Matrix Games Forums

AlvaroSousa wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 6:15 pm Pretty soon my game is going to turn into a turned based Hearts of Iron

Do you want me to add a water check in North Africa to see if the Italians have enough water for their pasta?

No but I want tank corps, mechanized corps, rifle corps, and tank armies.

Not many games include sea and air for the Western Allies which was the main GDP and manpower expenditures for most of the war. So air and sea leaders and HQs were important them. WarPlan at least includes these aspects at a higher level than many games.

Landing ships were not fully consumed. Certainly not LCTs, LCI, LSTs etc. The US was building 60000 tons of invasion shipping every month from mid 1943 to Overlord. Bridge building companies in Illinois and Indiana did alot of that.

You could consider packages of add ons to calibrate complexity for different aspects Battle of Britain, Battle of the Atlantic, Invasions, Battle of the Scientists which the bombing campaign especially night bombing and the Battle of the Atlantic had more changes or tech increases than say Pz IV to the Panther versus the T34/76 to T34/85.

any fun to see people's ideas and flattering there is engagement from players.

Packages is a good idea but it is a nightmare from my end. If a bug comes out I need a lot more information. Then balancing will be difficult.

On leaders this is how I view it.....

WW2 is primarily a land game. The 3 attributes, should be 4 really, for generals make each one pretty dynamic on what you are trying to accomplish.

Defend or Bust a fort? High combat and tenacity!
Breakthroughs with complete dominance in land? High mobility, high combat, medium tenacity.
Delaying retreating front line? High combat, low tenacity.
The 4th stat I didn't put in is logistics or supply. Some commanders were better than others. Might do it for WP2.

Admirals there isn't much to this. Combat and aggression. It would be disadvantageous to make the Japanese have 90% low aggression commanders which was the case in history. Basically you would see Tanaka in every battle till he died. So it is kind of a non-decision factor. I could put evading but then it's kind of a moot point as who wouldn't put an evading admiral on a raiding fleet. So unless I come up with some meaningful non-binary stats for admirals..... Currently my stats would be, searching, evading, combat (which encompasses preparation and tactics)

Air Marshalls is even tougher.... maybe training, combat, and logistics (supply).

But then placing these extra commanders would really complicate the game. Every time you move a fleet you need to choose a leader. How will you place air marshals? A an air HQ, land HQ? the Air unit? Gets tough.

all good points, I do like the generals the way they are it is a good system, what if there was a small chance a general could be randomly removed to simulate, fussy high command, like how Hitler or Stalin sacked lots of generals, kinda how they can get killed, but removed would only put them back in the pool. Russian generals might have to kill themselves. lol

Imagine how many players that would piss off. Tracking that information for hundreds of leaders would be a pain in the ass.

I want it all, and I want it now

No there will not be a Freddie Mercury leader.

Will there be an option to play the ETO and PTO seperately? Much like it is now I mean. So basically 3 game modes: ETO/PTO/ETO+PTO

We need chrome! Shiny things! Atmosphere! Make the game less 'dry'.

At the very least open everything up, so that modders can do their stuff. Think in terms of General portraits, battleship pictures when clicking on a unit, pictures that can be associated with hexes, etc. If you don't put in the artwork yourself, that's fine, others will if you just enable the feature.

capital ship silhouettes will be in it.

General portraits I have been thinking about. I might hire out for that.

I even thought about division emblems but that is more than 1,000 pictures and a hell of a lot of work.

As I said, since it is "merely" chrome, just make it possible to insert custom artwork. You can leave it it empty for vanilla. Modding is life.

Who doesn't want "smiling" Albert Kesselring looking back at them?

I have been away from Warplan. What is the status of WarplanII?


RGA

AstroBlues wrote: Fri Dec 16, 2022 5:46 pm I have been away from Warplan. What is the status of WarplanII?


RGA

Currently WP2 engine is being designed and is functional. The 1st game using it will be a fantasy wargame to get out all the kinks. Then WP2.

WP2 is going to be a lot of work considering what I put into it. I wanted to test the engine on a simpler game first. If everything works out right the Fantasy game should be 2023 then WP2 2024 or 2025.

Unacceptable. Work harder.

PanzerMike wrote: Sun Dec 18, 2022 11:01 am Unacceptable. Work harder.

On the contrary, take your time to give us the best experience of WW2.

I wonder about a way to simulate technology transfer between countries. For example, USA helping UK by giving them a technology they have already discovered.

I'm working on that.

Yes indeed, we want it sooner

As mentioned the Allies had a little bit too much leverage with the Amphibious Landings but one could argue the Axis had too much leverage with stockpiling both oil/and special arms for their conquests. So in fairness both sides were equally exploitable if you weren't very proactive and planning ahead, like chess.

I am very curious what the current map looks like and sprites. I do love a good clean and clever interface which all the Warplans have had so far. It's easy on old man eyes. I think that the details in Warplan 1 were so immersive most people never fully used them. I think I recall things like Bombers being fairly useless for the Axis. For the Allies it would depend on a lot factors on whether to bother. As I recall people tend to go with META strategies. So for me for instance Tank Spam and building XP on them was a huge strategy. The mobility made them so powerful as you could push them into the enemy and remove them without losing them. As Infantry would then fill in the defensive holes. As for the Allies, generally they didn't have the Infantry to pull this off as France is a little small in the game. You could ring the Allied Neck if you knew what you were doing and had force ratio.

So really a great Allied Player would use the Western Allies to pull off forces while the Russians built up for the shove and in the end the Allied Production being so high they'd meet in the middle.
Attrition warfare wouldn't of been too popular in history. I wouldn't mind seeing the Allies a bit more upset over battle losses. The USSR was in a do or die survival war. The Western Allies I feel knew they could just sit and let them tear themselves to bits.

Oil being more historically represented as low as you could stockpile would be nice in Warplan 1. Virtually never running out by planning out every movement ahead of time. After 10 or 15 games I would never ever see that tank get low. I knew precisely where and when to use units.

Mechs were not very useful, a little too expensive and tanks hit a lot harder and I think that having too many details that don't impact the META gameplay is going to crowd things. I'd have my entire Kriegsmarine and U-boat Force useful out sinking Allied Shipping in '40-'41 cause I knew later they were just not very useful. Sea Dominance might be nice to stop this as to stop Russians doing gamey things like amphib landings into Germany or the Allies doing it, in The Baltic. The game was quite a masterpiece for a first time and I think still is a cult classic after nearly 3 years when these games are often burnt out. I really would enjoy a successor worthy of it's previous iteration, No Pressure at all.

High praise thank you.

To make WP2 work seamlessly I need to make a simper game first with the engine. WP2 will be more complex under the hood but easier to modify if anything goes wrong. The code is structured far better because now I know what I need to do and I am not walking in blind to a massive project.