An open letter

Have a suggestion or some feedback? Dont keep it to yourself - share it!

Moderators: AlexS, Run5 Staff, SSG Staff

Postby Ian » Thu May 22, 2008 11:58 pm

Brubaker wrote:Grognards, who, us?


Checked out the online dictionary and realized I’m one of them. :twisted:

English
Etymology
From French grognard (“old soldier”)
Noun

Singular
grognard

Plural
grognards

grognard (plural grognards)
1. An old soldier.
2. A longtime wargamer, particularly one concerned with game mechanics, historical accuracy and realism. :wink:
User avatar
Ian
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:37 pm
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Postby Gen Alexandra » Fri May 23, 2008 12:05 am

Ian, do not do yourself an injustice, there is demand for Battalion Level Grand Strategy scenarios like yours, especially those of an Eastern Front theme.

I was speaking from a personal perspective when I said that moving all those counters is time consuming, but saying that, I really like to play whole campaigns in other games. For me I like Division Level, but that is my own taste.

The point about scenario designing is whether to make a replication of history or make it what if, I believe with the AO system being incorporated into DotD you the scenario designer no longer have to worry about how us the player wants to play it, as we now get the option to play it historical or what if I was the General in charge.
Image
User avatar
Gen Alexandra
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Silverstone - England

Postby Noakesy » Fri May 23, 2008 1:18 am

Gen Alexandra wrote:Ian, do not do yourself an injustice, there is demand for Battalion Level Grand Strategy scenarios like yours, especially those of an Eastern Front theme.


Absolutely agree with this, it's a great piece of work and I hope to play it one day, just a bit big for me (with three children running around, my pc time is pretty limited to a few evenings a week). That's why I was wondering if it was possible to break your masterpiece into smaller scenarios too, or maybe this is just impractical?
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Noakesy
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:23 pm
Location: UK

Postby sorcerer » Fri May 23, 2008 3:09 am

Can someone from SSG or the testers please inform us all whether the scenarios (not just the main scenario but all the varient vs varient permutations) will be play tested for balance so that both sides realistically win?
Image Image Image Image Image Image
User avatar
sorcerer
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:55 pm

Postby Kingpin » Fri May 23, 2008 3:26 am

Brubaker wrote:Lets face it, if you want to win at these games you move the damn pieces one at a time anyway.


Bang on. You have to move your pieces one at a time. Moving stacks is a huge mistake. SteveL taught me this very clearly about 4 years ago.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Kingpin
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 4:18 am
Location: Waterloo, Canada

Postby Abwehr » Fri May 23, 2008 6:52 am

I try to move stacks only when it doesn't really matter when they arrive at the battlefield (this may sound odd, but some units start basically next to the front, or are not needed at a specific time and would be wasted if committed to get slightly better odds) nowadays. The exception being stacks of non-combatants which I use to beef up the defence of a hex (I can't imagine playing V-L without all those construction and flak units to protect river crossings in a stack with a security unit).

As to the complexity of the editor: do we know what an "armoured" (as in: the classification in the editor) artillery piece means in Battlefront? A few weeks ago, no one seemed to be sure.
Abwehr
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1041
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:23 am
Location: Arnhem, Gelderland province, the Netherlands

Postby Brubaker » Fri May 23, 2008 2:51 pm

I will have to let others answer your question Abwehr as my answer seems crontadictory as I say it to myself :oops:

Ian I too think your senario is genius. I agree absolutely that there is a call for big battleion level games and yours is a pure example of that.

I think when I was talking about scen design I was probably thinking of my Crusader game more than anything else and perhaps the possibility of porting over Gelb one day. What I really meant about design was that I/we had to think outside the square a bit more in terms of making the game more playble. Whether that would be smaller maps or smaller scens, or perhaps just a better use of the Off Map Areas? In Kharkov for example, many of the Korps rebuild OMA's are quite a way in from the edge ( as you would expect). Using this concept, a game like Gelb (for instance) could have each German reinforcement OMA's located (for instance) with one of three at the far right edge in Germany, one near the Meuse and one further west. This way a player can bring his reinforcements in close to the action and not have to worry about moving so far all the time.

This is just an idea of course and there are all sorts of timing things that would need to be implemented but it could be done. Again, placing reinforcement hexes (for me) at board edge is a left over from the DB days.

Another quick example would be the landing of troops at Normandy. Each OMA could have a zone out at sea, one on a beach and one inland. The player would choose which OMA for his troops to arrive at depending on where the frontline is.
User avatar
Brubaker
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 10:57 am

Postby Ian » Fri May 23, 2008 8:45 pm

Gen Alexandra wrote:The point about scenario designing is whether to make a replication of history or make it what if, I believe with the AO system being incorporated into DotD you the scenario designer no longer have to worry about how us the player wants to play it, as we now get the option to play it historical or what if I was the General in charge.


Sorry guys, I think I got a bit off the topic of discussion with my previous post.
But thanks to Gen Alexandra for summing up my thoughts exactly. I too think the AO system is a brilliant idea as you explained it.

Noakesy wrote:That's why I was wondering if it was possible to break your masterpiece into smaller scenarios too, or maybe this is just impractical?


Yes I think this is a great idea, I have been looking into possible smaller versions. Will keep you updated on any progress.

Till later
User avatar
Ian
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:37 pm
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Postby Chris Merchant » Fri May 23, 2008 10:41 pm

I'd add my encouragement here for smaller doses of the meisterwork if possible; I'd suggest there may be quite few out there who would love to have the time available to play the full game but for now would be most appreciative of a smaller dose to start with :)

cheers
User avatar
Chris Merchant
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
 
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 12:28 pm
Location: Adelaide Australia

Postby Robjess » Fri May 23, 2008 10:52 pm

+1 to the smaller ones.. I think the large scenarios are superb.. but sometimes I struggle to find the time to play them.. and unfortunately that keeps me away from them..
User avatar
Robjess
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5126
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 5:33 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby hank » Sat May 24, 2008 6:58 am

I agree with Robjess, its hard to find the time but for the large battles, its simply the nature of the beast.

Ian, I have no problem moving those stacks. Kursk was a huge battle. Prokhorovka by itself is a large battle with lots of units to move but I relish the thought of pushing the SS Pz Div's into the maelstom.

...realistically, if you thing that's a lot of unit to move, try a large PzCampaigns Campaign. Even with multiple unit movement, its mind boggling.

Thanks again Ian. ... heading home tonight to go through some more turns
User avatar
hank
Major
Major
 
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 12:09 pm

Postby Noakesy » Sat May 31, 2008 7:08 pm

Kingpin wrote:Moving stacks is a huge mistake. SteveL taught me this very clearly about 4 years ago.


Doh! So that's where I've been going wrong then :D :lol: I only raised this as it's been mentioned a few times, and in the bigger scenarios it can be a bit tedious moving stacks of units up from the rear individually - it's not a deal breaker for me.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Noakesy
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:23 pm
Location: UK

Any Ideas yet

Postby critter » Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:33 am

Hey Roger and Gregor
Any Ideas yet on the plan for the earlier releases? It seems alott of new guys are getting in useing them.
Are there plans for 1 system or 2? Can the DBWWII system be saved or do you go with a new engine?
Whats up fellas? Whats your thoughts?
Image
critter
Major
Major
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:17 pm
Location: Marine IL.

Postby Roger Keating » Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:12 am

I'm just a programmer .. I don't have any thoughts. Gregor may answer in due course.
User avatar
Roger Keating
SSG
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:32 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

There has never been an info leak at stalage SSG

Postby critter » Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:42 pm

Roger Keating wrote:I'm just a programmer .. I don't have any thoughts. Gregor may answer in due course.


:lol: :lol: :lol: Good one !

So your like Sgt Schultz in Hogan's Hero's? " I see nothing...I know nothing.."
Don't make us get the Gestapo involved...You could be programing on the Russian front....
Image
critter
Major
Major
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:17 pm
Location: Marine IL.

PreviousNext

Return to Feedback/Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron