Les the Sarge 9-1b Posted March 3, 2003 Share Posted March 3, 2003 I have I confess, not played my SC to death yet (gasp heretic burn him alive). Ok my comment here is this. I have noticed a lot of gamey this and gambit that. But hmm gamey and gambit are they not what you get when you don't enforce a lot of historical on the game. In the first turn you attack Russia in alot of games you get a Russian winter effect as well as a Russian unprepared effect inserted into the game. This is because the Russians were surprised, and the first winter was a real bitch to the Germans. But in SC we have a lot of effects possible because historicity is not being crammed down our throats at every turn. Thus we have the air fleets hassle. Telling me they are unrealistic, and mentioning history conflicts with complaints that history is too confining. You can't have it both ways guys. I am for force pool limits, but I can also see the argument, that the game is also about "what if". To cry about a gamey tactic, means you should have been in favour of more historicity being enforced. [ March 03, 2003, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: Les the Sarge 9-1b ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted March 3, 2003 Share Posted March 3, 2003 My vote is for more historicity to be enforced, as long as it isn't stifling. It is definitely possible to strike a balance. In most cases it's only a matter of tweaking game mechanics. There are forums on economics, amphibeous invasions and making air power more controlable. They are full of good ideas that would work if given a chance. The problems have already been identified, what they need now are solutions. And the solutions are already out there, usually in multiples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konstantin V. Kotelnikov Posted March 3, 2003 Share Posted March 3, 2003 I too vote for History. I enjoy what if's of these games as long as they are in a historical context, not some sort of Harry Turtledove world. Force Pool limitations would be nice. It distrubed me to see a recent post about someone who played a 1944 Ardennes mod. I think they played as germany and crushed the USSR and drove the allies from the continent. Now why the mod may be accurate, and well laid out, the games framework ignores "historicity" as they say. Germany doing this? Impossible. At most they thought they could gain a separate peace. Then possibly turn the Western Allies on the USSR. At worst they were hoping to create a rift in Anglo-American cooperation. Germany was scraping the bottom of the barrel for manpower. Young boys and old men. There is no way they could have defeated the soviet union unless the had their tanks crewed by toddlers and forced women into ranks. Or in a turtledove twist invading space aliens helped them. Even the seeming inexhaustable manpower of the soviet union was wanning by 1944. The red army was forced to comb through it's rear units many times to keep the fighting units up to a decent combat strength. More History - Less Fantasy. Force Pool limitations will go a long way to help. Others will disagree with that, but the game is based on WWII and should thus reflect those realities. Of course we could mod some of the units to represent UFO's and another to be elite Superhuman Dinosaur Clones. Then you could build as many of them as the Yippyskippy Galaxy could afford. Of course that's the Historian in me talking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted March 3, 2003 Share Posted March 3, 2003 "Of course that's the Historian in me talking. " -- Konstantin And, as always, doing a great job of it. The German Generals were so disgusted by the end of 1944 that some of them toned down into inaction. Field Marshal Gerd von Rundtstedt, who was supposed to be running the show in the West, gave few if any commands and chose to act as the conduit between Hitler's orders and his own generals responses. An arrangement that no doubt fit in with Hitler's idea of command structure. An alternative to the manpower pool might be to adapt the suggestion I put forward in the Bullying Air Fleets Forum and apply it to all types of units. 1 - x normal MPP cost,-- x-y 150% Base MPP cost, -- y-z 200% Base MPP cost -- z+ 300% the Base MPP cost. The rate might be higher for armies and corps with a larger 1 - x margin and 500% Base MPP cost for z+. How many armies would be built when they cost 1200 MPPs? [ March 03, 2003, 01:25 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minotaur Posted March 3, 2003 Share Posted March 3, 2003 Always the simplicity of a chess game vs the historical of our old boardgames... Since I'm not fond of 'special rules'... Always checking the manual for this or that special rule is no fun to me... I know they are sometime a necessary evil (like the Supply lines, that even today I still try to grasp all aspects), but too much and it will be collecting dust in the closet... But the computers are here to the rescue!... As long as these historical rules ar transparent (ie. the computer do most of the work) then fine... I think most special or historical rules should be created to be as simple as possible to the common user... Weather, Amphibious Assault and +Range/-Readiness for Air Fleets are good examples of special rules that should be added to SC2 because they are historical, but not painful to the casual player... Only one more option in the right-click menu... A paragraph in the user manual and that's it... The rest is 'under the hood' in the computer... Of course, if we have more special rules, perhaps we will have a beautiful paper User Manual shipping with SC2... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts