Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: bcgames
Having looked at Avalon Hill's/Atomic Games' version of Stalingrad, I'm considering the inclusion of another map scale to get the full 6.Armee experience--Operation Heron (Stalingrad to Astrakhan) in Stalingrad: Nightmare on the Volga. Two scales under consideration are 5K and 10K per hex. Unit scale remains the same--regiments with battalion breakdowns. Time period is the same and the area of operation is expanded to include Astrakhan and part of the Caspian Sea. The Caucasus is out; and so are the units that operated there. The game remains centered on Stalingrad and the units that fought there.

ORIGINAL: bcgames

Chatted with the wife today about the game and its' requirements and decided that I have an alligator's mouth coupled with a hummingbird's ass when it comes to the scope of Stalingrad. It's already a $39 game with four times the size and content of Desert War. But I don't think the players are there anymore for this type of game. I need to dial-back the work required--WAYBACK. Desert War found only a small following; and I think Stalingrad will enjoy the same support from the same folks. But I can't work four times as hard for Stalingrad for the same payback. I do have a farm and family to run. The study of history and its reduction into viable, acceptable, game-able content is a hard, additional duty for my spare time.

So. Stalingrad: Nightmare of the Volga is going to present six campaign games (3 Axis, 3 Soviets). Each campaign game will have 3-5 scenarios that surround a single division or corps-sized unit...that's 18-30 scenarios (Desert War had 12). If Stalingrad is a success then perhaps we will pursue additional scenario disks to expand the content. But...if Stalingrad performs like Desert War, then my hummingbird ass will feel alot like nothing has changed. No problem.

Markets have products, sellers, buyers, and an exchange of value that is satisfactory to both parties.

Onwards!

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

ORIGINAL: bcgames

Chatted with the wife today about the game and its' requirements and decided that I have an alligator's mouth coupled with a hummingbird's ass when it comes to the scope of Stalingrad. It's already a $39 game with four times the size and content of Desert War. But I don't think the players are there anymore for this type of game. I need to dial-back the work required--WAYBACK. Desert War found only a small following; and I think Stalingrad will enjoy the same support from the same folks. But I can't work four times as hard for Stalingrad for the same payback. I do have a farm and family to run. The study of history and its reduction into viable, acceptable, game-able content is a hard, additional duty for my spare time.

So. Stalingrad: Nightmare of the Volga is going to present six campaign games (3 Axis, 3 Soviets). Each campaign game will have 3-5 scenarios that surround a single division or corps-sized unit...that's 18-30 scenarios (Desert War had 12). If Stalingrad is a success then perhaps we will pursue additional scenario disks to expand the content. But...if Stalingrad performs like Desert War, then my hummingbird ass will feel alot like nothing has changed. No problem.

Markets have products, sellers, buyers, and an exchange of value that is satisfactory to both parties.

Onwards!

I have to admit, I was getting ready to comment on the 10K per hex, which sounds fantastic. I appreciate you being so upfront, and keeping us in the loop with developments. I support game systems that I really like, and I think this game system is excellent. When I say I support game systems, I mean I purchase all the games of a system I like even if it is not my favorite historical theatre. I want to support the developers, especially if its a small group. I think if I don't, it is possible that I may not see the game in my favorite historical theatre produced. Thank you for listening to our requests, which can be a rarity, and for a great game system. Just my 2 cents.

ORIGINAL: bcgames

Alrighty then...

At long last I think I have everything together for the first scenario of the Ghost Division Campaign -- 11th Panzer Division's Battles on the Chir River in December 1942. These scenarios will used to test the campaign game engine which is nearing completion.

In retrospect? I should have chosen a campaign with a easier order of battle. The Chir River Battles are the hardest OBs I've ever tackled. I have spent at least $500-750 on resource materials and a hundred hours or so trying to sort things out. After all that, I'm very confident--I'm somewhere in Russia in a ballpark--if they have one. I've squeezed the last juices from Glantz' map book on the topic and I think the buck will stop there.

In building the OBs for this game I was surprised at the number of Guards Mortar (Katyusha) units there were...so...if you missed my favorite rendition of the Katyusha song...here it is again!

Katyusha Dance

Katyusha Rockets

Onwards!

I am very interested in the way the new campaign feature works. Really looking forward to this new way of linking battles. I think you mentioned that losses would go from battle to battle, but there would also be replacement and reinforcements. I think this type of feature could be a big game changer, and raise the player immersion.

ORIGINAL: Saint Ruth

I am very interested in the way the new campaign feature works. Really looking forward to this new way of linking battles. I think you mentioned that losses would go from battle to battle, but there would also be replacement and reinforcements. I think this type of feature could be a big game changer, and raise the player immersion.

It's not finished yet, [8D] but all units in one scenario that are in the next scenario will progress to that scenario, with the same readiness/strenght that they had at the end of the previous scenario PLUS any campaign scenario increases.

Each scenario will then have a Readiness/Strenght increase (can vary for each scenario in the Campaign), so if they are say
50%/30%, then all units that are carried from one scenario to the next will have their end-scenario values increased by 50% for readiness and 30% for strenght (absolute increases, so a unit of say Readiness 10% Strenght 20% will be now 60%/50%).
Destroyed units will also have those increases, and if the unit becomes viable again, it'll appear with the say 50%/30% values as in the example above.

Other units not carried over start with their scenario defined values.

The Scenarios in a campaign may also vary on whether you win / lose a previous scenario...anyway, still making it up as we go along!

[8D]

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
Will there be choices to the player on what type of reinforcements he chooses? I have seen this in other games with campaigns, and the player is given points to purchase reinforcements. Maybe not practical for this scale, I don't know.

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

...Someday, it would be interesting to see a list of your resource materials.

ORIGINAL: bcgames
Blame this new idea on TIK. Thinking--Not deciding. The Germans really don't have a chance in Hell of getting to Astrakhan. Maybe that's why we never see Antwerp as an objective in Battle of the Bulge games.

ORIGINAL: wodin
Not normally one to judge visuals however I found the UI and other aspects unappealing just looked very homemade to me.

Are casualties counted abstractly or can we see how many men killed\wounded AFVs destroyed etc?