Next game?

[Ratzki]

Why not just work on a core game system and leave the added units/theaters to Modders and small "official releases". Maybe come up with a graphics standard that would be "portable" so as new PC's came out, all the graphics mods could be transfered to the newer core game. I know that eventually graphics would have to be redone, but at least the Modders could get a little time out of their work before it had to be redone.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: resinslinger
I keep nagging Steve (Mobius) to think about including the AA units. I've been told that they wouldn't be much use vs. ground units (what he called tank meat) and that the current game engine can't handle the high ROFs.

The game system can't handle the high rate of fire directly but as all fire effects in PCO are a result of 3 probability considerations in series one or more of these could be increased to give the effect of more intensive fire.

A 4x 20mm cannon weapon might work. It would have more base accuracy and better penetration as just the most telling hits would be considered. The ammo supply would have to be in terms of a four gun burst. So if it actually had 3200 rounds and used 8-10 per gun per burst then a burst would consume 32-40 rds so the gun would have an ammo loadout of 80-100.

[madorosh]

ORIGINAL: resinslinger

What theater would I like to see the next game cover? Well, for me that would have to be the Western Front from 1940 to 1945. What features would I like to see in such a game? Buildings and structures that take damage that could destroy them and/or set them on fire. Tree bursts. What units or unit capabilities would I like to see? Cullen hedge row cutters on the American tanks, flamethrower equipped tanks, engineer vehicles including the weird ones, more "What If" weapons systems that were in development during the final days of the war. Give the engineer units the ability to blow structures, railroad tracks, and bridges remotely (visions of Remagen in my mind). Ski troops. Offmap naval assets. Working armored trains. Maybe include a few "What If" scenarios/campaigns for 1946/47 including one or two that pit the Allies vs. Soviet Union, especially ones that might have taken place in and around Berlin and Poland. More types of vehicle/tank obstructions. Friendly fire. This is my short-wish list.

If an PCO expansion game/set is being considered, it would be great to see some of the minor nations that fought on the Eastern Front; Romania, Italy, Finnish, to name a few. What about including some of the captured vehicles/tanks (French, Polish) for the Germans and American Lend-Lease vehicles/tanks for the Russians?

I keep nagging Steve (Mobius) to think about including the AA units. I've been told that they wouldn't be much use vs. ground units (what he called tank meat) and that the current game engine can't handle the high ROFs. If the new game engine could include a way to take on enemy ground-attack aircraft and increase the ROF, then there would be a use for these very important weapon systems. However, if it isn't possilbe to include these units because the game engine won't support the capabilities of these units, then I completely understand and agree with Steve (Mobius).

Okay, I've rambled on long enough. Chris.

I think what games like CM and PCO need to do is concentrate on building up capabailities in core sets first. Concentrate on key areas one at a time. PCO has a good start on armour modelling, for example. I've yet to see a game of this type do well at infantry engineer tasks - i.e. how infantry and pioneers negotiated things like barbed wire obstacles, road blocks, minefields, anti-tank ditches, booby-trapped buildings, fortified buildings (including cellars and rooftops), etc. To do this well would I think would take a great deal of time. It also wouldn't result in any great spectacular in-game effects - nothing flashy - which may be a point against it. But at some point, someone needs to get it right. Not just the obstacles, but the ways in which infantry and vehicles interacted with and overcame them, including the specialized armour that was eventually developed.

Far better to get these common elements in the game than the esoteric stuff like naval artillery or armored trains that really wasn't used at the tactical level during a running battle. Work on the stuff in distinct sets and the releases are coherent and achievable.

I would see examples of these distinct groups as:

Common engineering tasks, as described above
Improved vehicle capabilities - convoy movement, improved commands
Advanced infantry capabilities - scaling/rapelling, specialized demolition, parachute landing
Amphibious warfare - assault boats, landing craft, specialized German bunker types as in Normandy (H677, Tobruks, etc.)

[LoneWulf63]

Michael. I do get carried away at times with what I'd like to see in this game or that. However, you are right about infantry and engineer unit capabilities. All of these games (no matter who published the game) could give these important units more capabilities. I have also been tinkering around with Battlefront's demo of the new Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy game. In that game the infantry units equipped with satchel charges can set those charges and blow holes in obstacles, buildings, and hedgerows. It is pretty cool if you can pull it off without getting your unit slaughtered in the process. As soon as I can afford to do so (being a player of CM for many years) I do play to add CMBN to my gaming library.

Besides not including AA units, I also noticed that there were no cavalry units in PCO. Almost ever WWII tactical level game I have ever played, conventional board or computer, has included these units. Again, I was told that simulating these units would be very hard to do. I don't understand the reasoning, but they seem to work quite well in the other computer games I've played, including Matrix's SPWaW and SPWaW is the same scale. Yes I know SPWaW is probably a different game engine, but I'd really like to see some horse mounted units (not dead ones). They might wind up as dog-food but it would be interesting to see them in action.

So Matrix games, please listen to your playing public. We know that you work very hard to do as much as you can with a simulation such as PCO or any future games. However, many of us are Old Guard wargamers (including this old fart) and we miss these units when we play the games. I think that a new forum area for PCO should be added. Call it, THE WISH LIST. That way we, the players, could let Matrix know what we would like to see.

Nuff said. Chris.[8D]

[sztartur2]

ORIGINAL: Jacko

ORIGINAL: Commanderski

There are hundreds of battles and scenario's on the Easterrn Front that could keep us busy for years to come. I would like to see more improvemnents with this game on the Eastern Front before moving to any other theater.

Amen to that.

+1

And focus on infantry model improvement, fix the exit issue.