Sammy_Davis_Jnr

Dear oh dear A game that has limited multiplayer options has limited game life. This game has some excellent features but not focusing on an expanded playability for multiplayer is a huge flaw. With games such as Faces of war to compete with on the multiplayer WW2 arena and so many people playing on the net why would you limit MP to 4 people and no co-op, next you will tell me we can only play the Yanks. Lets face it Single player games are great but nothing compares against testing your skills against other people and it usually more fun and challenging. Please some-one tell me this is a cruel joke because the more i hear about this game the more dissappointing im becoming. ----------------- "We're surrounded? Good, now we can kill the bastards in any direction." ~ Colonel Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller; Korean War

Do you expect smoke Do you expect to enter buildings Do you expect realistic chances of capturing and using enemy vechicles Do you expect mortar Geez we cant get that and you want pink mist? Next you will be asking for a game that is realistic Dont get me wrong im still looking forward to the game .. lets see if they include this stuff eventually..or maybe some one can mod it. ------------------------- "It would have been easier to fight alone with inadequate forces than to have to accept...responsibility for our ally's lack of fighting qualities and dubious loyalty." Field Marshal Albert Kesselring - August 1943 (After the German evacuation of Sicily)

Hahahaha Radiomenlets (miniatures) My point was this topic being a wish list... *The idea of Infantry having health bars is ridiculous...ok i dont know if this will (TOW) will, but c'mon the idea of seeing that little green bar going to red until the man dies is laughable. I hope thats not the case for any of the units in this game. Unless your a Fan of codename panzer ..hey lets have tanks with health bars as well. *The idea of a Radioman is a sound suggestion, is anyone here really think they were not essential to a fighting force..c'mon Hofbauer you must be smarter then that. Do you suggest things happened through ESP ------------- "The battle is going very heavily against us. We're being crushed by the enemy weight...We are facing very difficult days, perhaps the most difficult that a man can undergo." Field Marshal Erwin Rommel - 3rd November 1942

WISH LIST Well for me personally i hope 1.The game can beModded.No1. priority) 2. Realisticpenetration stats 3. The idea of Airbourne Unitsis interesting and would be good option. ( for some expertise on the use of Airborne - tactic here is an interesting article) http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/104-13/104-13.HTM 4. Riding on tanks and occupying buildings is a must, cmon guys other games can do it e.g Faces of war and the old SHOWW2 .why cant this game. 5. Multiplayer Campaign option[/b.I know its not gonna happen soon but maybe an expansion back just for multiplayer. 6. I agree that a tank crew capturing an enemy tank should have penalties.attached eg Less acurate, a chance of stalling or even impaired vision, but as for small arms fire i think its reasonable to use enemy pistols or rifles. 7. I would like to see more realistic infantry penetration stats as well. If a soldier gets hit he should out of action.. No Hitpoints. You either stay were you are if you are wounded or you are dead.Maybe introduce a medic to tend to the wounded. If we have a multiplayer campaign this would be an important feature. 8. Radiomenlets bring that into combat plz. It was such a huge factor for artillery, airsrikes and re-inforcements and other combat issues I believe its relevant. Well thats my say for now. Im looking forward gentlemen to seeing you in the field of combat. ----------------- The quality of decision is like the well-timed swoop of a falcon which enables it to strike and destroy its victims. Sun Tzu

The idea of capturing an enemy Vechicle is a sticky subject. It would obviously depend on a few things * What type of vechicle * Who would capture (type of unit) * Would it improve gameplay Firstly What type of vechicle could be captured i.e We could be talking motobikes and cars to a King tiger. Note(im no WW2 historian on tanks) but i wonder if most of hatches locked from the inside? I would say yes. So wouldnt that make it impossible? but on the other hand surely cars, motorbikes and trucks could be captured. They would not be that different or foreign. Second point who could capture? I tend to think most tank crews would struggle with an enemy tank, maybe an option could have been a certain level of experience is needed to achieve that or maybe the ability to operate the vechilce is drastically reduced eg Less acurate, Vechicle could be prone to stalling and vision impaired. Thirdly would it improve gameplay. Well i think if there was some tweaks and i suggest it should be a common sense approach maybe the option to is more realistic on some vechiles and not on others. E.g if for some reason the tank crew bail out of a tank thats in good nick then why couldnt the tank crew of the enemy take the risk. In War there was alot of that. When opportunity knocks open the hatch! ----------- Hold out baits to entice the enemy.Feign disorder and crush him. Sun Tze

I have played Battle ground Europe and yes it does have some good dimensions to it that are great...like the chain of command, but as you say GI Jas 'However, it is a FPS and I'm looking for a TB/RTS with these features' GI JAS Clash of nations i have read and looked at for awhile. The only problem i can say about this game is that its combat system will be based on codename panzer. they mention this: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=11111 "The second part will put players in a 'real-time' control of the battles that arise in the "MANAGER" phase and will be set within a 3D environment. This will be the "RTS" part of the game, closely resembling that used in the highly acclaimed RTS hit title "Codename: Panzers" will allow players a total freedom of actions and interactions" I did not enjoy this game because the tanks had health bars..not what i would call realistic. It just seemed very arcade to me personally. A game that i did enjoy was Soldiers heroes of world war 2 which is also connected with IC. As for the point of layering the game. I think the main point is to have a game were multiplayer can exist like WW2 online but play like Soldiers heroes of WW2. TOW looked very similar to SHOWW2 when i first saw it, then i realised 1C is involved with both. Iam looking forward to TOW but maybe down the track they can look at making these games more then just fighting on the ground (tactical) but bring a true strategic elemment.

I tend to agree with Sgt Kelly on the point of a game that could handle the tactical and the Grand strategic aspects, but i think a more encompassing approach to tactical games such as TOW could be that no more one off battles in multiplayer. Maybe if possible (and games like this usually attract committed players) a multiplayer design that allows players to fight a campaign. I say this because from experience you might play more then a few games, so really you could be playing a campaign. Now i know there are some problems with this i.e * Stable connection * lag... oh the dreaded lagggggggg * Time Some positives * Fighting over a series of maps * supply becomes an issue Ammo and troops Need to control roads etc * Maybe a short diplomacy phase between maps, obvious it would be timed, but allows for the creative players to calculate plans and make the team work together. * Gives the game and multiplayer a whole different dimension Im just throwing ideas out there i think its worth investigating because i think its the future 4 WW2 RTS Imagine playing a game with a dozen others, talking tactics deploying troops formulating plans and committing to achieve a campaign goal over a series of maps. Not just hunt and kill on one map and talking to no-one. ------------- We cannot enter into alliances until we are acquainted with the design of our neighbours Sun Tzu

Im new to this forum so i give my greetings to all. On the subject of soldiers in buildings one would think that TOW will have that available to gamers. I guess we have all had our 2 cents worth so i will add mine. I think structures that can provide cover such as houses either in a rural setting or an urban environment would be occupied at some stage before a battle. I dont think a structure would be a magnet necessarily due to the fact that an armour unit wouldnt just go around blowing things up and giving there position away without knowing were the enemy is, and a smart player is always trying to decieve. I think the major point is we should have a choice. This would add another dimension to tactics used. ------------------------------ All warfare is based on deception Sun Tzu