Prepare yourself for a wargaming tour-de-force! Conquest of the Aegean is the next generation of the award-winning and revolutionary Airborne Assault series and it takes brigade to corps-level warfare to a whole new level. Realism and accuracy are the watchwords as this pausable continuous time design allows you to command at any echelon, with smart AI subordinates and an incredibly challenging AI.
How about Counter-battery artillery fire as a possible Order/Task?
Also, is aerial recon considered in spotting (still thinking along the conter-battery lines)?
If you leave your artilery under AI fire control Counter Battery becomes one of it's highest priorities. AI controlled artillery seems to prioritize artillery/guns, HQs and bases. I almost never take fire control of artillery. The degree of micromanagement necessary to keep all tubes firing efficiently detracts too much from keeping up with everything else, especially in very large scenarios.
Here are two things which I think would enormously improve the system.
1. To market primarily the engine rather than the setting. Whatever scenarios could be bundled with the engine, but if you could buy the scenarios as add on mods for the latest engine, I for one would be playing HTTR as well as CotA and the Bulge scenarios. If you look at many of the most long lived game systems, in one way or another they use this. Three examples-
ASL (and its Platoon Leader and ATS spawn) has a rulebook which is continually updated but the scenarios are never obsolete, you just play them with the updated rules.
The Close Combat series went through five engine improvements. The historical contexts of three out of four editions were unofficially adapted for the fifth, on top of all the other mods and tweeks. It's dying now because the newest 6th engine is too closely identified with a contemporary war which inspires almost universal loathing, while the demands of modders for ever increasing historical accuracy reveals the inadequacy of the fifth engine.
IL-2 Sturmovik has been continually updated and there are an untold number of add ons, free and for purchase, to extend the range of theatres and times you can play. Only after many years does is the original engine due for a complete overhaul with a Battle of Britain game.
2. The ability to deploy your forces as you see fit, if within certain parameters, would greatly increase the longevity of the scenarios. They would become less predictable. This could be defender first, simultaneous setup or whatever. For paradrops it would be good to allocate forces to drop zones and then let the engine determine, based on historical conditions, whether they actually land there, and if not, where.
“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.”
-Leon Trotsky
Re Updated Scenario Packs. First off, it takes considerable resources to update a previous scenario set to work with an updated engine. Adding new features often requires additional data to be added or modified and can also affect play balance. Mods to the Estabs can require significant testing and tweaking. Eg. The new resupply system added to COTA required the creation of new supply units, SEPs and off-map supply schedules. All airborne bases needed to be overhauled to provide them with sufficient transport capacity, even if that meant man-packs. So updating the HTTR scenarios was never going to be a quick or cheap option.
However, I do agree that the concept is a good one and we'll look into it, seriously. No promisses, but it is something we have been giving thought to.
Re. Pre-start free deployment. Another good idea but one that requires a significant investment of development time, especially into the user interface. This would require the creation and implementation of a special "setup" phase at the start of a game. It would also require the UI functionality to drag forces, presumably within some constrained deployment zone(s). The ScenMaker would need to be modified so that the deployment zones could be created and that units placed on the map have a tag that links them to a particular zone. Similarly reinforcements would need to be linked in the SM and then a UI ability to drag them from the Reinforcement tab to the respective zone on the map. The UI would need to be modified so that it could prevent the dragging of forces into a prohibited zone.
Moreover, the AI would need some smarts so that an AI controlled side could deploy its forces amongst the respective zones. This would entail adding some form of priority value to each zone within the ScenMaker. We may need several such values if we want to differentiate between armour, arty and infantry for instance. We may want to add a min and max value for each too.
Sure it's do-able. But it is a BIG job. As to where it stacks in the overall wish list I'm not so sure. I for one would rather see other features added first. But then I'm willing to be influenced by a groundswell of user opinion. So I'd appreciate some feedback from others.
Sure it's do-able. But it is a BIG job. As to where it stacks in the overall wish list I'm not so sure. I for one would rather see other features added first. But then I'm willing to be influenced by a groundswell of user opinion. So I'd appreciate some feedback from others.
My 'groundswell of user opinion' vote goes for mount/dismount capability. Sorry to beat that drum again, but I really think it'd be the #1 improvement to a great engine. It seems to me that that would dovetail with the comments about routing units and abandoning their equipment as well - if the game can handle mounting/dismounting, it doesn't seem like that much of a stretch to provide means for abandoning guns/vehicles.
...and a campaign game, or at least a way to save/export the end state of units in a scenario, and import said unit states to a subsequent scenario.
Well, shoot, that's two votes. Chicago-style voting, I reckon. [;)]
_______________________
I'll think about putting something here one of these days...
I agree to disagree with Franklin...
The #1 improvement to this game would be a campaign mode, the mount/dismount capability would come a welcomed 2nd [;)]
I understand all of the problems and reasons why a campaign mode is currently not an option. If you had a bigger dev team and more time it would be the feature that would make this games replayability endless.
"In times of peace, a good general is preparing for war" - Gaius Julius Ceasar
There you go. A compromise. We want it all, and we want it now. [:D]
Fine! Glad to oblige. Please forward the cash advance to our bank account by cob and I'll get onto it right away. And if you are wondering how big a cash advance, then think BIG like the features you want. [;)]
If i won the lottery, i donate some to you and SSG so you can make even better wargames! Nice gesture eh? Well, i just need to win the lottery now [:D] Anyone wanna buy me a ticket?
"In times of peace, a good general is preparing for war" - Gaius Julius Ceasar
OK I had to google "Kurt Schilling" to realise it was another baseball reference. [:)] I was worried for a minute that he might be a stalker or something worse! [;)]
I would love to see a more detailed AAR broken down by unit losses and damage inflicted by a particular unit. I know I can scroll over the units at the end of the battle but I want to see a more direct comparison of the units starting strength and what they finished the scenario at. I want to know which of my units distinguished themselves
Anyways, great game. I just picked it up a few days ago and I am thoroughly enjoying it
JFalk68,
Welcome.
Yes your not the first to request that. It's already in our Task Tracker database. I'm not sure if we'll get to it for BFTB, but I'll bump it up the priority ladder.
TT1766 - UI - AAR - add unit performance detail to AAR
Yes your not the first to request that. It's already in our Task Tracker database. I'm not sure if we'll get to it for BFTB, but I'll bump it up the priority ladder.
TT1766 - UI - AAR - add unit performance detail to AAR
No it's not going to make it for BFTB. I'm desperately trying to wrap things up. So nothing new is going to get in at this stage. We'll be reviewing the wish list after BFTB and so we'll review this item then.
No it's not going to make it for BFTB. I'm desperately trying to wrap things up. So nothing new is going to get in at this stage. We'll be reviewing the wish list after BFTB and so we'll review this item then.
Understood. [:)]
Someday, I'd like to see it incorporated into an AA game so that I can evaluate what happened and how effective my strategies were, apart from "winning."
The games based on the Sid Meier's Gettysburg engine had end-of-game screens that detailed how many casualties individual units inflicted.
Those post game analysis of the results were an important part of the whole experience.
I've been searching the forum and trying to find an answer about dismounting motorized infantry. I see that it was suggested as an improvement, but was unable to ascertain whether it will be added in a later patch or the next game. Is there any update on this?
