Strategic Command Design Challenge!

[Hubert Cater]

Great thread Timskork and I will sticky this one as I have a few ideas to make this thread a bit more interesting... more on that later this week

Btw, I can tell you were once in the game industry as the framework for the thread is brilliant

Hubert

[PowerGmbH]

ENGINE: SC2 WAW

SYNOPSIS: False Flag Operations

Design Summary: a Player (Specially Interisting for Axis ) may have the option to Transport a Land Unit under "Neutral Falg". The Options menu on the Harbour then offers: Transport / Amphibious Transport / False Flag Transport

This is specially Interisting fox Axis Player in a Global Campaign, as Germany and Japan are far away one from the other, and this could prevent a Attac in the UK/Allied Controlled Atlantic or Pacific.

On the Other Hand it could be Interisting for Allied players in case Axis Subs Raiding gets TOO strong to have a secure transfer from Canada to Braitain f.ex.

COnsequences: if the Ennemy attacs the "neutral Transport", the Neutral Country gets ready a certain percentage (i.e. a random between 15-35%) in direction of the attaked player.

So the ennemy shall think well before sinking the "poor-neutral-transporter"

Also the Player when choosing a Neutral nation can only choose between some Neutral that allready tends in one or the other direction (i.e. Finnland or Spain for Axis, and Venezuela / Mexico or Greece for Allies )

PROBLEM: i see only advantages, also think it is easy to programm

[ January 08, 2008, 06:12 AM: Message edited by: powergmbh ]

[PowerGmbH]

ENGINE: SC2 WAW

SYNOPSIS: Surface Raider and/or Supply Sub

DESIGN SUMMARY: A unit called Supply-Ship or Surface Raider, that has the fuction of a "mobile-Port" similar to Land-HQ, and supplies allways a Supply of 4 to adjacent units. Itself is a little like a "Ghost ship" or invisible like a Submarine, but maybe have a small attac capacitiy about 50% of a Destroyer, specially towards transports.

This may be interisting for a Axis Player. and Specially interisting Historically as Surface Raiders and Supply Subs where used by both Japan and Germany.

Problem: How to calculate Supply for the Supply-Ghost-Surface-Raider-Ship?

[xwormwood]

Engine: Current

Synopsis: Change the sides

Design Summary: Allow in a game against the ai to change the side you are playing.

Mighty improvement when playing the ai, because, you can go on even if you are probably winnig.

Simply take the weaker alliance and try to turn the tide against your evil ai clone.

Problem 1: giving the ai some ideas what to do with the always new situation

Problem 2: players would know where units are and which city / region is how strong or weak defended. Solution could be: let the ai play 1 or 2 turns both sides while the human player gets only the results presented (unit x destroyed, city y taken, resource z bombed) so that the ai got time to make some adjustments.

[xwormwood]

Engine: Current

Synopsis: Game History

Design Summary: Offer the players more statistics when the game has ended.

Show detailed losses of every unit.

Show in a vcr fastforward-replay how the strategic map has canged while the game went on.

Tell the player, at which date the tide of war has switched from maybe winning to surely loosing by calculating army strength, income amd unit losses.

("Turningpoint: Stalingrad december 1942").

Keep track for the players, when wich city or ressource or unit was captured or lost or rebuild. Create for every country or ocean in which was fought a timetable. Show this list for every country / ocean seperatly if the player wants to see it seperatly. Highlight each end every name, so when a player clicks on a name he can see at which date a city was captured by which unit against what unit of the other side, or when a ship was sunk by which enemy.

Enrich with these details the fun for every player after the game, making it something worth to play a game through (instead of the MEGA-ULTRA-GIGA unsatisfying lame end we have just right now...)

Problem 1: has to be programed completly new into the game (?)

[Lars]

Er, this is devolving into "features" instead of a whole new game.

[xwormwood]

Engine: Current

Synopsis: Mobile Ports / Mulberry

Design Summary: Introduce a unit which represents a mobile port, but only to generate supply (not to load / unload units). No attack / defense factors.

Once attached to a coastline, it should only stay on a map for a limited timeline.

Let naval and strategic or tac bombers be able to reduce the supply level created by this unit.

This unit frees the allied player (and the AI) from conquering a specific city & harbor when it comes to starting a successful amphib landing.

Let this unit only be available to nations who gained a specific level in amphibius landings / naval power (maybe Lvl 4 / Lvl 2)

Problem 1: copyright belongs probably SSI

Problem 2: Placing it, moving it or unloading it?

[Timskorn]

Lars that's OK, the intention was to generate concepts ranging from very small to an entirely new game if you'd like.

[Timskorn]

Engine: NEW or CURRENT

Synopsis: Dynamic News Events and AAR Log

Design Summary: Dynamic News Events are a way to add the sense that you are creating your own history as you play and to add weight to your success and failures. DNE's that occur are then automatically added to a timeline LOG of the history of events that have occurred in the game. Log information can range from a unit gaining an Honor, the capture of a city or capital, the loss of multiple units in a single turn to research breakthroughs and scripted events that trigger. The primary purpose of the DNE is to track major events in the game and then to display them in newspaper format with a corresponding photo, headline and even sound. This can be improved upon by adding multiple "pages" which separate events. Page 1 would be the major news story, while page 2 could deal with lower-level events regarding your side (Axis or Allies), and page 3 could be scripts that have fired and other miscellaneous (Invasion of Crete, diplomatic changes, commission of a new General (HQ), etc).

To track major events that the players create through their own actions, a script system that can assess an event that occurs on a single turn (and possibly multiple turns) would need to be created. A dynamic event would be, for example, a major battle involving 8 or more combined units engaging in combat on a single turn and within a specific tile radius. The DNE would assess the amount of units involved, who took the most losses and the nearest city involved in the conflict and then generate a newspaper report about this battle. Example: Russia has 8 units defending around Moscow, Axis attack with 12. The script would keep a tally of units that were damaged for the turn, then calculate the distance between each of them. If 8 or more units were involved, and were within 6 tiles of each other, a DNE generates. DNE's could be generated in other ways, such as when Allied units invade Spain or a variable that keeps track of MPP's sunk via Axis subs and a DNE announcing the mounting toll they are inflicting on Britain when the MPP's reach certain milestones (300 MPP sunk, 500, etc).

DNE's would either be a pop-up (as events are now) or a selectable menu option titled "News and Reports" where you can view them for the turn. The LOG would also appear under this menu and which is a timeline of events both large and small. This way you can ignore them if you wish. If they are pop-ups, they would appear for you as soon as a DNE triggers. On the opposing players turn, it would appear after watching the reply. Optional conditions for DNE triggers could apply for naval and air units as well, such as the Allied bombing campaign over Europe or naval clashes that tend to be lower in size but critical in deciding who rules the seas. Optional: DNE also would track multi-turn battles. For example, Battle for Moscow from above. The first DNE fires and a variable is increased by 1. If, on the subsequent turn, enough conflict occurs that would generate a DNE, instead it checks the variable. If its 1, add another 1 and then check if the variable = 2. If its 2, a DNE is generated from the original DNE such as "Battle of Moscow Rages On!" Then you can branch conditions and variables from there to determine the status of this particular battle in subsequent DNE's (Say if Moscow is captured, or Axis troops are pulling back it could declare a Russian victory or eventually a stalemate if the situation hasn't changed for x # of turns). Optional: Historical anecdotes to go along with headlines that parallel the historical date and outcome (Such as when D-Day launches, start of Barbarossa, attacking Leningrad, U-Boat war, when Axis get Tiger tanks, etc).

Problem #1: LOTS of variables and situations to track. Could cause some odd headlines for unique situations if the DNE script isn't tracking enough info to give an accurate response.

Problem #2: Is it worth the time invested? Would it get too repetitive over multiple games?

[ January 08, 2008, 03:46 PM: Message edited by: Timskorn ]

[Timskorn]

So that last one was a little long, sue me.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Originally posted by xwormwood:

Engine: Current

Synopsis: Game History

Design Summary: Offer the players more statistics when the game has ended.

Show in a vcr fastforward-replay how the strategic map has canged while the game went on.

Clash of Steel had that and was a very cool, if not illustrative, feature.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Originally posted by Lars:

Er, this is devolving into "features" instead of a whole new game.

Reread the OP mate. Plus this is fun as hell, so go get bent.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Originally posted by xwormwood:

Engine: Current

Synopsis: Mobile Ports / Mulberry

Design Summary: Introduce a unit which represents a mobile port, but only to generate supply (not to load / unload units). No attack / defense factors.

Once attached to a coastline, it should only stay on a map for a limited timeline.

Let naval and strategic or tac bombers be able to reduce the supply level created by this unit.

This unit frees the allied player (and the AI) from conquering a specific city & harbor when it comes to starting a successful amphib landing.

Let this unit only be available to nations who gained a specific level in amphibius landings / naval power (maybe Lvl 4 / Lvl 2)

Why shouldn't units be able to load or unload? I mean that was one of the raison de etres for the Mulberries in the first place.

[Scrogdog]

Tactics: In a Pacific Carrier War, knowing which stances to use when will be key to fighting enemy fleets. On CAP stance, enemy ships and aircraft are free to attack and manuever within your carriers LOS without its fighters being launched in defense. This is purely a defensive stance to protect your carrier and any ships next to it, and to reserve the full strength of your fighters to be used on your turn.

Being a pacific war guy, I had to comment on Timskorn's great idea regarding carrier warfare.

In CAP mode, perhaps a reduced attack against enemy ships that enter LOS should still be allowed. After all, only half of a typical carrier's compliment were fighters. The other groups could be sent unescorted, at highly reduced rate of success of course. Midway, for example, was largely determined by uncoordinated and unescorted attacks.

Problem: Unnecessary additional complexity *unless* fighting a carrier war/pacific war style campaign.

[Timskorn]

Scrogdog: Yes, very true, however this begins to tread the realm of micromanagement as you mention. Since current SC2 focuses on the general picture, the design I had in mind would simply be an abstract way of representing carrier warfare. Strike first, but leave yourself vulnerable...or be defensive and wait to see the full enemy naval situation before attacking?

Now if this was under an entirely new engine that focuses more on the details, there could still be a fun way to add that level of detail without increasing micro too much.

[SeaMonkey]

Engine: WaW Modified

Synopsis: Unit actions continued or interrupted by phasing players will ultimately be dependent on expended action points. (clicking off and on units without ending their turn actions)

Summary: Unit would be able to engage in multiple moves and/or strikes to the extent of its available action points not necessarily in a sequential manner.

Problem 1: Obviously this would serve to further undermine the AI ability to competently provide competition to a human player.

Problem 2: Additional micromangement feature slowing the progress of gameplay.

[Lars]

Originally posted by John DiFool the 2nd:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Lars:

Er, this is devolving into "features" instead of a whole new game.

Reread the OP mate. Plus this is fun as hell, so go get bent. </font>

[Timskorn]

Engine: CURRENT

Synopsis: Creation of a new Marine unit capable of attacking land units that occupy a single tile from sea.

Design Summary: To develop an effective way to allow single-tile invasions from sea a new unit with a new ability will need to be created. The Marine is a low-cost but specialized unit with the unique ability to attack an enemy position directly from sea. The Marine unit would differentiate itself from normal land units in that it wouldn't act as one. Instead, a Marine acts as a naval unit that can strike land targets from sea. It has a high attack factor but also low defense, making these assaults effective but costly. Against a well defended unit, multiple Marine units supported by naval and air would be required to be effective.

Land units would need to have their naval defense ratings adjusted so they repel damage from sea, but which would affect all naval units in general. A BB shelling a land unit would then risk taking damage. Hard code may need to be required to help differentiate between a Marine attacking a land unit from sea, and a normal naval unit. Marine units would cost the same as a Corp., be as effective as a SF unit but take twice as long to train and is limited only to naval to land attacks. Since Marine units are actually a naval unit, they can never enter a land tile. In my opinion this is a good compromise. Marines clear the tile of enemy units and then you transport a normal land unit in to occupy it. They repair in port like ships, and do not need to "Transport" or "Amphib Transport" to move. Its assumed they are part of a naval task force moving them around.

Problem #1: Will need to find a good way to differentiate a Marine unit from a Naval unit when attacking a land unit. Naval units only take damage from ports, cities and forts and that should remain so, but a Marine unit needs to take damage from an enemy unit as if it were attacking on land.

Problem #2: Marines won't be able to actually enter a land tile unless hard code was added to allow naval units to also be land units. Or if there was a way that a Marine unit acted like an Amphib Transport AND a naval unit. This way they could attack from sea and also land on a clear tile. If not, the development time to create that duel ability probably wouldn't be worth it just for one unit.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Problem #2 doesn't sound that hard to me, as SF units can already embark onto a transport (magically change into a transport rather) without a port. I'd also like to be able to use Marines as regular infantry, as they in fact were in many a campaign. Marines, while tough in the attack, were arguably even tougher in the defense, but after 1942 rarely had the chance to fight prolonged defensive campaigns. I'd peg them at 2 attack 2 defense (a bit tougher than regular corps, not quite the equal of an army), as often if the defending unit has already been knocked down a lot by other units, all the Marine needs to do is breathe on it and it'll fall over and die.

[Lars]

You know, the easiest way to solve your Marine problem is just make all the islands two tiles and write the code to only allow one unit per side to be placed.

I assume the defending player will always have his on the port side tile.

Or three tiles I suppose, and only two units, if you want to dump air in too. But that would be a good minimum island size for a Pacific campaign. In any case, just always have one tile open for an invading force.

[ January 09, 2008, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: Lars ]

[Timskorn]

John: True in that land units currently can turn into naval units, and a SF unit doesn't need a port…so these things are in place already. If it was a new unit that could turn into an amphib transport with the ability to attack and receive damage from all land units, it could also then disembark like a normal unit and be used on land. The problem here is, all amphib transports are currently the same so there would need to be a way to make an amphib Marine unit unique. If you went into the editor and changed amphib transport attack stats, and they could attack, then any unit that turns into an amphib transport will have this ability when we only want the Marine unit to.

Lars: This is definitely another option, but it'd probably require hard code to force tiles to be off-limits to a certain side. SC2 supply rules would make attacking like this inefficient as well. You'd have a very ineffective unit stuck on an island waiting to die, unless you gave it the SF's ability to amphib off the island again. A Marine unit considered as naval would follow naval supply rules so couldn't be "cut off" after one turn.

[Lars]

Don't think it would be that hard. A simple crosscheck of unit positions would do it. Either way, you're recoding.

And that's my point, really. It's pretty much already done for you with the SF units. Just rename them Marines and tweak to suit. Edit the supply state to allow amphib even if cut off, if you wish. And/or tweak the invasion shore and air bombardments to give the desired play balance for a Pacific campaign.

Sure, the Marianas are going to look a little funny, but it'll do.

[Marty Ward]

For amphibious invasions couldn't you just give a combat value to a unit in amphib mode and let it attack like a naval unit but have results like a land combat?

[Timskorn]

Marty: I just took a look in the editor and we can't add attack value to an amphib transport, so this is probably hard coded in. But essentially you are right and this is something HC would have to do.

Could keep it simple and just allow all land units with an attack value the ability to invade from sea, then just change their ratings on how effective they are. If you add a Marine unit, just make them the most effective at getting it done. Just not sure how time consuming this would be to add in.

[PowerGmbH]

To Timskorn:

I would suggest to do the "marine Unit" in a Easier way:

When your Army Corps Tank or Whatever Unit is besides a Port, you can choose between:

1) Transport (normal as ever)

2) Amphibious Transport (as allways)

3) Amphibious Marines (new: same attac values as if the Unit would be on a land-field)

4) False Flag Transport ( see my proposal in this thread)

By this Options menu the Marines can attac from their Ships, i think it is easier for Hubert to Programm, and most of all tis is SIMPLIFICATING.

because at least a whole bunch of new Units have to be bought, and at least i am personally not soooo much in favour of too many "Special" units, not forget about that each unit needs it's square to be placed...

Why not simply ENHANCE the capacity of existing Units making enable them to some "Multi-Tasking"?