TOAW IV features

[sPzAbt653]

I'm trying to understand your point, why do we need 'linked scenarios' when we can have the entire campaign? What's the benefit of taking all the effort to split a campaign up into separate parts? Why not play the campaign scenario itself?

[josant]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I'm trying to understand your point, why do we need 'linked scenarios' when we can have the entire campaign? What's the benefit of taking all the effort to split a campaign up into separate parts? Why not play the campaign scenario itself?

Yes, this is true.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I'm trying to understand your point, why do we need 'linked scenarios' when we can have the entire campaign? What's the benefit of taking all the effort to split a campaign up into separate parts? Why not play the campaign scenario itself?

Perhaps, as in the case of a long campaign, linked scenarios would be shorter than playing out the entire campaign. Many campaigns consist of periods of build up followed by shorter periods of intense activity.

[r6kunz]

Perhaps, as in the case of a long campaign, linked scenarios would be shorter than playing out the entire campaign. Many campaigns consist of periods of build up followed by shorter periods of intense activity.

I quite agree. In the case of Barbarossa, in The Road to Moscow, I used eight "linked" scenarios in 4-8 week periods. These are linked in the sense one starts when the previous one ends. The forces are then reset to their historic strength and locations for the next date, etc... The final scenario is a "What if..." Guderian had the go-ahead to drive straight toward Moscow in mid-August 1941 rather being diverted to the Ukraine. You might be surprized!

Long campaign scenarios, of course, offer the chance of a free reign in the campaign. But try as I might I could never have anything look like the historic front line on, say, mid-October, or jump into Kiev. It is nice have both styles. The beauty of TOAW.

[Meyer1]

Without knowing how radical the changes in the GUI are, one little thing that I, since always forget to check the weather, would find useful is to have the hex's weather situation written in the bottom panel alongside the other information. Right now there's plenty of room available to do it.

[Meyer1]

Will it be any improvements regarding the weather?. It looks like designers have a hard time duplicating historical conditions, for example, the mud periods in Russia.

[secadegas]

Will it be any improvements regarding the weather?. It looks like designers have a hard time duplicating historical conditions, for example, the mud periods in Russia.

This doesn't match reality at all. There a lots of scenarios where winter conditions are perfectly represented. TOAW allows designers to simulate mud or other winter conditions in several different ways. And criative designers do it with excellent results.

Of course everybody has the right to post, suggesting whatever it may but IMHO is much more productive make suggestions after getting a good idea of how TOAW really works.
And if there are doubts please do post because there are a lot of people here more than pleased to help.

[Meyer1]

I didn't say anything about winter.. but, ok, weather modelling is perfect, no need to improve it. Moving on...

[Curtis Lemay]

Actually there is an issue with mud. It dries out independent of temperature. That makes it impossible to make a mud "sea", where every hex is muddy. Hopefully that will be addressed eventually.

[Meyer1]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Actually there is an issue with mud. It dries out independent of temperature. That makes it impossible to make a mud "sea", where every hex is muddy. Hopefully that will be addressed eventually.

Thanks Bob, I just don't like the lame "cease fire" or shock/supply events to replace what weather should do by itself. Nice to hear from someone who really knows how TOAW works

[secadegas]

ORIGINAL: Meyer1

Nice to hear from someone who really knows how TOAW works

Ditto.

[Meyer1]

Inspired from the other thread: I would like a icon or something on the counter showing if the unit is unsupplied, without having to enter in the unit menu.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: Meyer1

Inspired from the other thread: I would like a icon or something on the counter showing if the unit is unsupplied, without having to enter in the unit menu.

It has that. The health spot now goes black when the unit is unsupplied.

[Meyer1]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Meyer1

Inspired from the other thread: I would like a icon or something on the counter showing if the unit is unsupplied, without having to enter in the unit menu.

It has that. The health spot now goes black when the unit is unsupplied.

Cool.

[Rhetor]

Things I would just love to see in TOAW IV:

- railroad gauges (rail damage does not do justice to that)
- single vs double track railroads
- more road types, especially for modern scenarios, to simulate motorway networks.
- fort units or fort equipment (requiring heavy artillery to crack) for WWI scenarios

And, perhaps more difficult options:

- supply causing congestion on roads, thus making it difficult to supply too many units via a single road/railroad/port etc.
- addition of supply dumps or mobile supply trains, acting as intermediate tier between supply sources and combat units (one might think also of a possiblity to capture enemy supplies). In other words - making supply quantified.
- diffrent supply types (adding at least fuel, perhaps forage as well?)

any comments?

[SMK-at-work]

IMO all those are good ideas - it is the implementation of some (esp supply) that is the bother!

[Rhetor]

And one more - an ability to select a specific unit for artillery or aerial bombardment. One might want to use their artillery or aircraft to target eg. only enemy artillery or hqs, not spread the firepower evenly through the whole stack. I am not sure whether it has not been already addressed somehow in the patches.

[Oberst_Klink]

ORIGINAL: HPT KUNZ

Perhaps, as in the case of a long campaign, linked scenarios would be shorter than playing out the entire campaign. Many campaigns consist of periods of build up followed by shorter periods of intense activity.

I quite agree. In the case of Barbarossa, in The Road to Moscow, I used eight "linked" scenarios in 4-8 week periods. These are linked in the sense one starts when the previous one ends. The forces are then reset to their historic strength and locations for the next date, etc... The final scenario is a "What if..." Guderian had the go-ahead to drive straight toward Moscow in mid-August 1941 rather being diverted to the Ukraine. You might be surprized!

Long campaign scenarios, of course, offer the chance of a free reign in the campaign. But try as I might I could never have anything look like the historic front line on, say, mid-October, or jump into Kiev. It is nice have both styles. The beauty of TOAW.

I second Hawkeye's notion. Especially for beginners who're 'scared' of moving and managing more than 200 units splitting up a campaign is IMHO perfect. Even relatively short operations/campaigns, e.g. Kharkov '43 might be more enjoyable if I'd split it up into the Soviet initial offensive and 2nd scenario part dealing with Manstein's backhand blow. I now got a complete map *thanks to Rick* 2.5km hex to start various smaller scenarios relating to ALL 4 battles of Kharkov...

Klink, Oberst

[Crossroads]

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink
I second Hawkeye's notion. Especially for beginners who're 'scared' of moving and managing more than 200 units splitting up a campaign is IMHO perfect. Even relatively short operations/campaigns, e.g. Kharkov '43 might be more enjoyable if I'd split it up into the Soviet initial offensive and 2nd scenario part dealing with Manstein's backhand blow. I now got a complete map *thanks to Rick* 2.5km hex to start various smaller scenarios relating to ALL 4 battles of Kharkov...

Klink, Oberst

Yes please!

The large scenario dilemma is not solely a beginner vs an advanced player thingie. It's also about how much time can you have for gaming.

I mostly shun the large scenarios for the reason I can only get so far, until I need to put it aside, and then after a month or three it is What the heck was I thinking there? moments all over the map.

So the concept of smaller 'linked' campaigns is very appealing to me.

Campaign Series that I am intimately familiar has linked campaigns. But as said you can work around with 'linked campaigns' as a scenario design approach too I think. Something like maybe have Theater Options popping up, asking whether in the previous scenario you got a Loss or a Win, or if Draw or having not played it choosing that Theatre Option instead. Would work I think but then again I have not created any scenarios with TOAW, just played them.

It is all good though. I mean if you guys can throw Linked Campaigns as a game feature in, I am all for it. But no pressure, I am definitively buying this regardless. So when can we preorder? [8D]

[lcesar]

ORIGINAL: Freyr Oakenshield

[&o]

So, that's mean on this new patch, are include the ones of "AAA2Opart 3"?

Cheer's