Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

"Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...?

 
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] >> Desert War 1940 - 1942 >> "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
"Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/13/2020 12:57:36 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline
What do you think about the "Desert War" WEGO game system?

* In your opinion, are the ground casualties suffered in the game low/high/or about right? What are your questions/concerns about ground unit casualties?
* In your opinion, is the air asset concept good, bad or are you indifferent? How would you improve it?
* In your opinion, is the ground asset concept good, bad or are you indifferent? How would you improve it?
* In your opinion, is the naval asset concept good, bad or are you indifferent? How would you improve it?
* What questions do you have about the WEGO system that you would like to have answered?
* In what directions would you like to see the Desert War WEGO system proceed?

Thanks in advance for your input!

_____________________________

Post #: 1
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/14/2020 11:01:47 AM   
jmlima

 

Posts: 576
Joined: 3/1/2007
Status: offline
I would kind of flip the question on it's head by saying 'it depends'.

For Stalingrad (presumably company scale?), you will need some further granularity on urban structures and, most of all, on the types of movement available and LOS / ZOC / detection routines. Also, never saw any weather model with winter / extreme weather in the game, so not sure how that will operate (in terms of ground and air combat and also movement, impact on troop numbers, etc)

For DBP, you will need some of the above, but also some more granularity in troop types since there was a huge difference, even amongst the elite troops, also, command will need to be reviewed since (actually in both of these games) most troops operated reasonably effectively even when cut from their superior commands , but this was heavily dependent on their quality (ie, 6 BCP could operate even if alone on mars, some of the colonial troops would collapse if they felt isolated).

In both of the above, the current air and naval models are probably just right. The naval model is not even needed. The only question on the air model is air supply, which would apply to both cases.

In short, I think it depends on where you are going. IMO, for example, if you now went crazy and developed an ubber naval model whilst working on titles for Stalingrad and DBP, then your work would be wasted for the time being... so there's little point in even discussing it!

Hope the above makes sense, even if probably not helpful at all...

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 2
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/15/2020 9:16:30 PM   
Freedom205

 

Posts: 271
Joined: 12/4/2000
From: Michigan USA
Status: offline
Regarding 'wego". I was skeptical at first. I was guilty of wanting extreme control over my units. After using it for a few games, I now love it. It adds a true "variable" factor to the execution of orders. (which seems more realistic to me)

As far as casualties,I think they are within reason and close enough. I do question the ease of killing units off after they have been surrounded and isolated. I agree that their fighting power should diminish every turn they are isolated and out of supply, but I don't agree with how quickly it diminishes. Most units had enough supply for at least a day or two of fighting, if not 3 or 4. Movement should be limited, but I think it should take repeated attacks to lower the defensive strength of a unit. Not just repeated turns.
I also think it would be nice if ground units had an attack and defense value for both soft and hard targets. As an example the 2 pounder was a good anti tank gun, but useless against troops because of the lack of a HE round. The Panzer IIIJ was far superior to the IIIG against armor, but they were equal against troops.
As far as air assets, I have thought that perhaps their fighting ability should factor into how they effect the game. As an example, a fighter unit should have an air to air rating rather than just being added as one more unit on CAP. If you had a unit of 109Fs (maybe rated a 5) and a Fiat G50 unit (rated a 3) than your total Counter Air would be an 8. (instead of 2, like it currently is) I understand it would take a lot of added programming, and once you factor in bombers it could get very complicated. In a nutshell I don't like to see 1 Gladiator unit on Counter Air have the same effect as a Spitfire unit. I certainly can live with it the way it is though.
Ground assets seems spot on to me.
Naval assets seem fine to me as well

Lastly, I hope enough interest is generated to keep the wego system alive. I really enjoy playing.

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 3
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/16/2020 12:10:33 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmlima
For Stalingrad (presumably company scale?), you will need some further granularity on urban structures and, most of all, on the types of movement available and LOS / ZOC / detection routines. Also, never saw any weather model with winter / extreme weather in the game, so not sure how that will operate (in terms of ground and air combat and also movement, impact on troop numbers, etc).

Stalingrad will have two scales; Operational Level = 2500 meters/hes, Tactical Level = 250 meters/hex (experimental). There are three weather conditions: Clear, Mud, Snow/Freeze.


quote:

ORIGINAL: jmlima
For DBP, you will need some of the above, but also some more granularity in troop types since there was a huge difference, even amongst the elite troops, also, command will need to be reviewed since (actually in both of these games) most troops operated reasonably effectively even when cut from their superior commands , but this was heavily dependent on their quality (ie, 6 BCP could operate even if alone on mars, some of the colonial troops would collapse if they felt isolated).

DBP discussions are tabled for now...our current focus is on Desert War/Stalingrad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmlima
In both of the above, the current air and naval models are probably just right. The naval model is not even needed. The only question on the air model is air supply, which would apply to both cases.

Air supply/transport has already been implemented in Stalingrad. There will be naval forces (riverine) in Stalingrad as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmlima
In short, I think it depends on where you are going. IMO, for example, if you now went crazy and developed an ubber naval model whilst working on titles for Stalingrad and DBP, then your work would be wasted for the time being... so there's little point in even discussing it!

The Volga Flotilla will be represented in Stalingrad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmlima
Hope the above makes sense, even if probably not helpful at all...

Great! Thanks for the feedback!


_____________________________


(in reply to jmlima)
Post #: 4
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/16/2020 12:51:34 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Freedom205
...As far as casualties,I think they are within reason and close enough. I do question the ease of killing units off after they have been surrounded and isolated. I agree that their fighting power should diminish every turn they are isolated and out of supply, but I don't agree with how quickly it diminishes. Most units had enough supply for at least a day or two of fighting, if not 3 or 4. Movement should be limited, but I think it should take repeated attacks to lower the defensive strength of a unit. Not just repeated turns.

Will take a look.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Freedom205
I also think it would be nice if ground units had an attack and defense value for both soft and hard targets. As an example the 2 pounder was a good anti tank gun, but useless against troops because of the lack of a HE round. The Panzer IIIJ was far superior to the IIIG against armor, but they were equal against troops.

This is already "baked into the cake". There is an armor/anti-armor (hard) system--those are the factors you see on tank and AT units. The "soft" system like-wise is a comparison between "soft" targets. The Shock system addresses the interaction between tanks (hard) and non-AT units (soft).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Freedom205
As far as air assets, I have thought that perhaps their fighting ability should factor into how they effect the game. As an example, a fighter unit should have an air to air rating rather than just being added as one more unit on CAP. If you had a unit of 109Fs (maybe rated a 5) and a Fiat G50 unit (rated a 3) than your total Counter Air would be an 8. (instead of 2, like it currently is) I understand it would take a lot of added programming, and once you factor in bombers it could get very complicated. In a nutshell I don't like to see 1 Gladiator unit on Counter Air have the same effect as a Spitfire unit. I certainly can live with it the way it is though.

The Counter-air Mission is a generic air mission in an abstracted air system. The Counter-air mission encompasses fighter sweeps, radar, counter-radar, airfield bombing/strafing (vs air units, air supply [fuel/ammo/repair parts], maintenance facilities, air control capabilities, etc.). Similarly, the Interdiction Mission targets enemy supply convoys (Naval and Ground) and the ability of enemy units to operate freely on the battlefield. In Desert War/Stalingrad, the player relies on his "air commander" to task the best asset (fighter, fighter-bomber, light/medium/heavy bomber) to execute the task assigned by the player--Counter-air or Interdiction. The "air commander" will determine the mission/targets that are assigned to the Gladiators, Spitfires, or Wellingtons. IOW, Counter-air does not equal air-to-air.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Freedom205
I hope enough interest is generated to keep the wego system alive. I really enjoy playing.

Glad you like it. Saint Ruth and I aren't going anywhere except--Onwards!



_____________________________


(in reply to Freedom205)
Post #: 5
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/16/2020 3:27:31 PM   
superhans

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 1/11/2019
Status: offline
WEGO system is excellent but...ground casualties are a bid odd. What i like about this game is its homage to history but an overwhelming attack produces startling and slightly unrealistic results IMHO. So far Ive been wiped out 436 men to 0, 291 men to 0 casualties and so on. Both sides would naturally take casualties, even if it was a decisive victory. Especially at Sidi rezegh, there is plenty of testimony of NZ batalions getting overwhelmed but giving as good as they got even tho it was armour against infantry. That's why Rommel held the NZ troops in such high regard...their courage under fire. Sounds stupid but i feel 436/0 does'nt do em justice.

< Message edited by superhans -- 5/16/2020 3:29:29 PM >

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 6
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/17/2020 5:43:20 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline
Thanks for your feedback. We are currently re-examining the historicity of our CRTs.

_____________________________


(in reply to superhans)
Post #: 7
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/20/2020 12:58:28 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: superhans

WEGO system is excellent but...ground casualties are a bid odd...So far I've been wiped out 436 men to 0, 291 men to 0 casualties and so on. Both sides would naturally take casualties, even if it was a decisive victory...

I'm doing a deep dive on this issue because--as a player--I generally agree with this observation; losses don't feel "right" more often than they should. Work in progress--casualties are too high for the attacker and WAY to high for the defender in the neighborhood of 2:1 and 3:1. Three-to-one should be in the neighborhood of 50:50 chance of success (all things being equal) of taking a hex (defender retreats/is destroyed).

Movement Factor + Combat Results Table Odds + Unit Quality + Current Readiness% + Die Roll = How we feel about Combat Results.

Currently, I don't feel as good about Combat Results as I might. But I like many of you know how to work the game.

So--Experienced Players! What do you think about the equation I have proposed above? Are all significant variables considered? What weight do you place in each? Is any change actually required?


_____________________________


(in reply to superhans)
Post #: 8
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/20/2020 1:45:22 PM   
Okayrun3254


Posts: 154
Joined: 8/28/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bcgames

What do you think about the "Desert War" WEGO game system?

* In your opinion, are the ground casualties suffered in the game low/high/or about right? What are your questions/concerns about ground unit casualties?

I have been playing Salerno, which has been a tense and fun scenario, and in some of the battles, there have been high casualties. The battles that have high casualties seem to be when a unit is surrounded, attacked with high concentration of offshore bombardment, artillery, command ratings, or a combination of the two. I have seen units that were caught out in the open ground completely destroyed by a superior force. I have also seen elite paratrooper unit withstand a attack, and survive, which seems historically correct to me. Most of the time when I lose one of my units is completely destroyed, its because I left that unit vulnerable, out in the open, no flank protection, etc. This has been a lesson for me, and now I respect the range of the offshore bombardment, open ground defenses, and I am learning to find better terrain for defensive positions, and protecting my flanks from being surrounded. When I see a unit that has been destroyed, I wonder if that is all casualties, or are part of the list of casualties represent prisoners taken. I think historically, if a unit is destroyed, there will be a mix of casualties and prisoners.


* In your opinion, is the air asset concept good, bad or are you indifferent? How would you improve it?

The more I understand the system, the better I like it. To me, it is a system that is abstracted in some ways, but is also very direct in how the air units can be assigned by the player for specific missions, which have a very key effect on the game.


* In your opinion, is the ground asset concept good, bad or are you indifferent? How would you improve it?

The ground assets are a nice way to get an advantage at a key point in the game by assigning them to a battle. I like that the player has a way to possibly tip the scale in a specific battle of the player choice. It is a powerful asset, and in some scenarios I think the number of command assets may need to be adjusted.

* In your opinion, is the naval asset concept good, bad or are you indifferent? How would you improve it?

In a game like Salerno, the naval asset is historically a key factor in the battle. I think it works well to represent the Allies advantage in naval power, and the Axis's vulnerability to this asset.

I am not sure, but can the Axis airpower attack the Allies naval assets?

* What questions do you have about the WEGO system that you would like to have answered?

Does airpower have an effect when units are moving, or caught in a meeting engagement? Do any of the assigned assets come into play when units run into each other in a meeting engagement?

* In what directions would you like to see the Desert War WEGO system proceed?

I would like to keep seeing new game enhancements similar to the addition of troops, AFVs and guns to the unit information. I am very interested in how smaller, maybe company sized units play out in an urban environment like Stalingrad. Maybe some new fortifications types would be interesting. Bridge building and destruction for engineer units. Paratroop landings. The game graphics is also one of the most import feature in a game for me. I like the looks of the Salerno map, and hope to keep seeing further improvement to map and counter graphics.

Thanks in advance for your input!

Thanks for the opportunity to give input.

Frank



< Message edited by Okayrun3254 -- 5/20/2020 1:46:49 PM >

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 9
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/21/2020 2:44:45 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
Does airpower have an effect when units are moving, or caught in a meeting engagement? Do any of the assigned assets come into play when units run into each other in a meeting engagement?


Does air power have an effect on movement?

Yes. Enemy Interdiction will reduce the movement of friendly units up to 50% of their assigned movement factor. In addition, Enemy Interdiction reduces the range of HQs which in turn reduces the Players ability to assign Move + Supply.

Do Air/Naval/Ground Assets come into play in a meeting engagement?

No. However, if the enemy remains stationary in the target hex, then friendly ground support COULD be applied in a Moving Attack.

_____________________________


(in reply to Okayrun3254)
Post #: 10
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/21/2020 4:04:49 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
...I am very interested in how smaller, maybe company sized units play out in an urban environment like Stalingrad. Maybe some new fortifications types would be interesting. Bridge building and destruction for engineer units.

We're looking at these things. We'll see what happens.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
Paratroop landings.

Yes--Monty's Front.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
The game graphics is also one of the most import feature in a game for me. I like the looks of the Salerno map, and hope to keep seeing further improvement to map and counter graphics.

We try harder.


_____________________________


(in reply to Okayrun3254)
Post #: 11
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/21/2020 4:12:08 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
...When I see a unit that has been destroyed, I wonder if that is all casualties, or are part of the list of casualties represent prisoners taken. I think historically, if a unit is destroyed, there will be a mix of casualties and prisoners.

Casualties = KIA + WIA + MIA + POW

However comma I think casualties are too high--especially for the defender--in environments that are NOT--The Desert. We are looking at what is required to balance things better in a temperate climate.

_____________________________


(in reply to Okayrun3254)
Post #: 12
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/21/2020 4:15:55 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

Thanks for the opportunity to give input.

Frank

Thank-you for your feed-back. Folks like you will make the game better.




_____________________________


(in reply to Okayrun3254)
Post #: 13
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/22/2020 2:09:52 PM   
76mm


Posts: 4109
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: online
Sorry for delay in responding...haven't had a chance to play in a while, so I wanted to review some features in the manual before responding. I don't actually have responses to your specific questions, but a few random, minor comments:
1) DW remains one of the most innovative games to come out in recent years; I didn't play it as much as I'd hoped, mainly because I'm not very interested in the theater, and the dense stacks were a bit of a turn off for me. Looking forward to Stalingrad!
2) IIRC there are no night turns in DW--will this be remedied in Stalingrad? I would expect that recon values and non-road movement costs would be affected.
3) Frankly I've never really understood why I had to select a special supply mode to use road movement...I think road movement (at least in Russia) would typically consume less fuel than cross-country, not more fuel? And why not be able to use road movement for part of my move, then deploy for offense or defense (at some MP cost)? Seems like this happened all the time?
4) My main graphical wish would be to give the counters a little "depth" by shading the edges to more closely resemble a cardboard counter; a minor thing perhaps, but IMHO it would really improve the game's look.

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 14
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/23/2020 1:15:40 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Sorry for delay in responding...haven't had a chance to play in a while, so I wanted to review some features in the manual before responding. I don't actually have responses to your specific questions, but a few random, minor comments:
1) DW remains one of the most innovative games to come out in recent years; I didn't play it as much as I'd hoped, mainly because I'm not very interested in the theater, and the dense stacks were a bit of a turn off for me. Looking forward to Stalingrad!

After much testing, we have found what I consider to be the best we can get regarding stacks--and still maintain the feel of Desert War unit capabilities. Ground scale plus unit breakdown/build-up capability for most units puts stacking in the hands of the players. Stalingrad's default at-start for a division (generally speaking) is the regiment. The Player takes it from there to build his capability stacks and/or plug the holes in the line as he sees fit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm
2) IIRC there are no night turns in DW--will this be remedied in Stalingrad? I would expect that recon values and non-road movement costs would be affected.

Stalingrad has night turns and night-capability for some ground units and air assets. Turns per day depends on what time of year the scenario takes place and the associated moon illumination. At the latitude of Stalingrad there are days in the Summer where night = dusk; no dark. When there is no moon at night...night capability goes away.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm
3) Frankly I've never really understood why I had to select a special supply mode to use road movement...I think road movement (at least in Russia) would typically consume less fuel than cross-country, not more fuel? And why not be able to use road movement for part of my move, then deploy for offense or defense (at some MP cost)? Seems like this happened all the time?

Think of "road movement" as the "strategic movement mode" found in many boardgames; in fact that's what we called it originally. Maybe we should change it back.

Using road movement (strategic movement) you can move a long way if you can avoid contact--else ambush with penalties. But, moving along a road regardless of fuel expenditure is faster than moving cross-country. And...If you do expend fuel points, your movement factor still doubles (if in the correct supply range of your HQ). Which means you can move further cross-country...and even further along a road in Move-to-Defend or Move-to-Attack Mode--but not as far as you could move using Road Mode.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm
4) My main graphical wish would be to give the counters a little "depth" by shading the edges to more closely resemble a cardboard counter; a minor thing perhaps, but IMHO it would really improve the game's look.

Image below shows our current attempt at "cardboard counters".





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bcgames -- 5/23/2020 2:10:10 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 15
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/24/2020 7:08:22 PM   
governato

 

Posts: 883
Joined: 5/6/2011
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline
I know a full game at division level is not in the cards but as the developers like having side projects ...let me tempt you.

1) pushing the game engine boundaries is always good. What if it works really well?
2) there are NO WEGO games at the operational level that I know of, wouldn't you be interested in gaining a beachhead ;) in that niche if you get a positive response? IGOUGO games is a house of cards ready to crumble....


You could probably use some of your East front research to put a two week long, division scale scenario together that includes some of the planned small scale ones. Hopefully with not much work...

3) adding an operational level scenario to the East Front package would help players understand better the scope of the smaller scale scenarios and how they were interconnected, immersion always adds a lot to a game.

Say...I once suggested how one could use 'points' at scenario deployment to make the opponent life more difficult (I take a 10VP points cut but then my opponent gets a third less fuel). A larger scale scenario would help the player understand those events... as in 'I have been tasked to take Vorhonez but then AGS had trouble in taking Sevastopol and my air support had to be delayed'...

just my 2c ;)

< Message edited by governato -- 5/24/2020 7:14:40 PM >

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 16
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/24/2020 8:12:53 PM   
WABAC

 

Posts: 329
Joined: 1/25/2014
Status: offline
Since you asked.

The AI is woefully ignorant. I was beginning to have some doubts after a few games. So I ran Alam Halfa AI vs AI. The Axis ran right around the ridge to take Al Hammam. Then stopped. They could have taken Alexandria and the eastern victory hex had they wanted to.

They could have done almost anything they wanted to because the 8th Army simply didn't respond at all. Units that were unlocked didn't move to respond to the threat in their rear. Units that were locked to start with stayed locked. XXX Corps HQ sat in place and was overrun. OTOH, ME Command advanced towards the action unsupported.

I am left with the impression that I could have pulled the unlocked units entirely off the line without fear of the AI reacting.

And it wasn't a matter of supply that stopped the Axis advance. They had more fuel and ammo at the end of the scenario than they did in the middle. So Allied interdiction wasn't having any effect. Maybe it was a designer's choice. The Allies did not enjoy the overwhelming air superiority they had in the actual event. The German's alone have three wings and five squadrons of Messerschmidts.

As long as I'm here . . . Looking under the hood. There's nothing more to see than a chit management system. I was wondering why XXX Corps couldn't get out of the way of the advancing Axis forces. It has simply been assigned a "move cost" of 6. Most units are assigned an 8 move cost.

This is decidedly not the sort of game that lets you fiddle with the number of motorcycles, jeeps, lorries, and Sten guns on hand. Aircraft and ships are handled in a similar manner. You simply assign numerical values that suit you to the unit you are designing. The only thing that says its a Messerschmidt or an L Class destroyer is the .png you attach.

One odd book-keeping note . . . You can look at your expected reinforcements entering at such and such a square. But you can't actually find the square labeled anywhere, even with a mouse-over.

As far as WEGO? I can't say that it has much influence on my opinion of the game. It feels sort of clunky. Things move a little bit. Then there are big graphics straight out of 60's TV Batman. And then you have to read a sub-screen to see what happened.

I think I'll see if I can get Highway to the Reich up and running for some real-time movement. And I can count the trucks in XXX Corps's TAC HQ to boot.

This is my first negative review on a Matrix game. I have bought some games that didn't suit me. But this is the only one where the price seems out of keeping with the quality of the product.

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 17
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/25/2020 3:18:08 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline
Thanks for giving the game a chance. Thank-you for your feedback. We continue our work to improve the AI and provide new scenarios along the way. Matrix is not responsible for our shortcomings here at BK Games. The artwork is mine and the code-work is Saint Ruth's. We try hard. We support our small community to the best of our ability. That's all we got.

_____________________________


(in reply to WABAC)
Post #: 18
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/25/2020 3:20:01 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: governato

I know a full game at division level is not in the cards but as the developers like having side projects ...let me tempt you...

Somebody's been reading my notes...?


_____________________________


(in reply to governato)
Post #: 19
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/25/2020 3:47:53 AM   
governato

 

Posts: 883
Joined: 5/6/2011
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline
No..but I read minds ;).

I hope you also considering the 'points' feature! It adds re-playability and chrome, especially if choices are left to the opponent...I think modern wargames need to show how difficult it was to make any major choice with the scarce knowledge of the enemy a commander had. To make it clear I am not talking how to min/max an attack ratio or knowing *exactly* how many men I have ..more like `should I attack this week or wait for better weather', 'will I have time to get to my objective before my panzer division gets pulled out'...

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 20
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/25/2020 7:05:37 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: governato

Say...I once suggested how one could use 'points' at scenario deployment to make the opponent life more difficult (I take a 10VP points cut but then my opponent gets a third less fuel). A larger scale scenario would help the player understand those events... as in 'I have been tasked to take Voronezh but then AGS had trouble in taking Sevastopol and my air support had to be delayed'...

So I can understand better what you are suggesting here...can you expand on the idea? A few more illustrative examples? Thx!


_____________________________


(in reply to governato)
Post #: 21
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/25/2020 12:51:15 PM   
Okayrun3254


Posts: 154
Joined: 8/28/2014
Status: offline
The game has two options for counters, either a military graphic, or NATO type. I would really like to see another option for a smaller NATO symbol and military graphic, and maybe more information on the counter with the extra room. Along with the newer cardboard counter look this would go a long way IMO.

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 22
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/25/2020 1:00:17 PM   
Okayrun3254


Posts: 154
Joined: 8/28/2014
Status: offline
I would like to see some improvements in the HQ Hierarchy screen. I noticed that it shows that a unit is destroyed, but I was unable to determine the type of unit destroyed.

It would be incredible to be able to click a Non-HQ unit and get its unit information screen. The would be very helpful as an overall planning tool, especially whey there are multiple divisions in the scenario.

(in reply to Okayrun3254)
Post #: 23
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/25/2020 1:18:46 PM   
Okayrun3254


Posts: 154
Joined: 8/28/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WABAC

Since you asked.

The AI is woefully ignorant. I was beginning to have some doubts after a few games. So I ran Alam Halfa AI vs AI. The Axis ran right around the ridge to take Al Hammam. Then stopped. They could have taken Alexandria and the eastern victory hex had they wanted to.

They could have done almost anything they wanted to because the 8th Army simply didn't respond at all. Units that were unlocked didn't move to respond to the threat in their rear. Units that were locked to start with stayed locked. XXX Corps HQ sat in place and was overrun. OTOH, ME Command advanced towards the action unsupported.

I am left with the impression that I could have pulled the unlocked units entirely off the line without fear of the AI reacting.

And it wasn't a matter of supply that stopped the Axis advance. They had more fuel and ammo at the end of the scenario than they did in the middle. So Allied interdiction wasn't having any effect. Maybe it was a designer's choice. The Allies did not enjoy the overwhelming air superiority they had in the actual event. The German's alone have three wings and five squadrons of Messerschmidts.

As long as I'm here . . . Looking under the hood. There's nothing more to see than a chit management system. I was wondering why XXX Corps couldn't get out of the way of the advancing Axis forces. It has simply been assigned a "move cost" of 6. Most units are assigned an 8 move cost.

This is decidedly not the sort of game that lets you fiddle with the number of motorcycles, jeeps, lorries, and Sten guns on hand. Aircraft and ships are handled in a similar manner. You simply assign numerical values that suit you to the unit you are designing. The only thing that says its a Messerschmidt or an L Class destroyer is the .png you attach.

One odd book-keeping note . . . You can look at your expected reinforcements entering at such and such a square. But you can't actually find the square labeled anywhere, even with a mouse-over.

As far as WEGO? I can't say that it has much influence on my opinion of the game. It feels sort of clunky. Things move a little bit. Then there are big graphics straight out of 60's TV Batman. And then you have to read a sub-screen to see what happened.

I think I'll see if I can get Highway to the Reich up and running for some real-time movement. And I can count the trucks in XXX Corps's TAC HQ to boot.

This is my first negative review on a Matrix game. I have bought some games that didn't suit me. But this is the only one where the price seems out of keeping with the quality of the product.


I have played most of the I go-you go, and real time games, and I have found some really great games in their own right. When I first starting playing WEGO, I found it clunky too. My play has evolved as I have become more experienced with the game system, and the play has become less clunky. I have improved in my abilities to handle a formation of units knowing that enemy units could also be maneuvering in my area of operations. I am finding how the game rewards the player who pays attention to zones of control, and other game features that all integrate when used properly. Its a lot a fun when I can set up a screen and out maneuver a opponent. I keep trying and learning new tactics, and its fun and challenging to me.

I can see how it would be difficult to program an AI for the swirling battles in North Africa. A few months ago I played the Allies against the Germans in Salerno, and I got my rear handed to me. I made some big mistakes, and the AI took advantage, and it was humbling. I played the AI mostly in the beginning to learn the game system, but I found the most fun is playing PBEM against another player. I have never found an AI in any game I have played that is as much fun as playing another player. I also think the AI can be improved in this game.

< Message edited by Okayrun3254 -- 5/25/2020 1:26:51 PM >

(in reply to WABAC)
Post #: 24
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/25/2020 9:03:16 PM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

The game has two options for counters, either a military graphic, or NATO type. I would really like to see another option for a smaller NATO symbol and military graphic, and maybe more information on the counter with the extra room. Along with the newer cardboard counter look this would go a long way IMO.

Interesting. What additional information would you like to see on the counter?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

I would like to see some improvements in the HQ Hierarchy screen. I noticed that it shows that a unit is destroyed, but I was unable to determine the type of unit destroyed.

Good point. Good idea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
It would be incredible to be able to click a Non-HQ unit and get its unit information screen. The would be very helpful as an overall planning tool, especially whey there are multiple divisions in the scenario.

"Unit information screen"...what do you mean? Is it showing the non-HQ unit's HQ and sister units? I'm not following.





_____________________________


(in reply to Okayrun3254)
Post #: 25
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/26/2020 12:21:34 AM   
Okayrun3254


Posts: 154
Joined: 8/28/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bcgames


quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

The game has two options for counters, either a military graphic, or NATO type. I would really like to see another option for a smaller NATO symbol and military graphic, and maybe more information on the counter with the extra room. Along with the newer cardboard counter look this would go a long way IMO.

Interesting. What additional information would you like to see on the counter?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

I would like to see some improvements in the HQ Hierarchy screen. I noticed that it shows that a unit is destroyed, but I was unable to determine the type of unit destroyed.

Good point. Good idea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
It would be incredible to be able to click a Non-HQ unit and get its unit information screen. The would be very helpful as an overall planning tool, especially whey there are multiple divisions in the scenario.

"Unit information screen"...what do you mean? Is it showing the non-HQ unit's HQ and sister units? I'm not following.




I was thinking of the Non-HQ units shown in the HQ Hierarchy screen. When you click on a armored battalion symbol for example, a pop-up of the units information would pop-up like when you right click a unit a unit on the game map. A bigger graphic of the Non-HQ units in the HQ Hierarchy would be helpful too.


< Message edited by Okayrun3254 -- 5/26/2020 12:31:35 AM >

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 26
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/26/2020 4:45:12 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline
OK. I think I understand. Check me. If you have the HQ Hierarchy screen open and you click on a unit icon on the HQ Hierarchy screen--then you will see the unit information pop-up you would normally see if you right clicked on a unit icon while in-game. Correct?

_____________________________


(in reply to Okayrun3254)
Post #: 27
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/26/2020 1:38:12 PM   
Okayrun3254


Posts: 154
Joined: 8/28/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bcgames

OK. I think I understand. Check me. If you have the HQ Hierarchy screen open and you click on a unit icon on the HQ Hierarchy screen--then you will see the unit information pop-up you would normally see if you right clicked on a unit icon while in-game. Correct?


Yes, exactly. It would also be great to see a regular sized icons for each of the Non-HQ units in the HQ Hierarchy screen view.

(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 28
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/26/2020 7:26:26 PM   
Okayrun3254


Posts: 154
Joined: 8/28/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bcgames


quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

The game has two options for counters, either a military graphic, or NATO type. I would really like to see another option for a smaller NATO symbol and military graphic, and maybe more information on the counter with the extra room. Along with the newer cardboard counter look this would go a long way IMO.

Interesting. What additional information would you like to see on the counter?



I would like to see a small nationality symbol, and a number representing the "Quality" of the unit.



(in reply to bcgames)
Post #: 29
RE: "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? - 5/27/2020 2:50:11 AM   
bcgames


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Bramble Rose Farm, KS
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254


quote:

ORIGINAL: bcgames

OK. I think I understand. Check me. If you have the HQ Hierarchy screen open and you click on a unit icon on the HQ Hierarchy screen--then you will see the unit information pop-up you would normally see if you right clicked on a unit icon while in-game. Correct?


Yes, exactly. It would also be great to see a regular sized icons for each of the Non-HQ units in the HQ Hierarchy screen view.


I like this idea. I will add it to the wishlist.

_____________________________


(in reply to Okayrun3254)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Desert War 1940 - 1942 >> "Desert War" Game System: Your Thoughts...? Page: [1] 2   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

0.172