Strategic Command Design Challenge!

[emf]

Engine: Current editor

Synopsis: An easier way to distingish the various colors of weather zones.

Design summary: Each weather zone should have its own color, it should be readily recognizable from all other colors. As I was playing the Thrawn map I noticed there was sandstorms off the coast of England. I go into the editor to change them and I see that its difficult to tell when a number is different from the others because the colors are the same. This is especially true with double digit numbers like 15 and 25, 12 and 22, etc.

It would also help if there was a way to isolate each zone on the may so that only one zone is highlighted. That way you can see immediatly if there are zones out of place.

Cons: Can't think of any, should be easy enough to program.

[emf]

Engine: Current editor

Synopsis: An easier way to setup convoy routes by selecting a start port and a destination port.

Design Summery: In the current editor you must manually type in every tile a convoy goes through. I think it might be easier (for the player) to select a start port and an end port and let the computer handle the rest. It might also be possible to set way points.

Cons: Might be difficult to program, without the player using so many way points that it becomes just as tedious as the current system.

[emf]

Engine: Current

Synopsis: Might be interesting to know what kinds of units you have when looking at the reports screen.

Design Summary: When looking at the reports you have no way of telling how many of what types of units you have. I'd like to know if I have X# of fighters or infantry. It should also tell me the same for the enemy and units destroyed, mine and their's.

Cons: Is it worth the effort? It's not important but helpful to know.

[PowerGmbH]

Engine: Current

Synopsis: "Total War" Effect

Design Summary: With cetrain circunstances the Engine Asks for the if you want to declare "Total War".

The Circunsctances could be:

1)Germany doesent Accept the "Vichy Treaty", so France can Declare it.

2)Germany Invades Britain

3)Germany Takes Moscow

4)USSR stikes back and takes 2 ( or 3?) Cities from Germany

5)USA is invaded in Pearl Harbour

The Effect could be:

Not only The country gets maybe 1 HQ and 3 Corps + 1 Army extra, BUT:

the OWN Citys (with Strength 10) are reduced every turn by 1 without recovering (means 5 rounds reducing up to 5 )

and the effect is that the MPP during these rounds are Multiplicated by a certain Factor, i.e. 2.

This Means if Germany gets 345 MPP per round, this would mean the next 5 rounds it would receive 690 MPP and then would be reduced to 50% for the 6 th round up to the 10th.

Contra: ?

[Bill101]

Originally posted by emf:

Engine: Current editor

Synopsis: An easier way to setup convoy routes by selecting a start port and a destination port.

Design Summery: In the current editor you must manually type in every tile a convoy goes through. I think it might be easier (for the player) to select a start port and an end port and let the computer handle the rest. It might also be possible to set way points.

Cons: Might be difficult to program, without the player using so many way points that it becomes just as tedious as the current system.

I've set some up in WAW and haven't had to type in every tile the convoy goes through, only waypoints. It does take a few minutes to do, possibly more if it has to follow a convoluted route, but I've not found it to be that hard. Are you putting in more waypoints than you need to perhaps?

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by 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

Hubert what was it you wanted to tell us?

[SeaMonkey]

Current game platform.

Set up a journal of the last 6 months of the pop-up gameplay notifications in chronological order for player review in the REPORTS area.

You know the end turn and beginning turn occurences and maybe allow a replay of the last significant events(visual action summary, condensed of course)

Cons: Sorry Hubert...its just an idea

[emf]

@Bill101, sorry, you are correct. I had previously looked at the convoy scripts and thought I had to type in every tile. I did some experimenting this morning and found I only had to put in source, destination, and waypoints, the computer did everything else.

That being said, I believe it would be a little simpler to click on a source port, then click on the destination port and have the convoy lines appear. Then if the player wants, to click on various waypoints and have the lines change immediately. And the same for setting min and max for mpp transfer.

BTY one of the experiments I did was to try and set-up a convoy between Germany and Italy, with Italy neutral but I think Gibraltar, being under UK rule, stopped it. Would that be true?

[PowerGmbH]

Editor: Current

Synopsis: 4 Units can go inside 1 Field

Design Summary: Units are reduced in scale in order that 1 Unit takes only 1/4 of one field.

the onsequences: Battles over Cities greatly Improve, as to take a City there must be taken all the 4 Fields of this. ( Villages will be respectively only 2 "part-Field"

I.e. by invading to Stalingrad, Russians put 4 Units in the City, and Axis forces must pull out each of them to get this city.

A city with only 1 Unit inside can get attaked form all 4 sides as there is a Middle Standing Point coosable.

Other Solution could be that a Unit can Either CONCENTRATE on 1/4 of the Place, or make a LINE on 2 or more "part-Fields" of one single Field, causing less defense value for this steched line.

this means Stacking will not more interisting.

Problems: all new Programming and Units shall be Formable to lines, maybe difficult to handle.

[SeaMonkey]

And these units can only be air, SF, corps, egr, AT,AA,Art, no Army or Tank size units.

Partisans are elligible. Did I miss any?

[PowerGmbH]

Well why not more than 1 Tank ?

at least you can imagine The same European Map, only that all Cities are 4 Fields instead of one.

WHAT type of units you "PACK" in this city is

fully your decision, you can put 4 x A-Air if you

prefer...or 4 x Tanks...

[SeaMonkey]

footprint.

[PowerGmbH]

Here I think is a very nice Issue on PORTS:

Editor: Current

SYNOPSIS: Ports capturing by Land Units

Design Summary: if a Port is surrounded by Ennemy Units ( Ennemy Territory ), and has Supply of 5, this ennemy LAND Units CAN Attac the Port when no ships are inside. The Land Units-Attac has the same consequences as an Strategic Bombardement. The Port Falls then into the atackers hands as soon as the Port has a Supply = 0.

Example: Scapa Flow Port in GB, or Greek Port in Crete-Island

Problems: Programming that Land units may

Attack Strategically a Sea Field.

Problems2: ?

[Big Al]

Engine: Turn based. Same engine. I am 40 and have played many turn based WW2 games. I purchased most of the ones that are around in recent years. Your engine, for a turn based game, is the best. It is just complicated enough, it is easy to use, it is fun. Keep it and improve. WaW expension was great. I enjoyed the game much more than SC1 and SC2.

Synopsis: Expand the game to include the pacific theatre. This is an army/corp level game. Replace units that dont belong in a game of that scare with units that do. Take out special forces and anti-tank. Include Marines (infantry good at invation) and Mechanized (good vs infantry, weak vs armor, cost is between the 2). Allow invasions of single islands like Malta. Right now it has to be bombarded to death 1st. Alter counter look when upgraded (like if unit gets motorized show it by altering counter), use NATO symbols for counters. Make repair of ships difficult (1 point per turn)

Design Summary: Only change I would make is in the naval. CVs should have air counter, scale correctly, 3 BB, 3 CV, 25 Subs, 25 DD, 3 CA per counter, 750 A/C per counter. Expand AI for allies to include many options besides doing only D-day. Expand AI for axis to includ many scenarios. Perhaps AI selects its base strategic goals as scenario is set up (Gibralter, Kill Russia Ger and Jap, 42 barbarosa taking med, Sealion). For single island invasion unit would hang off of island in ocean hex. Only one unit can invade a single island.

Problem #1: Not sure if expanding the map and game would create problems. AI for Japan and USA would be difficult.

Problem #2: Counter altering, CV air component.

[Commander Darken]

Greetings,

Engine: New

Synopsis: A turn-based Hearts of Iron 2 (either with hexes as in SC1 or with provinces as in HoI 2)

Design Summary:

1) Every nation has some pools (a human pool, a fuel pool and an iron pool). To (re)build units you need human and iron, to move motorized units you need fuel (oil/gas/petrol).

2) Most units have 2 parts - the main unit (f.e. infantry, tank, cavalry) and the supporting unit (f.e. FlaK, PaK, Pioneer). Both parts can be indiviually upgraded (you f.e begin with a lousy supporting 3,7 cm PaK and end with a mighty 8,8 - or your main tank at the beginning is a Panzer II and you end with a mighty King Tiger). To make programming (and gaming) easier only the main unit gains experience. Of course you can change the type of the supporting unit when not in combat.

3) Human players should be able to choose individually for each major nation to be AI-played or human-controlled.

4) You should also have a scenario starting in 1936 (as in HoI 2) to be able to create your own starting position (f.e. what would have happended if the Germany would beginn WW II with more U-Boats instead of Bismarck and Tirpitz)

Problem #1: Hex-based / Province-based is not easy to programm (but hey - the makers of HoI 2 did a good job, and so Hubert will do, too).

Problem #2: There is no problem #2

[ February 28, 2008, 04:49 AM: Message edited by: Commander Darken ]

[Edwin P.]

Suggestion: Battle Field Promotion

Summary: After a unit gains 4 Medals the player is given a one time opportunity to promote it to a HQ unit, if the player does not have the maximum number of HQ units in play.

If yes then the unit is replaced with a randomly named HQ unit with a randomly generated rating of 3 to 9 and experience of zero.

Would require a table of random names for each major country.

Cons: Rating is randomly determined and some players dislike the unpredictable

Cons: Players might not choose to take the risk and use this feature

[ February 28, 2008, 08:20 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Edwin P.]

Suggestion: HQ Commander Death

Summary: If a HQ unit is destroyed in combat there is a chance that the unit is permanently destroyed and removed from play to reflect the chance that the commander is killed in battle from enemy or friendly fire. If this happens a popup announces the death of the commander:

"General [Lucas] Died from Wounds Suffered in Battle"

Design: A new field in the editor would control the chance (0% to 100%) of the HQ unit being permanently destroyed due to combat.

Cons: Non, as the % is editable.

[Edwin P.]

Suggestion: Partisan Unit Orders

Summary: Partisan units could be assigned one of four orders each turn;

1. Recruit - increases chance to recruit another partisan by 10%, if they do not move that turn.

2. Sabotage - destroys rail lines within a radius of 1 tile, if they do not move that turn.

3. Hide - partisan unit cannot be spotted by air units if they do not move that turn.

4. Non

Cons - perhaps it makes partisan units too important

[PowerGmbH]

Suggestion: Simplyfy AA, AT and Artillery !!!

Synopsis: all land Units can Upgrade with ONE (Armor maybe with two) of the Features: AA, AT or Artillery

Summary: In the Same way a Army can Upgrade Motorization or Inf-Weapons, this same Army can Upgrade with ONE of the Features: Artillery OR Anti Air. Same for Corps and so on.

The Upgrade may look similar to the little Number of i.e. Motorization. THe Upgrade may cost similar to a Anti Air Unit. THe Reaction of a AA Upgraded Corps is similar to a Actual AA Unit: When a Bomber/Fighter Attacs it Reacts...

Similar would be the Upgrade for a Army with Artilley Bataillons "inside".

Why have a whole Bunch of units if at least most of these Units (AA,AT,Artillery) where grouped "inside" the Armys and Corps Divisions.

Contra: Maybe someone likes too much this units...

Contra: Please, Please Hubert Simplify this Units...

[Colin I]

Love this - these should be add ons anyhow, not strategic units in their own right.

[Hubert Cater]

Just wanted to say thanks to everyone that has posted so far and I hope you repost your ideas in the new official contest forum.

More details in the top thread or by clicking on the following link:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=34;t=003124;p=1#000000

Hubert

[Joe98]

Engine: New game

Synopsis: PBEM play

There would be a Grand campaign and some shorter scenarios

My favourite way to play a game is PBEM. WW2 lasted 6 years. If a turn lasted one month this makes a 72 turn game. This is a lot of PBEM turns but doable by most wargamars

The Grand Campaign should not exceed 72 turns.

There should be an option to have pre-war diplomacy, an option to begin research pre-war and an option to carry the war into 1946.

If these options mean the grand campaign exceeds 72 turns that’s OK by me as long as these things remain as options.

Note that the fastest Atlantic convoys only took a week to cross the Atlantic and the slowest ones took the best part of 2 weeks. If a turn is one month, the Atlantic war has to be abstracted – see my new ideas in a post to follow.

In a PBEM game, the number of players would vary from 2 to 6 so that the 6 major powers can be played by different players in a PBEM game.

If a player drops out, his troops can be controlled by a friendly player. Any player ought to be able to move the units of any friendly country. If a player did so when he is not supposed to, he would get a bad name and that is punishment enough!

CONS: Some would say that a one month turn is too long

-

-

[ March 04, 2008, 09:05 PM: Message edited by: Joe98 ]

[Joe98]

Engine: new game

Synopsis: Victory Conditions

There would be some shorter scenarios and a Grand Campaign

For the Grand Campaign, the only victory condition is that Berlin falls.

September 1944 = decisive allied victory

December 1944 = major allied victory

February 1945 = minor allied victory

May 1945 = draw

September 1945 = minor German victory

December 1945 = major German victory

Any later date = decisive German victory

Each of the smaller scenarios could have victory conditions in a similar style to suit the scenario

Each minor country would have one capital. Once it is captured, the friendly controlling power has one turn to recapture before it officially falls.

Each major country should have 3 capitals. ( Italy might have only 2 and Russia might have 4). For a major country to fall, all it’s capitals must be captured. Once the last capital falls, the country has one turn to recapture any capital and if it fails the country is then defeated.

This stops the gamey play where all the troops converge on one capital.

CONS: Stops the historical path where all allied troops tried to converge on Berlin

-

[Joe98]

-

Engine: new game

Synopsis: Friction in a multi player game

Each country ought to have separate victory levels. In this way, in a multiplayer game, there could be friction between:

the French and the British and

the Germans and Italians and

the Russians and the British

the Russians and the US

….because they have all have different victory conditions. This would increase the enjoyment of a multiplayer game

CONS: Could make for bad blood between players!

-

[Funks]

Engine: current

Synopsis: Vietnam war

Design:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=59;t=000460

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=59;t=000461

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=59;t=000462