I'm wondering what the devs see as the future of this game.

[Xenomorph]

I haven't had a chance to get too far into the game yet but this game seems so moddable that I'm actually curious as to what the devs see as this game's future. Do you see it as possibility having a sort of parallel role akin to the old wargame construction set? I'm asking bc with my newbie eyes I can see that possibility but before I start modding down that road I want to know what you think. For example, I'm familiar with the Vassalengine and I've always found it curious (and rather ridiculous) that there's so obviously a demand for folks to create their own games on the pc and yet that void has never been filled at all adequately. Just wondering what your thoughts are. Thanks!

[Mad Russian]

The engine needs to be in two versions. Modern and WWII. Once those two versions have been created then the modders can take the game where ever they like.

Good Hunting.

MR

[CapnDarwin]

Xenomorph,

The idea was to be very moddable out of the gate, so in that respect we were looking to be very much a construction kit. As players the only thing you don't have access to is code and a few animation files. You have all the same tools and editors and files we do. We do plan on adding more regions, more decades, and more of basically everything as we go. This will include a continuous evolution of the game engine with new features and refinements to those in the game. Hopefully we will grab a big enough player base to go on for a long time.

[pzgndr]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian
The engine needs to be in two versions. Modern and WWII.

I don't quite understand this, unless the difference is 500m hexes for modern and 250m hexes for WWII? It seems to me that one game engine with 250m hexes and a series of modern vs WWII features that can be toggled on/off in the scenario editor or game menu should work fine. It would be more efficient to develop & maintain one game engine and everything else that goes with it than to try to keep up with parallel efforts. So, what would be significantly different between two versions?

[Mad Russian]

That's the difference. The size of the hexes for the difference in lethality ranges.

Good Hunting.

MR

[pzgndr]

I would happily accept one game engine with 250m hexes.  Modern heavy weapons would have greater ranges, ok, so what?  Give us a bigger map.  But infantry small arms engagement ranges of 250m makes more sense than 500m, and provides more fidelity at that scale.  Just my feedback, as a grunt. [;)]

[CapnDarwin]

At some point our hope is to just have a switch in the game engine so everything toggles between the two ranges. There are of course a number of hex size dependent routines in the code that need addressed for the toggle. Maps pose yet another challenge to have art and layouts for both. As for map size the number of hexes is good for both. A 10 x 7 km footprint would be good for most regiment/brigade sized fights in WW2. Of course bigger maps are possible now and would be later. [;)]

[IronManBeta]

Our choice was to make all of the data and artwork public and modifiable (more or less) but all of the AI and game mechanics set in code and modifiable only indirectly via weighting factors in the data. I expect that will continue as is for a while but as we get time we might loosen up more and more of the mechanics to be indirectly modifiable. The upside is that you can model a variety of new situations. The downside is that you will spend all your time debugging them and trying to figure out why the game is doing what it is. That can be very frustrating! The goal is to expand the scope of the game engine over the years to come and model more and more factors that are relevant to modern combat. We need to do that in an orderly and well thought out way though or it will all turn into a spaghetti of bad data and code that no one will be able to figure out.

I'm really looking forward to future improvements. I wish I didn't have to earn a living with a day job because then it would be sooooo much easier to work on the game!

Our focus currently is on modern combat because that market niche is under-served in the wargame world. We intend to extend it back to 1939 or so and forward to 2010 over time. These would take the form of 'modules' that you would load to tell the game what era and scale you are operating at. Within that context you would then have your various scenarios for different wars. We tried this already and the first attempt was overambitious, but it is something I would like to try again.

We have so many ideas in the queue already that we will be developing this engine for many years to come. This is just the second iteration of it (the first was Flashpoint Germany in 2005) and we hope to have regular annual releases now that have 2 or 3 major new game mechanic improvements each time. We are highly interested in what our users like and want to see more of so keep the comments coming. We pay careful attention to them.

We have been really slow to get the Modding Guides out (they were far more work to create than we expected) but they are coming out now and we hope to see some really good modding of both artwork and data done. (As a developer I need to go back and put more protections in place for out of range values and such to protect the game from wonky inputs and someday I will get to that....) As people make mods and make requests to integrate them better we will get a better sense of just which things to open up and in what order. The trick is to incorporate new material without it blowing up the game mechanics or play balance - in my experience that is easier said than done!

Thanks for your input, Rob

[Jafele]

FCRS is progressing at fast speed, furthermore mods will make additional improvements to the game (specially in graphics). Continouos support and updates from the developers in a long-term will bring an almost perfect wargame. I wouldn´t like to see an outdated FCRS, something quite usual in computer games. I have faith on you guys.[;)]

[Xenomorph]

Thx for the responses! I'm loving the future plans. [&o] One thing I might suggest is the possibility of tweaking the units during game play. I'd need to explain that one. There are a number of company/platoon level games (ie 2-4 km sized games) for which the boards are alive with folks hungering for a larger scale accompaniment. I recognize a number of the user names on this board. It's pretty much not possible currently bc there's no way to incorporate their game's local combat results into a second-party higher level game system. People have mentioned they've done so using the vassalengine but that's really cumbersome at best. I'm betting this would be tricky to create in Flashpoint as well but you'd have a ready-made customer-base if it could be. Be that as it may, thanks again for a great game!

[Mad Russian]

At the pace of current events next stop could be Flashpoint Campaigns: Ukrainian Storm!!

Good Hunting.

MR

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Xenomorph
One thing I might suggest is the possibility of tweaking the units during game play. I'd need to explain that one. There are a number of company/platoon level games (ie 2-4 km sized games) for which the boards are alive with folks hungering for a larger scale accompaniment. I recognize a number of the user names on this board. It's pretty much not possible currently bc there's no way to incorporate their game's local combat results into a second-party higher level game system.

I'll second this, especially for a WWII game.

[Mad Russian]

Wandering around and saw this:

"Love to see a Flashpoint Campaign game on the same subject."

http://kriegsimulation.blogspot.com/201 ... flank.html


I would think this is not an item we would do. In keeping with our first game of the series we are much more time oriented than space oriented.

Which means, we pick a time period and give you all the Order of Battle and TO&E/ORBAT data we can find. That would translate, in this case, to a 1943 Storm! Or something along those lines. With an entire section of the war for that year done. That could mean one game on the Eastern Front for 1943 or it could mean all nations German/Russian/US/UK for that year. It could mean US/USMC/IJA/SNLF/British/Australian for the Pacific for that year. It could mean lots of things but I doubt if it will mean a single operational area for a short time period.


Doing a slice of time fits our game system better than just doing, in this case, a portion of Operation Citadel. If we did 1943 there are numerous operations that could be done and the maps are the only thing needed to connect them all together.

That's what I personally would think. I've been wrong in the past though so who knows.....


Good Hunting.

MR

[MikeGER]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

At the pace of current events next stop could be Flashpoint Campaigns: Ukrainian Storm!!

Good Hunting.

MR

i was writing in another forum just today about the conflict:

...at least i smell a lot of (hopefully more fictitious then reenacting) wargaming scenarios behind the horizon
with a frontline from Odessa along the Dnepr to Zaporizhia and up to Dnepropetrovsk and then leaving the river and stretched up to Kharkov as the final position with scenarios where in the beginning the Ukrainians fighting a delay-action from their Russian border back to that 'natural' phase line and finally interdict amphibious assaults of Russians over the Dnepr ...and very very fictitious- but interesting for a setup- nevertheless: pushing the Russians back with some US and Euro units strewn in to their old border again.

scenarios could be done with:
- (other game)

- and in the close future with Flashpoint Campaigns ?
probably a mod would do the trick with hasty add in of more modern Russian equipment to the list and some new maps created with Dnepr river running through...
This would be the most enjoyable (cause of the good AI, replayability and scale) and also most realistic option to see actually coming to live. ...one single talented moder could do it.

- (other game)

[:)]

[ijozic]

Although I only just got the game so forgive me for commenting on the future of the game already. Don't care about a WWII variant at all because of the limited technology of the time (prefer strategical games for that period), but do love the later Cold War tech levels and alternate history scenarios. I hope one of the future releases could focus on the Middle Eastern theater (not really aiming at historical scenarios here which were often unbalanced one way or another).

[Mad Russian]

ORIGINAL: ijozic
(not really aiming at historical scenarios here which were often unbalanced one way or another).

If a battle isn't unbalanced in some form the attacking forces haven't done their jobs correctly. Any fool can attack with no advantage and get his forces handed back to him in pieces. History is full of examples of those kinds of 'leaders'.

Combat actions with a reasonable chance at success have the scale unbalanced in their favor as much as possible. While I'm not at all a fan of Montgomery's personality his combat record example is a good one. He was described by one German General as, "the British Field Marshal that won every battle he couldn't lose." What that meant was that Monty fought to win. He stacked the odds so much in his favor that he was very much assured that he would win. Couple that with the British infantry shortage in NWE Europe and you get some interesting results.

The point is, that most combat engagements you see put forth in wargames are the exact same way. They are over balanced in the end. What I look for is the tipping point. Where the situation was in question. For that very short amount of time. Or that part of the front where the fighting didn't go as planned and there was a chance it might not succeed.

Those are what make most of the scenarios you have played throughout your wargaming past. Those are the ones that you will continue to see here. Whether they are historically based, all my wargame scenarios in the past have all been historically based but the 12 I sent in for the Fire Team expansion, or they are hypothetical like you get here with FPC.

The scenario designer is who creates that slice of time where the action is in doubt.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Xenomorph]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

At the pace of current events next stop could be Flashpoint Campaigns: Ukrainian Storm!!

Good Hunting.

MR

I have a friend who's family got out of Russia as soon as the gettin' was good after the fall of the wall. She feels those opinion polls showing Putin w a 68% approval rating are bs. Folks there are still afraid of giving the wrong answer to pollsters. Gawd, as a school kid she had to attend parades celebrating politicians she knew her parents despised. Family back there say they still have to do so. I can't imagine the humiliation as a parent.

[Mad Russian]

Our own Charles lived in Russia and has friends in the Ukraine too.

Good Hunting.

MR

[ijozic]

The scenario designer is who creates that slice of time where the action is in doubt.

I see your point, but I was not talking about single scenarios, but entire campaigns.

For example, can you dig out some interesting historical scenarios from e.g. Desert Storm, yes, you can. Can you make an interesting historical campaign? I would say no, not without significant balancing changes.

[Tazak]

No offence to anyone who took part in Desert Storm or later conflicts in that region but the only way to make the conflict interesting in my view is to have the soviets backing up the Iraqis.

Speaking to some old friends of mine, the technology/numbers/intel/quality of troops advantage made it little more than a live firing exercise. One comment was it was like BATUS live firing exercise where the targets shot back now and again (BATUS is the British army training area in Canada where training leads up to a full battlegroup live firing exercises).