Things we want in wargames

[aaatoysandmore]

Insisting a new game look like a full set of ASL or a fully evolved Steel Panthers on launch is inherently stupid.

Your opinion, and don't call me stupid. [:D] Nothing I want more than an actual computer version of Squad Leader or Advance Squad Leader. I see no harm or wrong in wanting that. Don't say it's impossible to make or program because everything is possible given enough time. Even the making of this long overdue game from board to computer.

Playing a game 10-20 years old good to great eh? So that confirms Master of Magic, Master or Orion, X-Com, War of the Lance, Sword of Aragon, Warlords and Civilization are great games? [:D] All my games so I guess I was right.

[aaatoysandmore]

ORIGINAL: wodin

Innovative and new game mechanics. Less of the reskinning the same engine over and over again.

AMEN! to that. (applaud Wodin)

[Perturabo]

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

You know. Production, resources, fighting over production and resources. That kind of stuff.

Perhaps you missed this in my previous statement.

Everything doesn't have to be an empire builder or world war to be played out in a few hours

If you must be precise then take out strategy in RTS and make it simulated RTS.....no matter how you slice it it's still RTS. [:D]

You can't take out strategy and still have RTS. Because RTS is Real Time Strategy.

[aaatoysandmore]

ORIGINAL: Perturabo

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

You know. Production, resources, fighting over production and resources. That kind of stuff.

Perhaps you missed this in my previous statement.

Everything doesn't have to be an empire builder or world war to be played out in a few hours

If you must be precise then take out strategy in RTS and make it simulated RTS.....no matter how you slice it it's still RTS. [:D]

You can't take out strategy and still have RTS. Because RTS is Real Time Strategy.

What authority says? [:D] I've never read that in my life by anyone of AUTHORITY to describe a game. That RTS HAS to mean real time strategy. [:D]

[CapnDarwin]

I have to ask based on Wodin's statement, what is new and innovative mechanics? Let's throw graphics out. It's not a mechanic and you can always make things prettier. What specifically would you guys consider as new or innovative? [8D]

[DanSez]

The Scale of the game -- I don't think is as much the question as sometimes I like to play a squad/small scale tactical games and others times I want to launch a world conquest strategic level mega campaign.

It is more what keeps you playing a game:

1. Easy of use (ability to execute and understand how to do what you want)
User Interface, readability of colors choices --- jeeze some game screens have black over olive green -- pain in the ass. Simple clear information/click/list with a programmable set of F(keys) or customizable drop down list(s) for mouse/pad games.

2. AI assistants to hand off parts of the game (including move/attack/patrol orders) and as I learn more of the game, I can take more control of these sections if I wish.

3. For the games of larger scope, the ability to custom filter and sort game data. The ability to export game data into excel for the hard core grognards who want to plan the full economy and supply and unit composition on games of that scope.

4. Yes, the ability to mod units/setups/leaders/game values of attack/def/supply - and add new maps.

5. If not RTS, then WEGO format where both sides give orders and then the sheep hits the fan. I prefer WEGO over RTS personally, but IGOUG types is more like stand and slugging each other in the face, one turn at a time. NOTE: I really like the "new" sliding time scale approach of FlashPoint's Red Storm which IMHO merges the best of both WEGO and RTS.

[wodin]

I've mentioned a couple of game ideas..one in particular over the years. Can you PM me your email mate.

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin

I have to ask based on Wodin's statement, what is new and innovative mechanics? Let's throw graphics out. It's not a mechanic and you can always make things prettier. What specifically would you guys consider as new or innovative? [8D]

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

Blitzkrieg isn’t really a trait an individual unit should get when you are talking about an operational level wargame. A strategic level wargame makes sense, due to the fact unit scales are so large, but an operational game of division or smaller scale wouldn’t make sense due to the fact units needed help from other unit types to perform a blitzkrieg. After all a blitzkrieg was a combined arms cooperative strategy that saw many different elements of a Corp along with air assets used in the operation.

Unless I have misunderstood meaning of blitzkrieg, there is tactical component that can be part of even tactical scale wargames like in Steel Panthers serie. To my understanding, surprise, speed, shock, and awe are heavily involved with successful blitzkrieg. Accurate and timely use of artillery and dive bombings followed by combined panzer & motorized/mechanized infantry assault are important parts of blitzkrieg in tactical scale. But if we want handwave it away in operational scale wargames, we could just have greater EXP # for counters scenario designer deems qualify for blitzkrieg.

[DSWargamer]

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

Insisting a new game look like a full set of ASL or a fully evolved Steel Panthers on launch is inherently stupid.

Your opinion, and don't call me stupid. [:D] Nothing I want more than an actual computer version of Squad Leader or Advance Squad Leader. I see no harm or wrong in wanting that. Don't say it's impossible to make or program because everything is possible given enough time. Even the making of this long overdue game from board to computer.

Playing a game 10-20 years old good to great eh? So that confirms Master of Magic, Master or Orion, X-Com, War of the Lance, Sword of Aragon, Warlords and Civilization are great games? [:D] All my games so I guess I was right.

Key part you missed, ON LAUNCH.

I think if Gary ever does get to relaunch a defacto reborn Steel Panthers, regardless of what label he pins on it, it will be likely some WILL actually expect him to deliver a game that has as much gear, as many scenarios, as many nations, and as many settings as the current in use version of Steel Panthers World at War 8.4.something and have the Mega Campaigns handy.

That is unrealistic expectations.

As for actual computer ASL, actually it already exists, it uses VASL, runs on your computer and is identical to the board game, because it actually is the board game. Given a choice of learning it, or pretending to like a computer version meant to be played solo against a moronic AI which is the inevitable result, well the former is free, and the latter wouldn't interest me if it was offered for free.

The main reason I have not gotten around to learning the VASL program, is I simply prefer my ASL adversary to be in the room with me.

[aaatoysandmore]

As many times as I've tried I've never gotten VASL to work. I was able to download something Squad Leader and granted I can setup the pieces but nothing else happens. Unlike you I do like my AI's and there are some good/great ones out there whether you want to play them, admit it or not. To me playing against oneself is the most boring way to play of all, but, see I don't condemn you for playing that way.[:)]

[KG Erwin]

As for customizing the OOBs to build your own units/formations, SPWAW provides that with the OOB Editor. This how I constructed my own design for a 1942 era USMC Battalion Landing Team (then called a Combat Team). Now, the weapons are all of the time period (so I DON'T allow for the USMC to have Shermans or M1 Garands yet). (Being involved with some of the OOB teams in the 2003-2006 period gives me an advantage, I might add. [;)] )

I would venture to call SPWAW a hybrid RTS, as it allows for opportunity fire during the opponent's turns. THIS is why having recon units is so important, especially in terrain with limited visibility (such as the jungles of the South Pacific).

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: Matti Kuokkanen
Unless I have misunderstood meaning of blitzkrieg, there is tactical component that can be part of even tactical scale wargames like in Steel Panthers serie. To my understanding, surprise, speed, shock, and awe are heavily involved with successful blitzkrieg. Accurate and timely use of artillery and dive bombings followed by combined panzer & motorized/mechanized infantry assault are important parts of blitzkrieg in tactical scale. But if we want handwave it away in operational scale wargames, we could just have greater EXP # for counters scenario designer deems qualify for blitzkrieg.

Blitzkrieg was far more complex than just the battles that occurred that saw armored units involved in the fighting. There were many different elements involved in the doctrine and simply giving an attack bonus to an armored unit wouldn’t even come close to simulating the complex tactic of blitzkrieg.

Basically armor and infantry supported by massed close air support and artillery punch a narrow hole in the front lines. The infantry then holds the hole open and armored elements push through into the rear fanning out to the sides and penetrating deep into the rear to disrupt communication lines. The armor favored bypassing the enemy whenever possible to keep pushing on, so simulating that kind of tactic by giving a bonus to armor for its attack rolls makes no sense, the armor did not destroy the units and keep going, it bypassed them and later arriving infantry did the lion’s share of the destruction.

You’d be better off giving a large combined arms cooperation bonus to attack rolls that have all elements necessary involved in the attack to help punch the initial hole, then give armor reduced ZOC penalties to simulate the nature of bypassing enemy units in favor of grabbing more ground. Giving them the ability to destroy units they run into behind the lines instead of bypassing them would be a fantasy scenario, it would eliminate the last step of the blitzkrieg that had the infantry come up and reduce the pockets formed by the mechanized units.

Jim

[KG Erwin]

I'll give Matti a bit of a break, as apparently his exposure to some games is limited. In Korsun Pocket/The Ardennes Offensive, tank & mechanized infantry units have enough movement points available to exploit gaps in the enemy's line. This well demonstrates the weakness of blitzkrieg: not having enough mechanized infantry to protect the armored spearheads from being cut off from the following leg infantry. In a game like SPWAW, tanks racing ahead alone are doing so at their own risk. Remember how Rommel lured British tanks into protective screens of ATGs.

[DSWargamer]

"I was able to download something Squad Leader and granted I can setup the pieces but nothing else happens."

That portion sounded vague, not sure I comprehended it accurately.

If you meant, you downloaded VASL, well VASL is just an interface to allow two people playing the board game, to not need to be in the same room. That is all it is meant to do though. It requires both parties actually have the actual game to a point, as the software is a tool it isn't a game per se.

Now if you meant the old program called Squad Leader...... we don't generally speak of that abomination

I think playing anything at all, when no one else in the room is essentially the same as playing alone personally. MMOs for instance, you are not really playing with other people. That's one of the great lies of the modern gaming era. You might hear them on a group audio relay program, you might even have them on some form of video conference, but in the real world, if the person isn't there, you is actually alone

I play games solo for about the same reason I read books (which also work fine solo without an AI ). But not everyone likes books I suppose as well. Especially dry boring books on history.

[aaatoysandmore]

Not everyone likes people either. [:)] Especially dry boring historians on the internet. [:D]

[Twotribes]

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

Not everyone likes people either. [:)] Especially dry boring historians on the internet. [:D]

After your comments in the Civil war thread I suggest you read a little history.

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: DSWargamer
But not everyone likes books I suppose as well. Especially dry boring books on history.

I’m currently reading History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides. Being inside the mind of a man that lived over 2000 years ago and was himself a participant in the war is both entertaining and fascinating, not dry and boring at all. Far more entertaining that a television show in my mind.

The problem is it makes me long for a computer game covering the same subject that I can delve into between reading sessions. But alas, nothing as yet exists in digital form.

Jim

[Rosseau]

Yep, after reading "Landscape Turned Red" and getting SSI's Battle of Antietam, I became addicted. Read then play.

One thing we don't see a lot of is the option for different AI plans, either selectable or random. Devs promise the game "will never play the same way twice." Maybe...

Even if the AI plan is suicidal, it spices things up. More work for devs, I guess. The CMx2 editor has evolved nicely in this direction, but you really have to test, test, test.

[aaatoysandmore]

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

Not everyone likes people either. [:)] Especially dry boring historians on the internet. [:D]

After your comments in the Civil war thread I suggest you read a little history.

Wouldn't do any good. I don't "believe" everything I read like some nuts do.

[Ratzki]

I'd like to see "easy to use" editors in the games. I do not want to battle an afterthought map editor, then scrap with a fussy scenario editor, and finally get slapped around by having to pour over 500 scripts to make a scenario for a game.