Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: madgamer2
I come from having some 30 years in theater as an actor, technician, singer songwriter, guitar player, in front of the the stage light and from behind them.

Madgamer2

ORIGINAL: madgamer2

Let us just say for a second that you have designed a historical east front game. I maintain that what most players want are some of the great things Gary has come up with and has advanced war game design by leaps and bounds. Is anyone hearing some of the great idea that will make a better game but will cause it to loose a little historical flavor.
What if the shoe was on the other foot and some of the things that happened did not happen? The results of a huge battle for the eastern front could have turned out totally different and if they had would you have designed the game to those "historical outcomes?
One thing about Gary's games that i thought I learned was battles are a crap shoot. All one needs to do is look at the awesome combat model he designed for his American Civil War to see that. Why not allow both players to use those AP points to create a game that may or may not turn out historical.
I see a game here where hind sight is the best friend the Russians have and they can use and build on it. The Germans if they make a serious mistake at the start they are toast. Hind sight for them is knowing the blizzard is coming knowing that no matter what 1,000,000 men are gone. Many of the suggestions by the players are good ones. I think the reason is that they have not lived slept,thought nothing but this game for several years like the testers.
Many will say that i have no right to say what I am in this thread because I have not moved one counter or played the tutorial. I have read every single word on this forum every day from the day it started till today. So what gives me the right to make suggestions? I come from having some 30 years in theater as an actor, technician, singer songwriter, guitar player, in front of the the stage light and from behind them. There is one very noticeable but shuttle thing that can happen. When you spend som much time ,energy,sleepless nights, doubt and a desire to create something that has never been there is a danger of being to close to the thing you are creating. Matrix unlike many game companies that have fallen away at least listens to the players.
I believe like the big guy has said that in 6 months we will have a great game. I see this game being to close to history. I also see for many that is not bad as that is what they want. What I am saying from a distance is go ahead and keep that but put in some more options, add more random factors. If you are the German or the Russian and you did not know if or when or even not at all that a certain even will or will not happen or not in the way it did they, the German, could not say well Here is the first blizzard turn ...Or what if Stalin did not have the Purge or if the invasion started when it was supposed to.

I guess what it comes down to is I find a historical game that has enough hard code to keep it that way no matter what either side does you get the same historical result not that interesting.What would be interesting to me is to do it in a total different way. Whatever is done the game needs to be more of a crap shoot have more unexpected events. Now this is a human to human game. As many have told me You can have a great single player game but once you play human to human its not ever the same and there is no going back. Even if I just play the computer and have a fun game that is all I want and who knows I may even try a PBRM game if I can find some player who is as new and bad as me and I would even let him play the Russians.

There will never be another East Front game like this one because Gary is the best and has been in every other game he designed and I hope he just adds a few little what if touchs and makes some of the changes the players seem to want.


Madgamer2

ORIGINAL: madgamer2

Let us just say for a second that you have designed a historical east front game. I maintain that what most players want are some of the great things Gary has come up with and has advanced war game design by leaps and bounds. Is anyone hearing some of the great idea that will make a better game but will cause it to loose a little historical flavor.
What if the shoe was on the other foot and some of the things that happened did not happen? The results of a huge battle for the eastern front could have turned out totally different and if they had would you have designed the game to those "historical outcomes?
One thing about Gary's games that i thought I learned was battles are a crap shoot. All one needs to do is look at the awesome combat model he designed for his American Civil War to see that. Why not allow both players to use those AP points to create a game that may or may not turn out historical.
I see a game here where hind sight is the best friend the Russians have and they can use and build on it. The Germans if they make a serious mistake at the start they are toast. Hind sight for them is knowing the blizzard is coming knowing that no matter what 1,000,000 men are gone. Many of the suggestions by the players are good ones. I think the reason is that they have not lived slept,thought nothing but this game for several years like the testers.
Many will say that i have no right to say what I am in this thread because I have not moved one counter or played the tutorial. I have read every single word on this forum every day from the day it started till today. So what gives me the right to make suggestions? I come from having some 30 years in theater as an actor, technician, singer songwriter, guitar player, in front of the the stage light and from behind them. There is one very noticeable but shuttle thing that can happen. When you spend som much time ,energy,sleepless nights, doubt and a desire to create something that has never been there is a danger of being to close to the thing you are creating. Matrix unlike many game companies that have fallen away at least listens to the players.
I believe like the big guy has said that in 6 months we will have a great game. I see this game being to close to history. I also see for many that is not bad as that is what they want. What I am saying from a distance is go ahead and keep that but put in some more options, add more random factors. If you are the German or the Russian and you did not know if or when or even not at all that a certain even will or will not happen or not in the way it did they, the German, could not say well Here is the first blizzard turn ...Or what if Stalin did not have the Purge or if the invasion started when it was supposed to.

I guess what it comes down to is I find a historical game that has enough hard code to keep it that way no matter what either side does you get the same historical result not that interesting.What would be interesting to me is to do it in a total different way. Whatever is done the game needs to be more of a crap shoot have more unexpected events. Now this is a human to human game. As many have told me You can have a great single player game but once you play human to human its not ever the same and there is no going back. Even if I just play the computer and have a fun game that is all I want and who knows I may even try a PBRM game if I can find some player who is as new and bad as me and I would even let him play the Russians.

There will never be another East Front game like this one because Gary is the best and has been in every other game he designed and I hope he just adds a few little what if touchs and makes some of the changes the players seem to want.


Madgamer2

ORIGINAL: madgamer2

There will never be another East Front game like this one because Gary is the best and has been in every other game he designed and I hope he just adds a few little what if touchs and makes some of the changes the players seem to want.

Madgamer2

ORIGINAL: JeffK

I'd half agree / half disagree.

This is a game representing the Soviets Great Patriotic War.

Therefore it should represent as close as possible the historical options available to both sides, it isnt "Chess on the Steppes".

However, with the editor, you can provide ahistorical scenarios to suit your own personal wants. It would be interesting to look into what if - The winter was milder or the Wermacht better prepared, if Stalin hadnt murdered or put his commanders into Gulags. What if the Pzkw V was a lemon so the Panzers had to soldier on with the Mk IV or the T34 arrived 12 mths later.

These scenarios are not why I buy the game, but add value in being able to tweak it to suit my version of war in the east. I have also found that despite their best efforts, the devs miss/leave out something I want to add. Its why I whinge on the EDBTR forum about a lack of an editor.

ORIGINAL: miller41

One revision I have always wondered about was if Germany had not had to invade Yugoslavia in April and Barbarossa had started when it was planned to in May. 4 extra weeks would have been a huge advantage and was well within the historical "what if" possibilities. I am hoping that gets made by someone as it would be very interesting to see how it played out.

ORIGINAL: Crimguy

ORIGINAL: madgamer2
I come from having some 30 years in theater as an actor, technician, singer songwriter, guitar player, in front of the the stage light and from behind them.

Madgamer2

My suspicians are confirmed. Ladies and Gentleman, Robert Guillaume IS a wargamer!!

Just kidding of course. [:D] I don't disagree with you in some respects. There should be literally dozens of weather options, including "the mildest Winter the CCCP ever experienced."

ROBERT.....who????? The down side to some of what I said could be an invitation to the total control over everything players bringing up all kins of suggestions for :Whast if" games which would be very bad. I have faith things will work out.

Madgamer2