Guest Lokesa Posted April 14, 1999 Share Posted April 14, 1999 I browsed the FAQ and couldn't find much on how campaigns are handled. Firstly, what happens at the end of a battle in a campaign? Do we get any kind of strategic overview? can we choose which units to pull from the upcomming battle and where to apply reserves? will we have reserves? Also curious as to whether there will be cessations of hostilities of different durations. If so, for what purpose? Will the defender get better positioning or perhaps foxhole type entrenchments as a bonus? Mainly what got me going on this was thinking about how the AI might handle deployment restrictions on battles after the first of a campaign. I would assume physical location of units at end of battle, duration of cessation of hostilities, Goals of the Campaign(Defend or Advance), outcome of previous battle(rout vs standoff), possible terrain hindrance to movement would all have an effect on Deployment options. Is this all handled by the AI? Or could we talk you into letting us have some say in where to deploy within the larger campaign map? BTW Steve, you got a problem with gamestats? huh? you want to take it outside? Almost all the old diehards from CC2 didn't make the conversion to CC3, a few here and there but for the most part I think its been taken over by C&C people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted April 14, 1999 Share Posted April 14, 1999 Yeah, the FAQ was last updated before the campaign structure was designed. It is only now starting to take form in code. So bear in mind that the following comments are subject to change. Think of a typical campaign as being a long, rectangular map, of which you only play on a portion at a time. The area played on depends on how the battle goes. Each time the front line shifts signicantly, the playing area is moved (should be towards the attacker's objective, but it could go the other way). A small campaign map, like a city center, could be the entire playing area for the entire campaign. Troops will generally start out where they last left off. We are probably going to allow a small percentage to be repositioned "inbetween" the battles. Not sure about this, we might allow more. And yes, reinforcements can be assigned to both sides. Defenders can start out in prepared positions for certain types of scenarios/campaigns. This includes foxholes, mines, roadblocks, various pillboxes, etc. As to gamestats, I actually wasn't trying to slam the site itself, rather some of the folks on there who defend the rift between marketing promises and the actual end results. If the game says it is realistic, then it had better be. And if it isn't, the developer had better fix it willingly. And if a player doesn't know or care about the promise being kept, they shouldn't get into the discussion when people take the developer/game to task. Too many people on gamestats don't seem to get this, so they will probably take issue with Fionn's editorial. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rhet Schmidt Posted April 15, 1999 Share Posted April 15, 1999 Man I have been busy, I'm going to try to jump back into these discussions. Steve, I have a few questions/opinions on your reply. I humbly offer the following: "Think of a typical campaign as being a long, rectangular map, of which you only play on a portion at a time." Can it also be a large square map? The reason I ask is that a lot of battles developed in fanning movements and or pincers. The wider the map would allow for better tactical simulations as well (eg. do we bypass the defensive strong point or break through?). Also on this point during an earlier thread it was talked about story boarding the battles of a campaign is this still applicable? By storyboarding I mean the designer programs intelligence into the campaign. The next battle sequence is determined by this intelligence based on the results of the preceeding battles. "Troops will generally start out where they last left off. We are probably going to allow a small percentage to be repositioned "inbetween" the battles." I think redeployment would be very valuable for the campaign system. Consider Aachen or Reichswald, there were numerous attacks and counterattacks. If you were on defense during the previous battle it could take quite a few turns to move your units into a position to effectivly launch a counter attack. Seeing as the troops would reform and/or resupply before countering it just seems logical that we should allow for redeployment in these cases. In a delaying action or a layered defense system I definately agree with you. The redeployment should be limited to only a few units. I would think that both of these could be easily be accomodated in CM by specifing the maximum percentage of available units allowed to re-deploy between the battles (this % would be based on the previous battle results of course). ------------------ Rhet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted April 15, 1999 Share Posted April 15, 1999 Welcome back Rhet! A map can be very wide, be it a scenario or campaign. In fact, it can be wider than it is deep. If you want to make a campaign or scenario with lots of L/R room, no problemo. Your thoughts on the redeployment between battles is very valid. We are trying to figure out good, sound mechanics to allow for maximum flexibility without doing cheap moves (like pulling all of your troops out of the front line without risk of being shot at). Not exactly sure what we are going to do about it, but we know that there is a need to be flexible here. Will let you know when we know Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted April 15, 1999 Share Posted April 15, 1999 wow, I got it, I like it, my perspective was off. Perhaps units could be moved a certain distance from where they were at end of last battle, groups close to enemy units would have their allowance reduced, give option to entrench. What to do about units crossing fire lanes safely, in a city setting perhaps, between battles in a campaign that would not be good. hmmmm, let us know what you come up with. P.S. there were actually voices for organizing a lawsuit against Atomic on the same site, unfortunate what rifts have been caused by the horrible game, what was once a peaceful community, devastated and brought to arms against each other (not to say the thought of sueing Atomic didn't cross my mind for a moment driving in freeway traffic) [This message has been edited by Lokesa (edited 04-15-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts