Any Plans To Do This

[canuckgamer]

I posted the following back in May.

After viewing the replay twice to make sure there wasn't some kind of glitch I hit X and the victory screen came up. In my opinion, using graphs for all the results gives it too much of a clinical feel. For example I would rather see the eliminated units shown as the specific number rather than having it charted on a graph. As an option how about a display of the numbers when you move the cursor on the graph?

A general comment after finishing this first PBEM playing. I like WEGO but I think the game is too much of a simulation and not enough game. I think there has to be a balance between the two and currently there is too much of a statistical approach. For example, reducing the strength of an enemy unit by say 34% instead of converting that to the number of men killed and or wounded. I would show the strength of a unit as the number of men, tanks, anti-tank guns etc. and then the casualties and the number remaining rather than percentages. Anyway just my opinion.

Any plans to implement any or part of my suggestion in a future patch? Thanks.

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: canuckgamer
...I would show the strength of a unit as the number of men, tanks, anti-tank guns etc. and then the casualties and the number remaining rather than percentages...

St. Ruth has some ideas on how to implement this for Stalingrad. We'll see.

[Saint Ruth]

I'm having a look at that all right, the total number of casualties (in tanks etc) would be nice to see. It'll be a while though as I'm currently trying to add in campaign games!
/Brian [8D]

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: Saint Ruth
...I'm currently trying to add in campaign games!

This is the GIANT capability. There is no Stalingrad game without it. All else is tweaking the icing on the cake.

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: canuckgamer

...I like WEGO but I think the game is too much of a simulation and not enough game.

Thanks for providing this insight. Our goals have always been about THE GAME and GAME PLAY.

ORIGINAL: canuckgamer
I think there has to be a balance between the two and currently there is too much of a statistical approach. For example, reducing the strength of an enemy unit by say 34% instead of converting that to the number of men killed and or wounded. I would show the strength of a unit as the number of men, tanks, anti-tank guns etc. and then the casualties and the number remaining rather than percentages...

I think we could do both eventually...presenting the counting of heads, and also expressing the counting of heads in a percentage. However, following the game versus simulation idea, I would reduce losses to step losses--4 or 5 steps per unit (25% to 20% per step). Counting the losses of each combat system is and will always be a simulation approach. As such, if you don't have a system-vs-system combat results procedure, you won't have a simulation system. We don't have a system-vs-system combat results procedure in Desert War or Stalingrad. So....

Our games seek to storyboard history; when you play--do you feel like you are immersed in the historical decision-making situation. The statistical capture of that immersed experience we think is educational. Nobody is forced to consider its importance...it's just there if you want to take a look.

The question remains--for those who want data--what do you want to see?

[wodin]

CAsualties shown per man and vehicle etc are pretty important selling points for me. SOunds silly but it really is. Helps loads with immersion.

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: Saint Ruth

I'm having a look at that all right, the total number of casualties (in tanks etc) would be nice to see. It'll be a while though as I'm currently trying to add in campaign games!
/Brian [8D]

[Saint Ruth]

ORIGINAL: wodin

CAsualties shown per man and vehicle etc are pretty important selling points for me. SOunds silly but it really is. Helps loads with immersion.

Yes, I always liked the casualties tables in Panzer Campaigns, especially at the end of a large scenario!