lee, outside Bad Neustadt, is hammered by 152mm artillery fire. The camp had been warned only minutes before and very few of the squadron's vehicles were moving towards Rödelmaier on Route 279. It is fitting that 2nd Squadron was the last element of the Regiment to leave Vietnam, after five and a half years of service, and it is the first US unit to be engaged by the Soviet advance in WWIII.

The two elite units that have been facing each other over the decades will come together in a mighty clash. The Black Horse outposts along the border at Rödelmaier will have to deal with the Soviet advance down Route 279 until the rest of the squadron can move to their aid. Or until the Soviet Army breaks through and is advancing.

At 0400 the day is just beginning. What was going to be a hot day in July was about to get a lot hotter.

The Cold War is about to become a Hot War. It's time to dance to the music.


Good Hunting.

MR






OldSarge -> RE: About the Fighting (4/30/2013 2:30:09 AM)

Sounds plausible to me!




CapnDarwin -> RE: About the Fighting (4/30/2013 1:42:16 PM)

Yes, MR is crafting all of the primary 1989 scenarios and campaigns for the game as well as being our Jedi map maker. I believe people will love his work , but curse his name when their battle planning goes pear shaped. [:D]




Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (5/1/2013 1:55:42 AM)

At the moment at least, the game centers on the 1989 combat forces of NATO and the Soviet Union. That was the year that NATO finally thought it could stop a Warsaw Pact attack.

We'll see how well you do with that.

Good Hunting.

MR




CapnDarwin -> RE: About the Fighting (5/1/2013 3:02:55 PM)

To backup what MR said and what has been posted elsewhere the game will be focusing on on 1989. This will match up to the original FPG time line. The game system can cover anything from 1980 to 1989.

[8D]




wodin -> RE: About the Fighting (5/1/2013 4:23:13 PM)

I always thought NATO knew they'd have to go Nuclear and Russia didn't want that at all and hoped it could win through mass use of conventional armed forces.

So it will be interesting to see if NATO could hold them back just using conventional weapons..though knowing me I can't resist a Tac Nuke.




CapnDarwin -> RE: About the Fighting (5/1/2013 4:45:23 PM)

Being on Nato soil would have to be thought out before popping a nuke. Same thing with chemical weapons.




Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (5/3/2013 2:50:13 AM)

Nukes and Chemical weapons are in the game. Depending on the number of campaigns we get done will depend on how much you see them in the original release.

Good Hunting.

MR




Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (5/9/2013 3:32:54 AM)

An interesting development about the fighting is, that, at this moment, the first scenario for the American campaign is the favorite. [&o]

That might be because of these guys!

Good Hunting.

MR

[image]local://upfiles/28652/6B91C8B68D6044268AC6593B904CE294.jpg[/image]




JohnO -> RE: About the Fighting (5/10/2013 3:50:05 PM)

ok, I'm trying to read all the post about FPC:RS and I didn't see anywhere where I, a player, can make my own scenarios? If it is posted sorry for asking a question already asked.




cbelva -> RE: About the Fighting (5/10/2013 4:52:42 PM)

Yes you can make your own scenarios.




Mad Russian -> RE: About the Fighting (5/10/2013 7:29:05 PM)

The game comes with a full scenario editor. It is one of the major areas of change from FPG. The editor is extremely flexible.

Good Hunting.

MR




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.515625E-02