Matrix Games Forums

While I found that it worked the other way - German tanks popping in at long range and peppering me, being too far out for effective fire back. But the fact that any hit effects morale means it's pretty much never going to be bad to shoot at something that can hurt you I guess.

I think we'll want to see whether people adapt though before making any quick changes. Especially as I want to add rewind to the MP playback.

Cheers

Pip

The issue is we need to avoid another exploit which is bringing a tank out at max range to draw fire and then charging in once all opportunity fire has been used up. The current balance is pretty good in my opinion after hundreds of test games

ORIGINAL: Pford

A poster in the Wargamer forum brought up a possible issue with the armour depiction. Apparently, the player can advance a tank from a concealed position, unleash a couple of shots on an enemy tank, and retreat back to cover without fear of opportunity fire. He called it the "armoured vehicle shuffle" and finds it gamey. Or is this a misapprehension?

There is opportunity fire. And if you do a shoot and scoot... your accuracy is diminished as opposed to static position. Quite realistic if you ask me.

I will try a few turns on staying static and see if that is the best course of action.

Trey

One thing I'm not too crazy about is the scripting.  Sorry but to me it's a lazy way to program and it restricts things.  I'm a great fan of random scenarios but that isn't possible if each scenario needs to be scripted.  If there are enough fan made scenarios that takes the edge off so it'll be a wait and see.

On a positive note I like beer and pretzel games over grognard ones.

Another couple things I wonder about.  How large can the maps get?  And how far out can you zoom?  I really dislike games that don't allow zooming out to see a bigger picture.  This is why demos are nice.

Without scripting the AI will be predictable, once you work out how it is set up. The missions will all be samey. Scripting allows the designers to make scenarios more varied and interesting and is far more work than a generic AI. We've done both and know what works best in what situations and while the scripting makes it harder for us it makes the scenarios much more interesting.

There is a zoom and an overhead view for the big picture.

Thanks for answering.  So how big can the maps get?  1 mile x 1 mile?  2x2?  5x5?

And how easy is the scripting?  Could I take a map from one of the scenarios, add random forces, and borrow a script from one of the scenarios or modify one to make an unpredictable scenario?  If so, how easy would this be?

[/quote]

And how easy is the scripting? Could I take a map from one of the scenarios, add random forces, and borrow a script from one of the scenarios or modify one to make an unpredictable scenario? If so, how easy would this be?

Suggestion: get someone, one of the beta testers, to post a scenario to get the ball rolling. Perhaps with some design commentary.

The scale is abstracted. 1 tile range is intended to represent 50-100m. 2 tiles about 200m, up to 8 tiles at about 2km. This may sounds strange but it allows us to get the more subtle differentiations at shorter range without having to make ranges so high you cant see what you're shooting at on screen. This makes it very hard to give you a real ground scale. Maps can be 64x64 tiles at present but there is not really a technical reason they can't be bigger as far as I know but we didn't want to make missions like that.

Looks like about 3-4 miles square which is plenty big for this scale imo. 

It would probably help, if a demo is unavailable, to make the manual available, maybe online in a way that can't be copied.  Something like that to get a feel for the game. 

Or maybe a couple dozen more screenies of the maps and units along with some description of how the ui works.  Like moving and firing etc.

And to repeat my previous question.....
How easy is the scripting?  Could I take a map from one of the scenarios, add random forces, and borrow a script from one of the scenarios or modify one to make an unpredictable scenario?  If so, how easy would this be?

Sorry for all the particular questions but this game looks worthwhile enough to ask them.  No gamebreakers for me yet. 

To put it in perspective, I built something similar to what you are talking about (actually a kind of survival scenario with Axis troops spawning in) in about an hour including testing and rebalancing (although I did use an existing MP map - I'm a programmer not a prettifier dammit!). So doing the kind of thing you're talking about it not hard at all.

I'm suprised there aren't any YouTube gameplay vids up yet - maybe people are too busy playing

Cheers

Pip

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine
I'm suprised there aren't any YouTube gameplay vids up yet - maybe people are too busy playing

Because the game makes you unlock the scenarios one by one? This may be inhibiting the MP activity as well.

Deleted - didn't see Phil's reply

ORIGINAL: rich12545

Looks like about 3-4 miles square which is plenty big for this scale imo. 

It would probably help, if a demo is unavailable, to make the manual available, maybe online in a way that can't be copied.  Something like that to get a feel for the game. 

Or maybe a couple dozen more screenies of the maps and units along with some description of how the ui works.  Like moving and firing etc.

And to repeat my previous question.....
How easy is the scripting?  Could I take a map from one of the scenarios, add random forces, and borrow a script from one of the scenarios or modify one to make an unpredictable scenario?  If so, how easy would this be?

Sorry for all the particular questions but this game looks worthwhile enough to ask them.  No gamebreakers for me yet. 

Just to check, you might want to check out the fairly in-depth (with lots of screens) AAR posted on the Slitherine forum if you haven't already.

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18092

Cheers

Pip

Yeah, that was very interesting.  And brings up a couple more questions.

I enjoy playing infantry more than tanks.  It was hard to tell this from the pix.  Is infantry capable of entering buildings?  Going to the second floor?  Can infantry urban warfare be played satisfactorily? 

Infantry can not only enter buildings, they actually are quite dangerous to armour FROM them. Tanks need covering infantry to actually root out enemy troops.

Regarding vertical movement, not sure that can be done, but then I would not be in a position to answer that.

Buildings, fortifications, various forms of prepared positions, rough ground woods. All very infantry friendly. Driving your vehicles around whilly nilly is not wise.

Infantry can be dangerous, but the battles are all about tanks. Last player with tanks should win.

So is it pretty easy to take out the tanks and add infantry in the editor?  Easy to make an all infantry scenario that way?

And is terrain/buildings destructible?

ORIGINAL: vonRocko

Infantry can be dangerous, but the battles are all about tanks. Last player with tanks should win.

Thing is, vehicles can't take objectives they can't drive into.

You might end up with no way to root out a win all because you couldn't claim it.

It just takes one troop with artillery support dropping grief on your armour. And if the armour can't find that troop, it's pretty well outta luck.

You can't win without keeping both alive.

Tanks need covering infantry to actually root out enemy troops.

That isn't quite correct.  You can still kill or cause infantry to surrender with just tanks alone, even if they are in cover terrain.