Minefields, logistics and scenarios

[Jeff_Ahl]

Looks like a great game in many regards when watching Youtube-clips of it - especially that it is a nice smoth WEGO(!) game. I can not understand that there is so few WEGO-games out there. Much more realistic and fun. Any how, two question before considering buying this:

1. Minefields - do not really understand if one can place this in some scenarios or not. Or is it placed with out possibility to change it? Artillery can do "distance layed minefield" (do not know the correct english term) if I understood it right, but nothing about ordinary manually layed minefields. And is there any possibility to lay out "overrun protection minefields" (do not know the english term or if US/UK armies us this kind of tactics - but smaller minefields layed out fast by a platoon for example)?

2. Logistics, seems to be abstracted but is there any plans to implement logistical sub units to get the hardship of logistics?

3. Is there only scenarios or is there some thing like in Combat Mission where you can "buy" units to a specific map to get some re-playability and FOW?

[CapnDarwin]

Jeff, let me take a shot at these items.

1. Large minefield and defensive obstacles are all placed by the scenario designer and are considered to have been done just prior to the scenario start. Right now, the only player-added field would come from artillery units with FASCAM mission capability.

2. Abstracted. There are no plans right now to explore it further, except on the Pro side if requested in the future.

3. All scenarios can be played from both sides, and each side has 3 or more battle plans that change the dynamics of the mission start for the AI. The AI dynamics make it replayable even with the same plan as events on the battlefield can drive changes in the AIs planning as the battle rages on.

I hope that helps.

[SgtZdog]

A technical point: You only really have simultaneous turns like WEGO on the initial setup. After that it's closer to an initiative style tbs, as you'll basically never have OODA loops that matchup again.

1) I don't think we have engineer placed minefields? Engineers can remove minefields, but in the time scale of a scenario, I don't believe engineer placed minefields makes much sense. Obviously scenarios can utilize minefields and the scenario editor will let you place minefields. And we do have artillery launched minelets like FASCAM, mostly on the NATO side of things (mostly USA). But that is largely all that we use. (Things like claymores are used like a regular weapon system in the abstraction of the game and not a mine as they don't cover the scale of a hex.)

2) Not at this time, though we are working on a tactical transport model (inorganic transport) for things like trucks or Ospreys carrying infantry or VDV transported by helo.

3) There are currently 4 campaigns as well, but no customizable forces after picking your scenario. However, there's nothing saying you can't use the scenario editor to change an existing scenario (or campaign) or create your own with different units.

[Jeff_Ahl]

Jeff, let me take a shot at these items.

1. Large minefield and defensive obstacles are all placed by the scenario designer and are considered to have been done just prior to the scenario start. Right now, the only player-added field would come from artillery units with FASCAM mission capability.

I hope that helps.

That helps, but I really hope that mine fields can be determined by the defender in the beginning of the scenario, that is more realistic. You can manipulate it I guess with the game editor, but it is of course a bit more time consuming!

FASCAM - that is the english term - thanks for learning that! Really good that u have added that capability.

[Jeff_Ahl]

A technical point: You only really have simultaneous turns like WEGO on the initial setup. After that it's closer to an initiative style tbs, as you'll basically never have OODA loops that matchup again.

1) I don't think we have engineer placed minefields? Engineers can remove minefields, but in the time scale of a scenario, I don't believe engineer placed minefields makes much sense. Obviously scenarios can utilize minefields and the scenario editor will let you place minefields. And we do have artillery launched minelets like FASCAM, mostly on the NATO side of things (mostly USA). But that is largely all that we use. (Things like claymores are used like a regular weapon system in the abstraction of the game and not a mine as they don't cover the scale of a hex.)

2) Not at this time, though we are working on a tactical transport model (inorganic transport) for things like trucks or Ospreys carrying infantry or VDV transported by helo.

3) There are currently 4 campaigns as well, but no customizable forces after picking your scenario. However, there's nothing saying you can't use the scenario editor to change an existing scenario (or campaign) or create your own with different units.

Yeah, that is actually even better than WEGO I would say. Really nice tweak!

1. You are right, large planned minefields can not be layed in the span of the game time. I guess "overrun protection mine fields" (small hastely laid mine fields) are abstracted in that regard and NATO-troops maybe do not have anti-tank mines at platoon levels as we have in Sweden but claymores instead.

Regarding the mine fields I think that it would be great if they could be moved in the scanrio start. But I as I said earlier in the thread, it can be manipulated by the defender using game editor and setting it up in existing scenarios. Just a bit time consuming, but a work around!

2. That is a shame but I know logistics might freighten away some players I guess, I do like extreme realism and getting logistics to work in battle would be a great thing, but I guess it is to much for the mayority of players!

3. Yeah, the game editor would be the work around and one can of course talk with the opponent before MP and determine what each units are "worth" and then change the OOB in regards to that and I guess that would demand to much programming to add such feature!

Really nice looking game though. Will buy it and thanks for fast and devoloped answers to both of you.

[SgtZdog]

If you look in the subunit inspector or scenario editor, there are already points allotted to the different platforms. So in a sense that part is already done. But there is a lot of UI and map design work involved in making that kind of custom force scenario.

[pullg]

...logistics might freighten away some players I guess, I do like extreme realism and getting logistics to work in battle would be a great thing, but I guess it is to much for the mayority of players!

Even in its abstract form, logistics has a significant effect on play, especially when it comes to fire support. Just wait until your helo gunships, having expended their ordinance in frenzy on personnel carriers and trucks, return to the FARP to reload just as a T-72 battalion breaks cover. And I find I have to actively manage my artillery to prevent batteries from running out of ammunition all at the same time.