SeaMonkey Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 How about a multi-dimensional approach as you (JJ) suggested before. Each dimension would represent different areas of warfare/economics/politics. USA E.coast - Eur-Asia to the urals(1rst)SC1, 2nd, Pacific(USA W.coast to E.coast Asia), A northern rest of the world (scandanavia-murmansk)3rd, A southern zone Australia - Africa(4th). Of course there would be a transition-overlap zone for movement from one to the other. Tech, politics, economics would all be interactive but warfare separate. Ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1b Posted January 10, 2003 Author Share Posted January 10, 2003 Multi dimensional? do you mean as in differing map scales? ie current scale for Europe, but a greatly enlargened scale for Pacific and abstracted scales for some of the worlds dead spots (no tactical merit to map out in detail). If that is what you mean, I think it has merit enough to ponder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Hartke Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 I think that a supply map version of the normal map would be a great feature. Those familiar with the Sim City series of games know that there are different versions of the map such as underground map, electricity, water supply, population, etc. Here a couple examples... Normal Version Underground Version Something like that with varying shades of orange or some other color. That way, it would be a lot easier to check supply. Logan Hartke [ January 10, 2003, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: Logan Hartke ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DutchStorm Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 I do not like an only Pacific SC, and another Only Europe is so double, Just go global with SC 2! I would also have an option in it where you can decide with you opponent, weather you play allies/axis with total control, or just one plays England, the other Germany, with the other allies/axis controlled by computer, or maybe another player if possible. Further more it should not be able to teletransport your units from the Urals to the French coach in one turn. That should be limited to a maximum distance per turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 SeaMonkey Glad you revived those ideas. They were kicked around in the North Atlantic and North American Forums and possibly in some other areas a few months back. Immer also posted thoughts along those lines along with Zeres, yourself and the usual suspects. Then the inevitable cries of micromanagement began and those threads sank and settled without producing any lasting results despite being brought back up front a few times with some new ideas [most recently by Genghis ]. Naturally I'm all for that concept and also for going global. To me the big problems in the game now is the way the Atlantic is represented and the lack of weather. If the game goes global it would be good if those weaknesses were corrected first. Why repeat old shortcomings on a larger scale? Scale itself becomes an issue. It would be good to play on a map that includes places like Madagascar and Ceylon, Iceland, Greenland and the Canary Islands in it's overall strategy, but if it means the smallest units would be Fleets and Army Groups, -- Which was how we got started on that multi-dimensional concept. Large areas zooming into smaller within the same hex or area. Armies telescoping into smaller organizations and at sea Fleets into individual ships or small groups of ships. Two, possibly three levels. As you said last time, there has to be a control or it becomes a cartoon of a front detailing down to some guy using the latrine! I think three levels would be good, but essentially the whole thing becomes a different game. If it doesn't go that route I think it would have to use a global map that scrolls with uniform scale hexes and no stacking, literally SC but on a world wide playing scale. I think before we speculate further we should know which of those two main concepts would be followed: screens or global scrolling. I'd enjoy either method if it were done properly. It seems these things pass a certain complexity threshold and suddenly a good game tries to do too much and becomes worthless. A few speculative guidlines would go a long way toward producing better SC2 ideas. Logan Thanks for putting up those screen shots. That's exactly the concept we were talking about. [ January 24, 2003, 08:26 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1b Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 If I had to choose SC Global no major revisions, just a few cosmetic changes, I suppose I would be on board for that too. I hate the no stacking thing, but its a minor irk after a certain point. I would want the whole globe done atlas correct if possible ie the world is round, if I want to use long range bombers and flatten NY I should have a chance to. If I want to launch missiles over the pole, it should be an option. I once thought the Falklands was cool due to it being so far from anything. Then the Argentinians corrected me on that one. Learned a bit of history during that event, and realised it is not just a dumb place to raise sheep. I can see it being a big undertaking to represent the world's military globally, but the board game Axis and Allies managed it, surely to heavens it should not be to difficult for the supposedly superior computer environment. I most definitely DO NOT want it to become some stupid game like Hearts of Iron though. 5 nations in Axis and Allies is just fine. I don't need more than 5 in a global SC. SC was probably not Hubert's first game (I really don't know to be honest, was it?). I hope it is not his last. I think SC2 could just as well be done nicely as SC round 2. Maybe SC Korea 1950 could be a nice idea for SC2 Maybe SC Middle East. These are just ideas here eh. I am going on the assumption the game's basic engine could be adapted for this. I like SC mainly because it is grand strategy first. I am unwilling to say there are currently any grand strategy computer wargames out there worth buying other than SC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Had forgotten about this thread, but yes Sarge sort of. See I'm not really sure specifically how to handle SC global scale. The many talented people on this forum can and will come up with workable solutions. Its just a matter of HC to direct us. We are all devoted to making SC the strategic game of our dreams, isn't that how it starts. We will playtest/discuss the hell out of any version HC presents us with until it fits the bill. It won't be the dream fulfilled for everyone, but it will be damn close. As far as multi-dimensional, think about the geometric configuration of a hex, isn't it just concentric arrangement of hexes, 1 big hex = 7 or 19 or 37... smaller hexes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1b Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 Well in a perfect world I can zoom in from normal SC view so that I can identify who is running that Corps, or further zoom in and find out if it was wise to put that dude in charge of that division, move down and then see if it was practical to site the anti tanks defenses that way, a bit more and find out who is charge of battery A and then lastly see if Pvt Hicks is reading a Dear John letter. But keeping track of all that detail sure would be interesting. In the end, while I might like to game out some battles in greater detail, it is often best to play an operational wargame for that thrill, rather than try to get one game to do it all. The units might be a bit brutal in the standardization, but it never hurt the play value of A3R that The Germans for instance had either 3-3 infantry or 4-6 Armour units almost exclusively. The 12th SS Panzer division in my The Longest Day game has 21 unit counters I think if I recall correctly. But it worked in that game at that scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Actually I was thinking more on the lines of; say you have a large hex designated "The Marshalls", which is garrisoned by Japanese icon and you are approaching this archipelago with a transported corps stacked with a carrier group(SC1)intent to occupy, you could 1. simply attack and let the computer equate the results or 2. go to the battle map which may have 37 hexes with the island group layout and combat units previously organized as the initial task force broken down into their individual units and fight the battle operationally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HolzemFrumFloppen Posted January 25, 2003 Share Posted January 25, 2003 Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1b: I most definitely DO NOT want it to become some stupid game like Hearts of Iron though. Still watching you like a hawk, Les... I take it you've purchased the game, then, and played it through? Good to hear! Oh, wait.... or are you still sitting on the sidelines? Patch 1.03 was released today (1/23/03) for HOI; just for sh*ts and giggles, lemme tell you that it's really rockin' now. The guys (there's only two of them, actually) at Paradox have been as attentive to fixes as Hubert was for SC. Trust me, you really oughta check it out. Really... do check that last link out. Very truly yours, Holzem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1b Posted January 25, 2003 Author Share Posted January 25, 2003 Even if HoI "did" run without any hassle fuss bugs etc. Its a Grand Strategy RTS, which in my opinion was never a bright idea in the first place. If someone offered me the game for free, odds are I wouldn't have the heart to pass it on to some poor schmuck, I would likely just throw it out. I acquired Close Combat 2 recently. Now that is about the extent of the scale that non turn based should go. On the matter of the Marshalls example, yes that would be a nice way to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HolzemFrumFloppen Posted January 25, 2003 Share Posted January 25, 2003 Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1b: I acquired Close Combat 2 recently. Now that is about the extent of the scale that non turn based should go.Man, I loved that game back-in-the-day. I'm dying to get my hands on CC2; where in heaven's name did you find it???? I still have CC3 (Russian Front) as well as CC4 (Bulge), but for the life of me, I can't find where to buy #2! Lemme know! Holzem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve C Posted January 25, 2003 Share Posted January 25, 2003 Originally posted by HolzemFrumFloppen: [ Patch 1.03 was released today (1/23/03) for HOI; just for sh*ts and giggles, lemme tell you that it's really rockin' now. The guys (there's only two of them, actually) at Paradox have been as attentive to fixes as Hubert was for SC. Trust me, you really oughta check it out. Really... do check that last link out. Very truly yours, Holzem [/QB]Nice link, Holzem. I enjoyed the vibrant account of the Soviet disaster. LOL, those communiques are priceless, especially liked the one about executing the scapegoat Facist "saboteur". Goes to show that there may be more enjoyment to be had with HoI than I thought. I certainly prefer the SC approach with the details largely hidden under thc covers letting you concentrate on the great ebb and flow of battle. Versus HoI: having to arrange convoys, micro-managing economic priorities in your provinces,futzing with that dinky economic priority slider and so on. But to each his own. Certainly the research development tree in HoI is a thing of beauty, a mighty oak in comparison to the sapling in SC. Which brings us back to the main point, where indeed do we go with SC2 ? If Europe again, how does BF improve upon the original ? Panzer General -> Allied General -> Pacific General -> PG 3D -> PGIII Scorched Earth ? Now there's a downward spiral not to be emulated, to be sure. I vote for the Pacific theater first, tie it all together globally with SC3 once the vastly different scales of the Pacific fighting and vital role of the navies are refined as SC2. I agree, the Pacific is difficult due to the sheer size of it. Then you have the complete opposite with the unit scales, island battles restricted to a few thousand by supply constraints: how to reconcile that with the titanic struggle of millions on the Russian front in a seamless package ? I like the concept advanced by SeaMonkey of being able to drill down to different operational levels at the player's discretion and perhaps therein lies a key to being able to integrate the differences in scale between the two theaters into a conherent global grand strategy game, [ January 25, 2003, 12:13 AM: Message edited by: Steve C ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BriantheWise Posted January 25, 2003 Share Posted January 25, 2003 I like this thread so much, I bounced off it, and started another, before this one could get buried. Great stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1b Posted January 25, 2003 Author Share Posted January 25, 2003 Holzemfrumfloppen You can find CC2 as a free download currently at Underdogs. http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?name=Close+Combat+2%3A+A+Bridge+Too+Far The trouble with Underdogs though, is what you see might be what you get, but it might not work all the same. I downloaded CC1 there (I don't need CC2 from them obviously), and got it fully installed all ready to go, only to be told "please insert cd". So naturally I was not amused. In the case of CC2 though, I have the original cd and the original manual thanks to a fellow wargamer (it was clearly his copy and he no longer needed it). He mailed it to me his expense. See guys people DO in fact send people wargames in the mail hehe. Actually to date, I have gotten Steel Panthers 2 Modern Battles retail copy, Mega Campaign Desert Fox and Mega Campaign Watchtower 9for Steel Panthers WaW if you are not familiar with it), Russo German War, Sudden Strike 2 and Strategic Command all free from friends eh. Karma its a wonderful thing. But I routinely send stuff to others I know online all the time. Please be clear about this though, I am not talking about "copying games", I am referring to actual purchased games (these guys just haven't minded sending them to me). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts