Why not a global map? And the inclusion of Japan?

[houston555]

I was wondering if a global map was to be included into SC2? For exapmle including the rest of africa, asia and all of the americas in the map? This would make it a more complete game. Also by including Japan, the Axis would be able to target more strategic areas and have better coordination between each other. A global map would make the game more intersting and give it a enormous array of options pertaining to resourses and potential allies. Anyone is welcome to respond and inform me of more detailed material that iam not aware of that is being developed.

[japinard]

I can't speak for the developer's, but my guess is: Time and Resources.

I'm sure this will be very historically accurate sim for units, placement, numbers, etc. To expand it to the world would delay the release for quite a long time I bet. And personally I'd like to get it this year, rather than a year from now. We can always get mods and maybe an expansion pack later on!

[Scorpion_sk]

"Huge and beautifully rendered 120x38 2-D isometric tile map with a true-to-scale recreation of Europe (max custom map size of 256x256)"

If the regular map is 120 hexes wide, you can add to it and create your own map based on the original, and stretch it in width all the way to Japan. You can also make it deeper than 38 hexes....but after that you´d need to use a proxy nation for Japan and all the other countries that you want to be involved in the Far East...it could work, but it´d be a lot of work.

But I am sure someone will do it. It would be great, since the US would really have to think about its options...

[pzgndr]

The focus of SC2 is the European Theater of Operations and building upon what has already been done with SC1. Let's get that squared away first and make it work right.

That said, the tools in the editor WILL allow modders to create alternate games. PTO, a global conflict, or even a revised ETO game with 1-week turns and 25-mile tiles could be created. But recognize that any scale and/or scope changes will have multiple ripple effects regarding unit values, production, politics, etc. etc. etc. These would be essentially new games requiring much effort and additional playtesting to ensure realism, accuracy, play balance, and such.

Now, would y'all prefer that we spend extra time playtesting multiple new game designs on our own, OR get SC2 out with a darn fine ETO package and let folks take it from there??

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

A common request is to add the Pacific.

But as pzgndr mentioned, the game was made for Europe and the systems had Europe in mind.

The game will not easily breach the needs of naval air battles, and island hoping marine assaults.

Some modders will no doubt make the effort, but it will remain to be seen if the accuracy will be there.

[J P Wagner]

I have no doubt the some abstractions will need to be taken into account when modding a game outside of the SC2 sphere... for example, recreating the use of armored trains during the Russian Civil War will no doubt be difficult to implement, but perhaps by using a low value armor unit, one might still be able to represent it for gameplay purposes...I should add that there were Cavalry Corps as well and if they are not one of the representative units available in SC2, they would need to be abstracted... unless, will it be possible to add unit types with the editor?

[ April 28, 2004, 11:36 AM: Message edited by: J P Wagner ]

[Scorpion_sk]

Yep, like I said, I´m looking forward to the customization possibilities for SC2.

I agree that it´s best for the shipped game to be as good an ETO game as it can be, and let the modders handle the rest.

About such modding efforts....Les, you commented that you are sceptical about whether such efforts will maintain historical accuracy....

Was SC:ET historically accurate? Were the production capabilities of the countries really accurate, in your opinion? (For example, is it accurate that if Germany annexes France, her military production almost doubles...?)

Were the battles, with the "trench warfare effect" and über-airpower historically accurate...?

If the answer is no, then I´m relieved, because then I will know that the developers of the new game are truly aiming to create an accurate representation of WW2 as well as a fun game - learning from the mistakes of the past is the greatest way to learn (don´t get me wrong, SC:ET was a very good and fun game, but historical accuracy wasn´t its strong suit).

Ranting again...what I really meant to say that even though adding PTO to the game might not make justice to the actual conflict, it would probably still be fun as hell

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

Scorpion, I think it's a moot point, that some elements of SC managed to get past Hubert

But all things considered, what he gave us was plenty good all the same.

It's a fine line the designers walk the closer they get to grand strategy, because it gets harder and harder to keep it all under control.

One of SCs most notorious hassles, is the power of Airpower. If the German player just pumps out a large airforce paid for by initial conquests which are often not to difficult, it give them a hefty edge.

But it tends to make things complex when you want to enforce specific force pool limitations.

Then there is my pet peeve the sub counter. I think it should have never been made the way it was made. They would have been better designed in as an abstraction.

If SC was truely perfect, there simply wouldn't be an SC2 up for consideration.

But a refined SC, will not automatically lend itself to extension into the Pacific.

The Pacific might have been an integral part of what we called the Second World War, but it rarely lends itself to being an integral part of a wargame that simulates the war in Europe.

That is the conondrum facing any serious wargame designer.

[Blashy]

Airpower is an issue, I agree.

But WW2 was defining moment in showing that who controlled the air controlled the war.

Take UK, better planes, better pilots, outnumbered and yet the Germans were dissimated by them. Imagine the wasted resources (once again a decision by Mr.Dumbass himself Hitler).

Poland, LC, Denmark and France were hit hard by the blitz but the air power that was used for recon, bombings and paratroops sent those panzers in the right direction.

IMHO, SC is not hindered so much by that. the Jet Tech is the killer of the game.

[vveedd]

After I have seen most of posts in this forum must say that SC2 will have much more depth then SC1. This means more time to play turns. So global map with this depth will be like Hearts of Iron and I don’t have good words for that game. So, to my opinion, global map is out of the question. Solution can be SC3-Pacific theatre where we should have only Pacific map.

[J P Wagner]

Originally posted by vveedd:

After I have seen most of posts in this forum must say that SC2 will have much more depth then SC1. This means more time to play turns. So global map with this depth will be like Hearts of Iron and I don’t have good words for that game. So, to my opinion, global map is out of the question. Solution can be SC3-Pacific theatre where we should have only Pacific map.

I wouldn't use HOI as a barometer for any other game out there....if it's done right, and SC is one game going in the right direction, a global WWII strategic game could be viable and enjoyable gaming experience..

[pzgndr]

a global WWII strategic game could be viable and enjoyable gaming experience

Which is exactly what most folks, including myself, are expecting with Grigsby's WAW coming out this year. Since that game's mechanics, production and politics systems, and AI etc. are being specifically geared toward a global conflict game, it should do well. Trying to bang to fit such a game into the SC2 editor and expecting comparable or better results will likely be an exercise in frustration.

The 6 majors and 22 minors limitation will be just one of many issues requiring compromises and workarounds. Another issue is lack of unit stacking and how Pacific island hopping can be simulated well, especially with a large scale global map. This isn't to say a global game won't work in SC2 or shouldn't be attempted, just a sober recognition of the challenges involved.

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

I am personally looking forward to a double whammy.

I PLAN to get SC2, and I am really hoping Gary's game arrives timely too.

It doesn't have hexes or squares, but it looks like it will do the job.

I was so pumped for HoI, and, well, the fanatic fans can sit on this and rotate.

Latest mod/patch, and the loyal nuts are still combining praise with describing how it can't do this that or the other thing.

I don't know about you guys, but Steel Panthers was a great game day one. That it has been modified so often is not indicative of it needing fixing, but indicative of it being fun to fiddle with.

I will be happy if SC2 does what it does, and does it European.

Gary will likely ace the global scene for us, and life will be complete.

I am not planning on beating up SC2 just to get a Pacific fix forcibly, when it probably won't be necessary.

It's not the end of the world, if HC doesn't design a global game. The man doesn't have to be perfect at everything. I will settle for him having the must have game for Europe.

Also hoping to possible add NeppaGames ETO board game to my collection in 2005.

Once upon a time I played a lot of Axis and Allies. But my board game appears to have been efficiently "loaned out" to a random unknown person hehe.

I will likely enjoy replacing it though.

The board game Attack! also looks like a nice add on to my lightweight wargaming.

With luck, 2005 will be the year of great grand strategy games.

[J P Wagner]

Like Bill and Les, I too am looking foward to WAW... but a more truer measure of how a global WWII strategic game may work might be with World in Flames...we already know how the map will look, based on ADG's design, but it will be interesting to see how the AI they are trying to develop turns out.....regarding the SC2 editor, the more I work on details for the Russian Civil War mod, the more I believe that I might be able to pull it off using the SC2 engine... just hope it's not wishful thinking...

[arax3]

Les: Your criticism of HOI is typical of your modus operandi. I am not a fan boy for HOI but I think it is on the right track and Paradox is still trying to make it right. WIF is a mess and getting more messy. I have tried several games by Grigsby and always got tied up by having to get a master's degree in a huge rule book, poorly written and by mechanics which did not work properly. A3

[HolzemFrumFloppen]

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1:

I was so pumped for HoI, and, well, the fanatic fans can sit on this and rotate..

Pumped? Heck, you harangued HOI before it hit the shelves. And, as far as I know, you still haven't played it.

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1:

Latest mod/patch, and the loyal nuts are still combining praise with describing how it can't do this that or the other thing.

Well... suffice to say, HOI is a much more complex game than SC1 is in every venue; and its base of players dwarfs SC's. Not that SC is a lesser game, but if it had the variables HOI does (not to mention its larger userbase), there'd be plenty of whiners in here. And we both know that SC was also on the receiving end of some serious whining.... just checked the forum there... looks like it's still going on.

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1:

I don't know about you guys, but Steel Panthers was a great game day one. That it has been modified so often is not indicative of it needing fixing, but indicative of it being fun to fiddle with.

Well... day one is a little magnanimous, don't you think? I like SP, too, but if you trail together all the README.TXT files of fixes/changes/additions, you'd have a nice full day of reading, too. Tactical's your cup of tea, Les; but let's not exaggerate SP's goodness. I like it, too; but I'd wager a month's pay that were it not free, it wouldn't have the same following.

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1:

I will be happy if SC2 does what it does, and does it European.

Gary will likely ace the global scene for us, and life will be complete.

Yeah, the Grigsby fanboys are about as vociferous (and onerous?) as the HOI ones are. I'm anxious to see what GG's spin on Axis & Allies will be. I've been playing GG's games since the AppleII was god's gift to computing; but most of them are spreadsheets. GG does spreadsheets well.

By the way... if you haven't played HOI yet, you really should. It's an overwhelming game for a first-timer, but I'll bet it would take you for a ride. I love HOI multiplayer, but you need a solid 6-8 hour session for a good game. However, if you've got the time, it's like Risk on LSD. It's deep, and you always have flashbacks days later of some such invasional episode.

No flaming here, Les. But HOI has come a long way from its earlier incarnation... just as SC and SP have. And there's still 300 or so posts per day to sift through over there. Don't knock it if you haven't tried it.

That said, SC2 will always be welcome; and you'll find lots of HOI players buying it, too.

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

For the record (for those that don't actually know, hey might be one person ), but there are those out there that do NOT like my critism of HoI.

Just so everyone is clear, I have never played HoI and if you gave me a copy for free, odds are I would use it to keep pop spill off the desk here.

Yes I reeeeeeally wanted that game when it first became known to the public.

But thanks to my limited finances, I am usually slow in getting new games.

In this case it was a good thing.

Some find it odd I can so hae something I have never played.

I don't.

Hmm sorry if my being a veteran wargamer annoys some, but hmm I AM a veteran wargamer.

Been wargaming since about the time wargames first became a commercially identifiable product line around the early 70s.

And I combine that with the fact I regularly chat on forums with a great many other veteran wargamers.

Sooooo, I stand here and state rather comfortably, that HoI is better at being a coaster than a wargame.

But don't let me alone sway you, let all the angry people that bought it do that.

Or of course, you can just go out and buy it, you might be one of the odd fanatics for all I know.

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

Now cWif, I am not sure that will ever see the light of day.

I won't mind being wrong, but I won't be shocked to see it just not work.

There has to be a limit to everything.

And just being based off a classic board game, is not going to give it special status where reality is concerned.

[Scorpion_sk]

Les,

you judged the book (HoI) by its cover way before it was released, saw the angry commotion because of its bug-ridden and ai-lacking release, and surprisingly enough that did nothing to sway your initial opinion - which was "I have played turn-based wargames for decades, and I have absolutely no desire to try a grand strategy game in real time with pausing"

I can understand that predisposition is a very powerful thing, especially the older you get...but I really don´t know why you have to knock the game off other potential players? You really haven´t even tried it, all you have is your predisposition...so you are not qualified to review it.

Again, you are qualified to say that you have absolutely no interest in it - but why say that it is a piece of crap when you really don´t know anything besides that you don´t like it?

I think HoI really shines in multiplayer with enough players to represent the major powers.

And with the recent patch and the efforts of the modding groups, it gives a good enough SP-experience.

Granted, I only have a dozen or so years of wargaming under my belt, but still....

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

Well actually, most of "ME" saying it is crap, is mostly "ME" saying I have interacted with quite a large volume of others that have both bought it, tried to give a hoot about it, and given up in disgust over it.

Most of my opinion, is really just me passing along the opinions of a lot of others.

I don't hate games that are not turn based defacto without consideration, that is unwise.

I have a copy of Squad Assault here. Its an ok game, where its genre is concerned. It has some problems which I think will be hammered out during the next release title.

It has had a lot of its own troubles addressed in recent patches.

Still it is really what it is. I have the game, but it isn't in my top 5 must spend time playing games.

I am sticking with my opinion though.

I didn't judge the book by its cover, I judged it by the anger of a lot of people that bought it.

Turn based games are not immune to my opinion though.

Steel Panthers, one of my best games, has absolutely no play value whatsoever in Battle mode style against the AI.

And against a human, will be as likely to fizzle, as any DYO game for ASL that I ever wasted time on.

Some ideas work, some don't, and some refuse to accept when an idea fails, you don't just hit it harder with the hammer.

[SeaMonkey]

Scorpion, I to was instilled with great enthusiasm at the promise of HoI. I to have never played it, I have interacted with many people who have and I regard their opinion with great respect. I have not posted with my disappointment with HoI's initial release and don't intend to but I have followed Les' statements of his position in this forum and many others. I don't necessarily agree with Les' stance on all the issues revolving around HoI, but one thing is certainly clear and I believe this is Les' main objection to HoI. That is; the game was released in a beta condition and the people that it was marketed to were not informed of its incomplete status. Now I understand that this was not what Paradox's intent was, and lord knows they have hung in their with patches most admirably, but they should have somehow curtailed Strategy First's premature release. In this life I have been taken for the fool to many more times than I care to acknowledge and when the chance presents itself for me to take a stand against misrepresentation then I would like a chance to not be apathetic towards this sort of economic betrayal. So I make a statement and I do not patronize a company who would submit to this underhandedness. Am I being selective? Yes, there are many others I have not taken the same action against either through ignorance or inconvenience, but it is my choice, that's what freedom is, and I believe that is Les' underlying motivation and on that we agree.

[Panzeh]

So you hate that Paradox supports its games?

[Scorpion_sk]

Agreed, HoI´s release was a disaster - and I gave up playing it in its initial condition - and have waited up to these days to start again - but they have gone light years in terms of patching up the game. And the C.O.R.E. initiative helps a lot.

I do know that many, many people gave up on it because of its unfinished release state, and I fully acknowledge this fact. However, I just wanted to point out that right now, in its latest incarnation, with a good gaming group, it´s got great potential.

[shredder]

I hate spinach. I've never tasted it, but have talked to a lot of people who I respect and know a lot about food who really hate it, so therefore I hate it as well and don't have anything good to say about it. I've been eating food since the 70's, so I know what I'm talking about.

I chat with a lot of people who eat different foods and who have eaten spinach, and they really tried to like it but they throw their hands up in despair. Perhaps some of you will go out and waste your money buying spinach, but not me. No sirree. I'm too smart for that. You see, I hate spinach.

The only thing I hate more than spinach is some smart ass making fun of me on forums for talking about a product I've never tried and only formed an opinion about based on the opinions of others who hate spinach.

While I'm ranting, I also hate jazz. I've never actually heard jazz, but I've been listening to music since the 70's and know what I'm talking about and have talked to a lot of people in chat rooms who hate jazz. They wanted to like it but just couldn't stand it so gave up in disgust.

I also hate Hearts of Iron. I've never played it but have talked to a lot of people who wanted to like it but gave up in disgust. I've been playing wargames since the 70's and so am a VETERAN wargamer which makes me qualified to hate a wargame I've never played based on the opinions of others who hate it. You HOI fanboys can waste your money on it, but it makes a better coaster than a wargame. Take if from me, a veteran wargamer and someone who has a firm grip on logic and rational thinking.

[SeaMonkey]

Some people say caviar tastes great, some people say its to salty. I've never tasted caviar, would I like to? Perhaps. But it seems to be a little time consuming to find caviar around here and lord knows its a trifle expensive for my resources. Still it might be OK but some people say it needs a cracker to help the taste out. Now I'm going to have to try it with a cracker too, but what brand should I search for to try it with? You know it seems that with my limited resources (time and money) maybe I should just stick with peanut butter, I know it tastes good and its that way with all types of bread and crackers, then I'll have more time and money to try out some other things. But someday when I have lots of time and money, I'm going to try out caviar.

[ May 09, 2004, 01:01 AM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]