Great game, but what about the Eastern Front?

[JJKettunen]

ORIGINAL: RedMike

Nah, I like things just the way they are!! This is an elegant, well thought out, excellently coded piece of gaming software.

Regards,
RedMike

I fully agree!

[jungelsj_slith]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna
I would be interested to find out whether others also want to see 3D icons of men and vehicles representing their units. We originally trialled these back when we were developing Red Devils over Arnhem and most feedback was negative. So we dropped the feature in favour of things like better AI. But hey we're open.

Sorry, let me clarify. I definately would not like to see any type of 3d representations of units in this type of game. The couple of games that I've seen using single 3d objects to describe entire battalions and divisions have just come off as cheesy. Icons for units are just fine, and I don't know what specifically could be changed for the actual visual description of units. BiN's use of divisional symbols is a great example of a stylish, useful graphic that gives visual interest to the icons and ties in a very important gameplay aspect for them. Things like that really pull you into the experience. Divisonal integrity isn't important to HTTR so it's not something I would put on the icons. (just an example of what I consider to be "good graphics" in a wargame."

To be honest, the HTTR UI is actually very stylish and elegant - you guys have come up with a good color palette which would be a great base for further visuals. The problem (imho) is that it's just a base and the game comes off as very very minimalistic. Think in terms of a thumbnail image - the type of image that you'd see on the back of the game box. (Ie, any screenshot of HTTR, and size it down.) There's nothing there that would give any clue as to the theme of the game - WWII, airborne, anything. It's certainly pleasing to the eye in terms of layout and color, but all you see is a generic "box game." (as my girlfriend puts it )

More importantly - consider a customer who knows nothing about world war II - how do you expect him to immerse himself in that type of environent? I can, because I'm really into WWII, and I know what a stug is, what a k98 is, what an 88 flak gun does. I can take a look at the unit stats on an icon and imagine in my head what it is. I can be drawn into the experience to a degree, but only because I'm an expert (relative to the average gamer) on the era of warfare. When I first played steel panthers long long ago, I knew nothing about WWII, but the game visually described it enough for me to enjoy the game, and I learned.

Unit portraits, vehicle illustrations, icons instead of text, anything to spice up the game and pull you in. I see in alot of cases that players will add real-life photos into their AARS - those REALLY immerse you into the experience. Why aren't these types of things in the game themselves? If I see a real world map or photo of the scenario area, and then see it in the game, I can imagine actually being there. I can't look at your maps and put myself into the battlefield.

Anyway, I think games like BiN and steel panthers do alot of things right in terms of graphics to pull you in. It doesn't have to be 3d, or flashy, just appropriate. Everytime I see a screenshot or an AAR for BiN I immediately want to load up the game. I wish this were true for HTTR, becauses its so much more of an enjoyable game once you can get into it.

argh. sorry for the length of that

[jungelsj_slith]

ORIGINAL: wodin
Improved sound would be fantastic.

Absolutely. When two battalions of infantry are going at it full bore, and I'm zoomed in right over top of those icons, there should be an absolute cacophony of rifle and MG fire.

My location hovering over the map should partly determine how I hear sounds - if I'm zoomed in over top of one battle, I should hear those sounds fairly loudly, while other battles elsewhere would be far fainter. Vehicle engine sounds would be nice as well (though probably only while zoomed in.)

[jungelsj_slith]

Sorry for another post. I'm bored I just wanted to give some kneejerk feedback to some of the features you listed. (because I know everyone wants to read more rambling!)

Realistic Resupply System - Cool. This is definately something that's missing that makes HTTR battles fundamentally different than their real-life counterparts. HTTR at the moment tends to devolve into a huge mix of units on both sides scattered throughout the map - no front lines. It's hard to get an arnhem bridge scenario done correctly without supply. I was playing a bastogne scenario last night and got excited when I saw an opportunity to cut off a bunch of troops - then realized of course that it wouldn't really matter without supply.

Mixed Mode Movement and Slope Effects - hmm. Can't say that would change the way I played at all. In fact, I probably would never have known about the feature if you hadn't told me.

[*] - Message Log and filters [/i] - What does this entail? I was thinking last night how nice it would be if each unit had it's own message log. Of course you'd only see it if you select the unit. I realized that I spent most of my time memorizing personel numbers before combat and then comparing them after combat to see what had been lost. The message log would read something like this:


[1122] We've begun to reorg.
[1210] We've finished reorg.
[1212] Moving in road column.
[1224] Taking anti-tank fire.
[1226] We've lost 1 sherman tank and 4 personell.
[1229] We've destroyed an enemy tank and an unknown number of enemy personel.

[hank]

The one item I would like to see in COTA is ... in the equipment tab on the side menu; the vehicle silhouettes depict the actual vechicle. Specifically, as it is in HttR, for any type of tank the graphic symbol is a truck ??

It doesn't have to be elaborate just a simple small bitmap icon of a tank. I would be nice if they were distinct enough to tell if the graphic is a SHerman or a Tiger I (but beggars can't be too demanding). OR, another idea is to use the area below the normal data in the menu and when you click on the icon for a piece of equipment a nice color graphic side elevation would be nice ... similar to the graphics you get in the HPS Panzer Campaigns games.

just my $0.02.

hank


... other than that, its a great game.

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy
More importantly - consider a customer who knows nothing about world war II - how do you expect him to immerse himself in that type of environent? I can, because I'm really into WWII, and I know what a stug is, what a k98 is, what an 88 flak gun does. I can take a look at the unit stats on an icon and imagine in my head what it is. I can be drawn into the experience to a degree, but only because I'm an expert (relative to the average gamer) on the era of warfare. When I first played steel panthers long long ago, I knew nothing about WWII, but the game visually described it enough for me to enjoy the game, and I learned.

Unit portraits, vehicle illustrations, icons instead of text, anything to spice up the game and pull you in. I see in alot of cases that players will add real-life photos into their AARS - those REALLY immerse you into the experience. Why aren't these types of things in the game themselves? If I see a real world map or photo of the scenario area, and then see it in the game, I can imagine actually being there. I can't look at your maps and put myself into the battlefield.

Anyway, I think games like BiN and steel panthers do alot of things right in terms of graphics to pull you in. It doesn't have to be 3d, or flashy, just appropriate. Everytime I see a screenshot or an AAR for BiN I immediately want to load up the game. I wish this were true for HTTR, becauses its so much more of an enjoyable game once you can get into it.

argh. sorry for the length of that

OK I understand where your coming from now. We've started somewhat down this track for COTA see the feature list and Sneak Peak in the COTA forum. We certainly will try to do more as we develop the engine. Thanks for your suggestion.

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

ORIGINAL: wodin
Improved sound would be fantastic.

Absolutely. When two battalions of infantry are going at it full bore, and I'm zoomed in right over top of those icons, there should be an absolute cacophony of rifle and MG fire.

My location hovering over the map should partly determine how I hear sounds - if I'm zoomed in over top of one battle, I should hear those sounds fairly loudly, while other battles elsewhere would be far fainter. Vehicle engine sounds would be nice as well (though probably only while zoomed in.)

This is on our wish list but it did not get a guernsey for COTA. We'll see what we can do for BFTB ( Battles from the Bulge ).

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy
Mixed Mode Movement and Slope Effects - hmm. Can't say that would change the way I played at all. In fact, I probably would never have known about the feature if you hadn't told me.

Oh you will notice it alright. The reason it was not noticeable in HTTR is the flat terrain of Holland. Greece and Crete are the other end of the spectrum with very steep terrain, much of it impassable to motorised units. In COTA we use multiple movement maps for the foot and motorised and so you will find that motorised units are severely limited in where they can go.

[*] - Message Log and filters [/i] - What does this entail? I was thinking last night how nice it would be if each unit had it's own message log. Of course you'd only see it if you select the unit. I realized that I spent most of my time memorizing personel numbers before combat and then comparing them after combat to see what had been lost. The message log would read something like this:


[1122] We've begun to reorg.
[1210] We've finished reorg.
[1212] Moving in road column.
[1224] Taking anti-tank fire.
[1226] We've lost 1 sherman tank and 4 personell.
[1229] We've destroyed an enemy tank and an unknown number of enemy personel.

Very similar. I'm waiting on Adam "skirmish Bryant to check in his new code. When he does I'll post a screen shot on the COTA forum.

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: hank

The one item I would like to see in COTA is ... in the equipment tab on the side menu; the vehicle silhouettes depict the actual vechicle. Specifically, as it is in HttR, for any type of tank the graphic symbol is a truck ??

It doesn't have to be elaborate just a simple small bitmap icon of a tank. I would be nice if they were distinct enough to tell if the graphic is a SHerman or a Tiger I (but beggars can't be too demanding).

Adam is also working on this one and I'll post a screen shot when it's done. Because of the tremendous range of vehicles ( especially in COTA ) we've opted for differentiating AFVs into Lt/Med/Hvy.

OR, another idea is to use the area below the normal data in the menu and when you click on the icon for a piece of equipment a nice color graphic side elevation would be nice ... similar to the graphics you get in the HPS Panzer Campaigns games.

In future releases ( ie after COTA ) we'll migrate the Estab data from the ScenMaker into the Game. This will have scope for a picture as well as direct access to all the data of the selected equipment.

[HercMighty]

I am really interested in improvements to the map. I'm sorry but to me this is the one downside of HTTR, especially as you zoom in. Forests and such look like they are cut out and then placed on the map. Now the maps do what they are supposed to do, but I also think a great amount of improvement could be done. Maybe down the road after all the features are into the engine are in 3D maps could be developed. With camera controls you could then tilt, rotate, and zoom your view to get an angle the soldiers see to develop your attacks.

Like I said this is more of a cosmetic complaint, but a lot of people will buy a game if it looks "cool", and with the gameplay of HTTR and the planned features going forward they will not be victims of the gameplay stinks problem.

Regards

[Arjuna]

HercMighty,

Yes a 3D map and fly through would be nice features. However, I think we would always want to have a 2D map as well. Implementing a 3D map would require a complete rewrite of our graphics engine. This would be a BIG job. At least 1 to 2 man-years of work. That's a lot of time and money. The question is are we going to get the return on such an investment. Are we going to generate that many more sales?

[HercMighty]

Good question and one I am not qualified to answer, but it does sound cool.

[hank]

I'm Impressed !!

[&o]

HttR / COTA is the primo continuous action strategy game I've seen. And the improvments to enhance emersion will make it even better. For me, and others I've conversed with over the last year or so agree that a game like HttR or BiN or HPS games need good vehicle and weapons graphics to help the player imagine what's happening on the battle field. I'm sure the database of weapons capabilities has always been there but pictures help us feel like we are really there. [:)]

anxiosly awaiting

Hank

[karto]

ORIGINAL: HercMighty

I am really interested in improvements to the map. I'm sorry but to me this is the one downside of HTTR, especially as you zoom in. Forests and such look like they are cut out and then placed on the map. Now the maps do what they are supposed to do, but I also think a great amount of improvement could be done. Maybe down the road after all the features are into the engine are in 3D maps could be developed. With camera controls you could then tilt, rotate, and zoom your view to get an angle the soldiers see to develop your attacks.

Like I said this is more of a cosmetic complaint, but a lot of people will buy a game if it looks "cool", and with the gameplay of HTTR and the planned features going forward they will not be victims of the gameplay stinks problem.

Regards

The 3D map sounds really cool. It'll be a happy day when wargames have unlimited budgets [;)]

What is more realistic (I guess) and something that could realy drive the mass-appeal of the AA-games is a more visualy refined 2D map.
There are several ways I can see this done (I've been thinkin' about it ya know [:'(] )

• Handpaint them (as is done in Decisive Battles IIRC - and brings very beautifull results). This is probably not very easy, since it requires both lots of time and a talented artist. Probably not the solution for you.
• Make an improved engine that will automagically blend edges of forrests etc. and use some high quality textures. On the other hand that is probably a lot of coding and a lot of computer power "wasted".
• So, my favourite idea this far: Use "real" maps (like authentic topographical military maps [&o]).
  A few examples here (links) that I believe could be wonderfull as maps in future AA games:
  • USSR map, Warzaw area
  • German map (swastikas could easily be edited out to avoid morons getting the wrong ideas)
  • Detail from another german map, Tscherkassy
  Of course it might be a nightmare finding usefull maps (and possibly there are licensing issues as well?). Alternatively the maps could "simply" be made identical to period military maps. This has the added benefit of using a "style" that is simple but visually effective in identifying features important to military operations.
  Although I have very little knowledge of the AA engine, I believe it could be done by having a bottom layer that is the map, and making the terrain features as now except they are transparent (and thus still accesible by the engine)...? If done this way, anything could be the visual map - aerial photos, scans of authentic maps, Joe Gamers 10-minute MS-Paint session etc. The only problem I see, is the potential for differences between the visual map and the actual terrain features - but carefull scenario design + good tools should help avoid that.
  
  Perhaps the concept could even be extended to the UI - something like Imperial Glory did (SS attached) - that was subtle but very cool, and might make for good screenshots in reviews [;)]

Wow... this was quite a first post [:D] - especially considering I don't have HTTR yet(!) - I have spent good time with the Red Devils demo though, and a few sittings with HTTR at a less economically challenged friend.
I think the games are very good already, but I know that more refined/immersive graphics would make it a lot easier to get my friends into the game. I think there is a potential for AA to gain some serious ground among "mainstream gamers", but EA et al have created some very high expectations when it comes to artwork (I know - they can throw big $$'s at it). Trying to outdo them in the "flashy" department is a lost cause, but with a little inovation a small budget might go a long way.

EDIT: HAH... I forgot - Hello to the forum! Looks like a nice place. Hopefully I'll have money for HTTR soon (and hopefully I'll have time to play even though I'll be spending the next 5 months as a trainee at hospital... I guess "playing wargames all night" doesn't count as an excuse if the patients die [:'(]

[Arjuna]

karto,

Hey that must be short for "kartography" - excuse the bad pun.[;)]

Welcome to the forum and thanks for your considered thoughts. You should check out the COTA forum. We have done some work on the map graphics. What we really need to do to accommodate better graphics is to rewrite the graphics engine in DX so that it can take advantage of the graphics card and use proper trancparencies and alpha effects. But that's a big job - probably 1.5 to 2 man years of effort.

[karto]

Thanks for the quick reply... oh and for the bad pun (truth is "karto" is an even worse pun, but in untranslateable danish [:D] - suffice to say it involves cakes).

I've admired the COTA screens, but (as you evidently think yourself) there is room for improvement. I know from other games I've been following that "improved graphics engine + improved artwork = hard work" - and even worse, work not directly related to what the dev. is usually interested in (wargaming).
When/if/... you get to work on the graphics, please do consider using period maps (real or faked). It would add a lot to the athmosphere and immersiveness (as well as being damn cool [8D])

[Arjuna]

Now what's this about cakes? You have me really intrigued now.[;)]