Erwin Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 (edited) The game itself looks interesting at first. But, why Matrix chose an intellectually challenged adolescent to do a playthru is baffling and discourages one from wanting to actually play it. Eg: He is so ignorant that he thinks that a Chinook is some sort of Attack Aircraft. Also he can't seem to master the controls: Lots of "whoops, I didn't mean to do that..." etc. If this is the current target market for a wargame, we all got problems... Edited March 23, 2017 by Erwin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Erwin said: The game itself looks interesting at first. But, why Matrix chose an intellectually challenged adolescent to do a playthru is baffling and discourages one from wanting to actually play it. Eg: He is so ignorant that he thinks that a Chinook is some sort of Attack Aircraft. Also he can't seem to master the controls: Lots of "whoops, I didn't mean to do that..." etc. If this is the current target market for a wargame, we all got problems... Lol yeah a lot of YouTube reviews I see are done by folks who have no business doing them. If it is at all helpful I see the same thing in woodworking tutorials. ? I saw the announcement for this and first thought was dang this might be useful for a CMSF 2 campaign generator, but it is single player only which severely limits it's usefulness sadly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 23, 2017 Author Share Posted March 23, 2017 Yeah, Matrix needs to think about paying this kid to NOT do reviews. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 I never heard of this game but found Vietnam '65 after following your link. Sounds really cool. So cool I just bought Vietnam '65 on Steam. If it plays as good as it sounds I will probably get Afghanistan '11 also. Thanks @Erwin!!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 I'd treat the historical side of it with some scepticism as well - there are no non-US Coalition Forces and the last time I looked the ground West of Lashkar Gah (where I spent 5 months in 06-07) was not what you would describe as Mountainous which is the impression given in the map in one of the play throughs. However that aside the mechanics seem like a decent attempt to capture the flavour of the conflict and it looks vaguely fun to play but as a basis for scenarios I wouldn't go there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 That's probably all the info I needed right there. Wound up watching 'Restrepo' yesterday.....Not completely sure how I feel about it TBH, but the sheer terrain visible in the film is quite staggering to see at times, also the 'stacked' mountainside villages (I've had a crack at modelling these and it's no mean feat to get 'em looking right). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 23, 2017 Author Share Posted March 23, 2017 5 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said: I never heard of this game but found Vietnam '65 after following your link. Sounds really cool. So cool I just bought Vietnam '65 on Steam. If it plays as good as it sounds I will probably get Afghanistan '11 also. Thanks @Erwin!!!!! Give us a review. If you like it, I may get it too lol. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 24, 2017 Author Share Posted March 24, 2017 (edited) 20 hours ago, Combatintman said: "...as a basis for scenarios I wouldn't go there." We must be looking at design concept completely differently. What I see in the demo is a series of missions that could form a fun CMA campaign. Eg Campaign Objective is to supply outpost, win hearts and minds. Missions: 1) Send out recon and engineers to clear IED's (mines). 2) Send spec ops to remote village(s) to clear out Taliban without destroying valuable buildings 3) Use troops to recapture village that has "gorn over t'other side". 4) Escort medical supply convoy thru valley/gorge of death. 5) Protect medical mission from Taliban assault. etc etc... Again, generic situations are fine. No need to get hung up on historical situations. Edited March 24, 2017 by Erwin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 3 hours ago, Erwin said: We must be looking at design concept completely differently. What I see in the demo is a series of missions that could form a fun CMA campaign. Eg Campaign Objective is to supply outpost, win hearts and minds. Missions: 1) Send out recon and engineers to clear IED's (mines). 2) Send spec ops to remote village(s) to clear out Taliban without destroying valuable buildings 3) Use troops to recapture village that has "gorn over t'other side". 4) Escort medical supply convoy thru valley/gorge of death. 5) Protect medical mission from Taliban assault. etc etc... Again, generic situations are fine. No need to get hung up on historical situations. Except ... 1. CMA does not depict the Coalition forces or Taliban - CMSF is a better fit. 2. Special Forces don't clear remote villages. 3. Regular troops clearing villages was historical fact but I don't need a game to give me that inspiration. 4. Medical supply convoys were not standard missions - I have done three tours of Afghanistan and can't recall any such mission being launched during any of those tours. 5. See above. Importantly - as you have repeatedly said, you are not prepared to design scenarios or campaigns I'm not sure what qualifies you to give design advice to those who do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 24, 2017 Author Share Posted March 24, 2017 "...what qualifies you to give design advice to those who do." Well, maybe 35+ years of being a gamer professionally, reviewing games, managing DoD sim designs, running a game R&D company, and playing for fun. I have made no secret that my philosophy is that "fun" is by far the most important element for an entertainment product and for a game company making such products. However, no one is saying that you shouldn't make scenarios/campaigns designed for your own specific interests. Not sure why others who have different interpretations/offer different opinions of what is "fun" should bug you so much. Live and let live... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 (edited) Playability vs. realism is the oldest trade-off in the history of gaming.....What I most like about the CM family is that they generally hit the sweet-spot for me, detailed & realistic enough to model most engagements with some accuracy and yet still flexible enough to allow me to indulge in daft things like 'The Trumpton Riots' or 'The Battle Of Al Durkali'. But it's got to be said, to fully get to grips with the whole thing you really do need to dive into the editor.....If you think units can do strange stuff when you are controlling them directly, you ain't seen nothing compared to what can happen when they get their orders by proxy! Edited March 24, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 24, 2017 Author Share Posted March 24, 2017 These map/building changes you proposed. Presumably they could change the game significantly. I was just starting set-up. Perhaps you should provide the final, final map at least. This doesn't look like the kind of scenario that one can objectively replay several times. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 (edited) These two shouldn't affect things at all, they're pretty much out of the way.....The buildings in question were the 'State Bank' and a couple of adjacent apartment blocks. The bank layout needed tweaking a bit (the internal windows in that one are intentional - they're for the bank tellers) and the apartment blocks had internal windows where they shouldn't. All fixed now, Other than that as far as I'm aware everything lines up correctly, so there shouldn't be any issues.....If there are, well that's kinda what testing is for. If you really must have the very latest edit I'd be happy to upload it, but as I say this particular glitch shouldn't affect the current scenario whatsoever.....The one where the Mujahideen rob the bank on the other hand..... PS - We're in the wrong thread! Edited March 25, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.