Jump to content

SC2 Scope? Pacific Theater? Matrix?


Cheesehead

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know what the scope of SC2 will be. What will be the length in hexes of the Eastern French border with the Low Countries and Germany for instance? Will it include the Pacific Theater? Are there any plans to keep naval units from destroying each other so fast? How has Matrix Games two new Grand Strategy projects (CWiF and GGWaW) affected the development of SC2?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than Mr H, if anyone else has the answer to your questions about SC2, I'm sure that are not at liberty to say.

Computer World in Flames is not a "grand strategy" game. Best description is that of a operational game operating at the strategical level. I don't think the WiF fans would appreciate any concept design changes, so CWiF will be hitting a different market than SC2.

GGWaW... exactly which game are you referring too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

me again (noob on the block)

this is based upon the turn based movement currently used is SC and an idea that may (or probably not) improve on the game playing expeience. forgive me if it has already been suggested.

at the moment SC is played on a turn based basis, like chess, which is fine for board games but on a computer it should be a little bit more advanced, ie, players issue their orders and the moves for a turn are carried out simaltaneously for that 'turn'. for the sake of argument i am thinking 1 turn would represent 1 week real time, weather would have effects (4 climate zones based on the current map) and units are of the same type as they currently exist in SC.

this would mean players issue their orders and once both (or more if the multiplayer option allows) have completed the turn unfolds. certain modes could be introduced to the units to allow for more 'realism' (my favourite word). here is an example:

patrol - set a patrol area for ships/subs/AF

defend - dig in and defend the area

assault - assault an area

move - move to an area

support - AF support an attack/defence of an area

retreat - like move, but backwards smile.gif

exploit - like move, but forwards smile.gif

counter - a defending unit will attack back

resupply - resupply

operate - like move but a lot faster

PATROL

subs - set two points and the units move backwards and forwards between them, until ordered otherwise.

ships - same as subs

AF - a default setting, the AF intercept any enemy AF attacking within range of the AF.

DEFEND

last man last bullet type thing. if the unit comes under attack it will not move for any reason other than been totally destroyed. the unit will gain an increased defence bonus.

ASSAULT

an offensive posture which will attack anything within its path from its start point to the objective set for it. Using this mode would give a movement penalty, but increased attack bonus.

MOVE

a unit moves from point A to B. Using this mode would give a defence penalty.

SUPPORT

attach an AF to a specific unit for an increased attack/defence bonus.

RETREAT

when attacking/defending, a level of unit strength can be set to trigger the unit to move back from the disputed hex.

EXPLOIT

the ability to attach an 'exploit' unit to an assaulting unit. this ensures that if a defending hex is assaulted and vacated by a defender, a follow up attacking unit may move in. the exploit unit will have the DEFENCE bonus, but the movement of an ASSAULT unit.

COUNTER

receiving no defence or assault bonus, but on being attacked the unit shall attack back in the same turn, if not destroyed or retreating.

RESUPPLY

a unit stops for a refit and supply. units have to be 'stopped to be supplied. this means they can not be assaulting, exploting, moving or transporting in the turn of resupply. units under assault can only achieve 75% of resupply.

OPERATE

like the current operate but with a penalty of the turn after the operae the unit can not moveor take any offensive actions. they literally sit in defensive posture for the turn. OPERATE shall also have a distance limitation (3 times that of move?)

anyway, as i am sure SC2 is almost complete smile.gif i guess this is just a wish list of my own tastes :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gary Grisbys World at War... thats what I thought, but I wanted to make sure it wasn't a reference to the boardgame World at War. There are hints that it will be developed for the computer.

Slapaho

Quite some time ago, back we were making suggestions for "enhancments" to SC, I brought up simultaenous movement. I serioulsy believe that simultaenous movement would open up a whole new market for wargammers and is the direction that wargames should go in, not real time movement.

If we look at the mechanics that SC uses, you really don't have to issue "orders", like you have suggested. The majority of those orders are already default actions taken by the units themselves. For example, your "defend" is something a SC unit already does by entrenching. Your "move", "exploit", "retreat" are all performed by a unit moving in SC, with "attack" being the same except with combat. All that really needs to happen, is that after you select a unit and select what you want it to do (identical to what happens now), the action itself doesn't happen until you've selected all of your units or have ended your turn.

However, though I fully support the idea, this is the type of design that needs to be incorporated into a game from the beginning. Its not something that should be added to SC2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advanced Third Reich had a painful experience when they made Rising Sun, and then tried to unify them after the fact.

The reulting game is likely a nice game, but required a fews years of rather nasty behaviour from fans on the left the right and those in the middle.

Hubert could like make an SC game for Pacific with his eyes closed. But don't bother asking him to make an SC game that unifies Europe and the Pacific, and it be any easier than it has ever been for anyone else.

Global Grand Strategy games that begin and end as global settings, usually work better than those designed after the fact. Or at least, the designers go through less hell in the process.

Axis and Allies is indeed a great game when you measure the fun factor. But it is hardly Advanced Third Reich grade wargaming.

Computer World in Flames will no doubt have zero competition for king of the hill when it is finished.

But the problem is it is a pet project likely moreso than a priority issue. And if you have looked in on the forum for it at Matrix Games, it is clear it is not going to please everyone unless it can do vitually everything.

It will have to have an AI that is capable, and It will have to incorporate every permutation of the board game to date.

No one wants to give up it being the board game verbatim, and yet everyone wants the board games tedium removed.

No small task.

SC2 should be old news me thinks long before cWiF hits the market.

I personally think World at War by Gary might be the sort of thing a lot of us will be wanting.

Not so darned simple as A&A, not so darned complex as WiF, not isolated to one theater like SC or A3R. And on a computer so we can play it aginst others or solo.

What do I really want from SC2? Really I just want the subs gone, places like Ireland to stop being Black Holes and maybe a more involved political scene. I am not planning on asking the world of SC. It is fine more or less. I just want a few design glitches maybe adjusted.

If I want Hubert to make a global wargame, I will prefer him working on a clean slate actually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...