going operational

[kafka]

Sorry to say this, but I'm disappointed. Another via matrix publishing developer who has decided to move from strategy to purely operational. After the great disappointment with the new war in the east by 2by3 which has crippled the strategy layer by removing all production, WCS abandonning the great strategic-tactical 2 layers model in favour of a series of a purely operational wargames, now VR Designs which seems to follow the same path. Maybe that's how the business model has to be because of god market allegedly requiring it, I don't know, but I'm getting the impression that's just about producing the greatest possible amount of products from one engine requiring the game design to be reduced to just the operational layer - anyway from my view, sorry I'm not one of those willing to take on it.

[Erik Rutins]

Hi Kafka,

I'm not sure how you've decided all this, but it's simply not the case. Each of the developers you mention made their own decisions.

War in the East will not disappoint you, I guarantee. I'm a huge fan of Gary's previous Eastern Front games and this is without a doubt the best yet, based on my experience with the beta.

Creating a new Civil War battle game based on the original tactical engine for Forge of Freedom has been a long-term wish list item for WCS fans as well as the development team. They are working on multiple projects at the same time and have in no way abandoned the idea of the strategic/tactical combined game simply because they branched out from it.

This game and the others all represent huge investments of development time and resources and none of them are being done "on the cheap". Each of them involves either a complete overhaul of a previous engine with development time equivalent to a ground up new release, or a completely new engine unique to the game.

I'm sorry you see all this as negative, but I had to chime in as from where I'm sitting you are barking up the wrong trees. Personally, I see three new high quality wargames coming here and I'm excited and hopeful that wargamers will get a lot of enjoyment from them.

I believe this (Decisive Campaigns: The Blitzkrieg from Warsaw to Paris) is going to be a very well received new series on WWII with detailed operational battles and a strategic decision layer. Many wargamers considered Advanced Tactics to have the potential to be the best operational WWII wargame around and I think this release will make a compelling case for that.

I believe War in the East will be the best Eastern Front wargame ever made for the computer. I believe Brother against Brother will be the best tactical ACW game ever made for the computer. This is all my opinion from where I am sitting, having played and tested the beta versions. I hope that after these releases the community will agree with me, but as it stands I'm pretty darned excited about these upcoming releases. Each of these games is being made by excellent design and development teams who had the freedom to make their own decisions on how best to achieve their vision.

Regards,

- Erik

[kafka]

Erik,

thanks for your reply. I didn't want to put the value of those upcoming games in question. I'm sure they will provide high quality in regard to what they are designed to be. I explicitly referred to the design decision to make them operational only, what may be valid from your btw the developers' point of view. On other side, from my point of view, it's a disappointment, for none of those games is going to include the strategic layer (i.e. production, research and so on) I was hoping for and what I have enjoyed from their previous games.

[TPM]

ORIGINAL: kafka

Erik,

thanks for your reply. I didn't want to put the value of those upcoming games in question. I'm sure they will provide high quality in regard to what they are designed to be. I explicitly referred to the design decision to make them operational only, what may be valid from your btw the developers' point of view. On other side, from my point of view, it's a disappointment, for none of those games is going to include the strategic layer (i.e. production, research and so on) I was hoping for and what I have enjoyed from their previous games.

I tend to agree with the OP...this game looks awesome, and I am a HUGE fan of Advanced Tactics (going back to when it was a free game called People's Tactics), but I'm dissapointed that there won't be any production, etc. I keep waiting for that game that combines the simple elegance of Advanced Tactics with the scope of Hearts of Iron...I think what I want is a "better" Commander-Europe at War or Time of Wrath...anyway, looking forward to this game, but dissapointed that there is no strategic focus.

[Erik Rutins]

Guys,

There is a strategic layer in this game - it's similar to the action cards in AT but more historical. Among the things you can do with your PPs is choose among strategic options that affect how the operational battle is setup and unfolds and what the victory conditions are, gain intelligence on enemy strategic actions and things like weather and outright "purchase" additional reinforcements.

Also, this is not the sequel to AT, but it will feel very familiar to AT fans and I think you guys will enjoy it. AT2 is a separate future release.

Regards,

- Erik

[Widell]

Seems like we're back to the preference discussion, and we all know there's no right answer to it [;)]. Maybe this discussion should be had in the General forum? It is an interesting one as all developers make their calls during the design process, and it could be interesting for them to hear the arguments for and against the different alternatives.

On the other hand, as Bartheart answered me in another thread in this forum: This is not AT2, so it's probably not 100% fair to compare with AT either?

[TPM]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Guys,

There is a strategic layer in this game - it's similar to the action cards in AT but more historical. Among the things you can do with your PPs is choose among strategic options that affect how the operational battle is setup and unfolds and what the victory conditions are, gain intelligence on enemy strategic actions and things like weather and outright "purchase" additional reinforcements.

Also, this is not the sequel to AT, but it will feel very familiar to AT fans and I think you guys will enjoy it. AT2 is a separate future release.

Regards,

- Erik

Thanks for the info Erik. Kind of sounds like we're/I'm complaining, which I guess we are, but all that aside, I am HUGE fan Victor's work and I'll most likely buy this game...provided it's not $80 or whatever. Thanks again.

[TPM]

ORIGINAL: Widell

Seems like we're back to the preference discussion, and we all know there's no right answer to it [;)]. Maybe this discussion should be had in the General forum? It is an interesting one as all developers make their calls during the design process, and it could be interesting for them to hear the arguments for and against the different alternatives.

On the other hand, as Bartheart answered me in another thread in this forum: This is not AT2, so it's probably not 100% fair to compare with AT either?

Agreed.

[berto]

I applaud this game's operational focus. My regret is more YAGET (Yet Another Game on the European Theater). Why no truly operational WWII Pacific games? (Going beyond the obvious choices of Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima to include, for example, standalone games on: Bougainville; Rendova/New Georgia; Solomons Campaign (in general); Papua/New Guinea; Malaysia/Singapore; Burma; Philippines 41-42; Philippines 44-45; and others.)

[AZKGungHo]

Yeah Baby!!!  This is great and I'm very excited!  AT was fun, but so nonhistorical in many ways.  This sounds great - and if it works well we could have an entire series of games getting better all the time covering the who ETO - and then there's always the Pacific!!

Can't way for this - you guys at Matrix are preparing so many great games that I may have to get a second job to pay for all this!! [&o]

[sullafelix]

To me this game could branch out to be the Europa of computer games.

This is one of those few " just one more turn " games.

It is not about the entire situation in 39 or 40 but the separate scenarios that played out then.

This game is also very historical,

[scout1]

ORIGINAL: berto

I applaud this game's operational focus. My regret is more YAGET (Yet Another Game on the European Theater). Why no truly operational WWII Pacific games? (Going beyond the obvious choices of Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima to include, for example, standalone games on: Bougainville; Rendova/New Georgia; Solomons Campaign (in general); Papua/New Guinea; Malaysia/Singapore; Burma; Philippines 41-42; Philippines 44-45; and others.)

Not ditzing the Pacific theatre for operational games, but weren't most of the contests you listed basically slugfests ? Lack maneuver. WOuld be like WWI, western front later in the war ....

[berto]

ORIGINAL: scout1
Not ditzing the Pacific theatre for operational games, but weren't most of the contests you listed basically slugfests ? Lack maneuver. WOuld be like WWI, western front later in the war ....

Nope.

It just goes to show how little is remembered about these "forgotten" conflicts. [:(]

[JameyCribbs]

I'm actually very happy that this game does not include production. Production was actually the part of AT that I enjoyed the least. Too much micro-management. I want to be the general and move my troops around and fight battles, not a rear-area administrator.

I realize that a lot of players feel the opposite, I just wanted to reply to the OP so that Vic knows that some of us are happy that he did not include production in his latest game.

[Vasquez]

Iam also disappointed about the lack of production. I thought the sequel of AT would be a kinda "Axis High Command Game". Seems we have to wait "a bit" more But Ill buy this one anyway.

[Josh]

ORIGINAL: Vasquez

Iam also disappointed about the lack of production. I thought the sequel of AT would be a kinda "Axis High Command Game". Seems we have to wait "a bit" more But Ill buy this one anyway.

It's not the sequel to AT, we will have to wait for that one just a little bit longer.

[Widell]

LOL - I think Matrix and Vic will have to make an official stickied statement soon - "This is not AT2" - It was definitely not clear to me when I first read the announcement on the Matrix home page.....

[Sheytan]

WHA! This isnt the case with TBWTP, the real operational constraint is supply allocation in repect to the HQ chain. Yes formations and the "weight" of each formation married to a HQ has a effect but this IS NOT a operational game. You will have to decide which regiments to allocated to the attack and which to withhold for the breakthrough. This is not Battles of the Bulge, and that is not to denigrate that title. It is the old style SPI style boardgame in spirit with some nice bells and whistles thrown in. The game will really shine when you have AARs running about a multi sided match.

ORIGINAL: kafka

Sorry to say this, but I'm disappointed. Another via matrix publishing developer who has decided to move from strategy to purely operational. After the great disappointment with the new war in the east by 2by3 which has crippled the strategy layer by removing all production, WCS abandonning the great strategic-tactical 2 layers model in favour of a series of a purely operational wargames, now VR Designs which seems to follow the same path. Maybe that's how the business model has to be because of god market allegedly requiring it, I don't know, but I'm getting the impression that's just about producing the greatest possible amount of products from one engine requiring the game design to be reduced to just the operational layer - anyway from my view, sorry I'm not one of those willing to take on it.

[Hexagon]

I prefer tactical/operational games over grand strategy games but i am a little bored of WWII, maybe this serie could cover other wars like Spanish civil war or travel to the Pacific, yes, is WWII but is different [:'(]

[Widell]

Hexagon - I think you should check out AT first if you are looking for that flexibility and the range of scenarios. When you have done that, start waiting for AT2 with (hopefully) many of the features from this series.

You won't be disappointed with AT, and if you manage to convince guys like Grymme and the other scenario makers, they'll throw out almost anything you can imagine with good quality in all aspects! Waiting for anything beyond WWII here will be a very long wait I'm afraid