1940 Scenarios

[Prince of Eckmühl]

One of the criticisms that I've heard voiced in regard to the setting for this new game is that the "Battle of the Bulge" has been gamed to death.

With that in mind, has the developer ever considered the possibility of including some scenarios related to the German advance through the Ardennes in 1940, the breakout at Sedan, and the unsuccessful Allied attempts to contain the breakthrough?

It was those battles/operations that sealed the fate of France. There's certainly no shortage of drama attendant to the terrain and the situation, and it might attract your effort some extra sales from folks who would like to see the OOB expanded to include (more) French and British forces.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Arjuna]

Good suggestion. We would need to do a whole new set of 1940 estabs. The German and Brit ones we could massage from the COTA estabs but the French would have to be done from the ground up. That's a pretty big job when you consider all the new weapon types. We would also have to map the Sedan area of the Ardenne, which we don't cover in BFTB. So all up there is a fair bit of work to be done. But it could be done as an expansion pack.
 
What do others think?

[JeffroK]

Arjuna,

If ideas are being looked for for expansions/new games, I would like to see a movement away from the well trodden battlefields of Europe & Russia. these have been widely covered.

As with COTA I would like to see you move "half a step" away from theses areas into the fringe, Sicily 43, Syria,, Eritrea/Abbysinia (Keren?) and a plethora of possibilities in the Pacific.

[FredSanford3]

Love the idea! Might as well update all the Cota estabs to the BftB format at that point, eh? Will Cota maps load into BftB as is now?

I'd also like to see an expansion pack that covers mid-war Western battles - later N. Africa, Sicily & Italy. Between that and France '40, you'd have the ability to do a large fraction of any non-Eastern Front battle in Europe in WW2. Even if some of the more esoteric units have to be approximated by 'vanilla' near-equivalent units in some cases.

Just a thought- have you ever considered if a subscription-style update arrangement would be feasible? Something like people that buy Bftb could opt to pay some annual fee, and in exchange get periodic updates that include new estabs, oobs, maps, and scenarios. If the revenue stream could justify the resources to dedicate to churning out content, it could provide a way to broaden the appeal of the game engine.

[Txema]

I think it is an excellent idea. I would buy it for sure !!

Txema

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Good suggestion. We would need to do a whole new set of 1940 estabs. The German and Brit ones we could massage from the COTA estabs but the French would have to be done from the ground up. That's a pretty big job when you consider all the new weapon types. We would also have to map the Sedan area of the Ardenne, which we don't cover in BFTB. So all up there is a fair bit of work to be done. But it could be done as an expansion pack.

What do others think?

[barbarossa2]

Haha... yes. Scenarios from '40?  It is tempting.  But I would rather have a whole game called "Blitzkrieg Fall Gelb '40" after BFTB gets some more chrome into the engine (in a way, I am glad Panther used BFTB to get the engine this far, because any '40 game will be that much better now). However, I would be up for some '40 scenarios included with BFTB or in an expansion.  I would be thrilled to be doing anything different than Bulge (but like I said, I am happy to be doing ANYTHING on this game engine).

But as an idea? I like it. And it would be nothing but good. I understand the temptation to do every freaking WWII product with US forces or Russians. I simply don't understand the lack of fascination with the other theatres and conflicts. I would kill for a copy of "Blitzkrieg in the West '40" with this engine!

[dogancan]

An expansion pack, or a totally new game does not matter for me. I will be much more interested for the blitzkrieg of '40 than a bulge game (althought I will anyway buy the BftB [;)]). 

[Neilster]

A 1940 expansion would help to convince me to buy this. I haven't read the manuals as thoroughly as I should but I would have played HTTR and COTA more if I didn't have so much trouble with rogue enemy units behind my lines and, frankly, keeping track of everything.

Am I missing something because one pet peeve is that when I am informed that some unit has arrived, I want to be able to click on the message and have the map centred on said unit? I often struggle to find the 3rd Uxbridge Piano and Flute Players amongst the hundreds of other units already on the map. I'd also like a permanent list of the messages to consult to check I haven't missed any new units. I taught myself to play RDOA from the demo so no doubt I've become lazy about studying the manual. I undertake to give it another go.

In general I'm more interested more of a grand operational scale game with this style of command system such as an "Invasion in the West" as mentioned above. I know Panther is keen to flog as much life out of this engine as possible but imagine the sales of a grand operational version? Poland, Norway, France and the Low Countries, the Balkans, Russia, North Africa, Sicily and Italy, France again, Germany. This will probably require a good naval side of things which opens up the whole Pacific Theatre as well.

I know Panther say that they don't have the resources to do a different scale yet but if you don't find a way, someone else will and steal your thunder.

Cheers, Neilster

[06 Maestro]

The more scenario's, the better. I would be glad to pay a reasonable price for an expansion packet. This "expansion" would be a big one; maps and estabs. It seems reasonable that this would boost sales of BftB-even before the expansion was released.

I played France 1940 with a board game and the TOAW scenario's. It would really be interesting to try it with the RTP engine.

I understand the large scale operational version is a long way's down the road-so I try not to mention it. All I can say is that is would be fantastic. I have to mention one related thought; how about playing a grand operational game and then at will zoom into BftB or CotA mode? Someday Nirvana will be with us.

[barbarossa2]

Nielster,
That WOULD be awesome.  A realistic theater "real time" game. WOW!!!! [X(] I have always wanted one.  Something where you could play through 1 day in about 3 hours. Units would be regimental or so I guess.  That would be incredible.  I would love to have to bring my advance to a halt to retool my tanks. Yes. I am waiting. And waiting. And waiting. I wish Arjuna would come into about 5 million dollars of investment cash to make it happen.
 

[FredSanford3]

With regard to adding estabs via an expansion pack, is there significant coding effort in implementing new estabs, or is the effort mainly in research to determine the appropriate parameters (e.g. gather weapons data, strength and organization, etc.)?

I'm asking for the purpose of seeing if there's a possibility of community-provided research, with the formal scenario people (simovitch, e.g.) as reviewers/editors?

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

With regard to adding estabs via an expansion pack, is there significant coding effort in implementing new estabs, or is the effort mainly in research to determine the appropriate parameters (e.g. gather weapons data, strength and organization, etc.)?

I'm asking for the purpose of seeing if there's a possibility of community-provided research, with the formal scenario people (simovitch, e.g.) as reviewers/editors?

Yes it's mainly research. However, you need to know what you are doing. Specifically, you need to appreciate how the engine works - things like how armour slope and penetration are modelled so you can convert what published data you can find to the format we require for the game. We did a Modern Warfare Demo last year for the Australian Department of Defence and we got one of our Data Design Team members to develop the estabs for it. He was a professional simulation support person at the US Command and General Staff College. So he knew the subject matter well. But even so it soaked up a fair bit of my time liaising with him and then reviewing it to get it to work. Entering the data is easy. Entering the right data is not so easy.

[Deathtreader]

Hi all,

To answer the original question, I'd cheerfully hand over money to get a 1940 expansion pack or even a standalone version of same. Same with an HTTR expansion pack.
I also agree with almost every post above re: gaming other theatres and/or a subscription version and/or going a few levels higher in scope. All really good stuff which I'll happily support to the extent my pocketbook will allow. [:D]
Bring it on!!!!!!!!! [&o]

Rob. [:)]

[Arjuna]

OK I'm interested to know what you would recommend for a subscription service. How would such a service work? What price would you deem reasonable? What would you expect for that? How would you cater for the fact that development can be help up for months due to the nature of original R&D dev work? So meeting fixed release deadlines is not really a workable option.

[Arjuna]

PS.  If anyone has a spare $5m they want to invest, please contact us.

[Deathtreader]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

PS.  If anyone has a spare $5m they want to invest, please contact us.

If I ever have a spare million or so to invest, you WILL be one of the first to know. [8D]

As to details of a subscription service let me think for a little bit. Initially, I'd suggest something along the lines of Strategy & Tactics Press (Strategy & Tactics and World War II Magazines with old-style paper/counter wargames enclosed) as to topics/game engines preferences polling. I also understand that a fixed release schedule in computer development would be difficult to commit to. Perhaps a period of time (e.g. once a year as opposed to every 10th of every other month.).
Like I said I'll mull it over.
Anyone else in support of the idea feel free to jump in!! [:)]

Rob.

[benpark]

I would not buy into a subscription service, but would absolutely buy individual scenarios/estabs.

[FredSanford3]

For the subscription service, I was thinking for say US $15-20/yr, a person could get quarterly (or so) issues of new estabs, maps, OOBs, and scenarios for various campaigns with the intent to 'fill in' the periods of the war that probably aren't in the cards for a stand-alone release (Did someone say East Africa?).

Say one quarter's release would feature the Polish campaign (or maybe just a part of that). It'd have the Polish army estabs and oob's, pertinent German ones, and maybe 4-8 maps and scenarios. Or another could feature the BEF and it's adventures in France. A large campaign would take several 'issues' to cover. Of course, each 'issue' is available for purchase seperately.

These releases would not be intended to improve or modify the gameplay, but simply provide more content. To the extent possible, this content should be transferrable to later versions of the game.

I don't really have a feel for the level of effort and the consequent revenue stream required that would support that level of output. Let's put it another way - say you could have one person full time doing nothing but that. How much content would be reasonable to for that one person to generate continually, and how many units at a specified price would it take to keep that person paid and reasonable productive?

[Llyranor]

If you're going to make content, you might as well charge for it individually as mini-xpacs, or have a few content packs grouped together for bundles. Having a subscription means that people will be EXPECTING content coming out at a regular pace. If this doesn't happen, people will start complaining about it. And if Panther DOES get regular content released, it'd probably still be better to sell things individually, since the person who'd subscribe to such a service is basically voicing that they'd pay for all the content that Panther will release; in which case they'd just buy everything individually anyway.

[Renato]

I too would prefer individual packs to a subscription service.