Jump to content

Thinking about user made campaigns


Oudy

Recommended Posts

The following is just some random musing about the game and campaigns. I think that one of the misconceptions about TOW, a misconception that has led to a number of people to feel let down is the scale of the game. This game is not designed for strategic or even grand tactical combat; it is essentially a platoon oriented tactical game. If you want larger maps with massive armies slugging it out, then TOW will disappoint. But if you want to simulate smaller scale engagements the game shines.

First of all, it's important to remember that this is a 3D not 2D game. Consequently, it eats processor speed and video cards for lunch. the maps that come with the game are 2K x 2K but in most of the scenarios, the playable area is a bit smaller. Trying to load and play on a map much larger would bring even cutting edge machines to their knees. A large map with large numbers of troops would be unplayable. So, we have to keep these parameters in mind when designing campaigns.

I believe the game engine can reasonably handle a platoon size force. I’ll use a German infantry platoon as an example. To generalize, a German infantry platoon contained 4 infantry squads, a light mortar section, and an HQ unit totaling 50 men. Even at platoon strength it is going to be difficult to micro-manage all of the men individually. Add to that tanks, SPGs, artillery and I think it's fair to say that platoon-sized battles are reaching the limit of what can reasonably be managed by you and handled by your PC.

This leads to the issue of maps and map sizes. The battles we are able to simulate are but small parts of much larger battles. There are other platoons, companies and battalions on both sides of us. Heavy mortars and artillery are a good ways behind the front line, which is certainly why they aren't represented with models in the game. We are left to imagine how the larger battle is faring. The only thing we can be concerned about is the enemy force in front of us. Larger maps wouldn't necessarily allow us to simulate a whole battle. Scenario designers need to keep this in mind when designing campaigns.

Here I'm going to say something that a lot of purists might think blasphemous. TOW includes a fairly wide variety of maps spanning from France to the Soviet Union. Once we get the map editor and can move static objects, it really doesn't matter what map you use to simulate your battle. Find a map with the topography that fits the tactical situation you want to model; it doesn't matter whether you use the St. Lo map to simulate a battle on the Eastern front. You will be able to draw your own picture on the blank map. You can still maintain historical OOBs even if the map isn't historic. Who’s to say that a map from a part of France wouldn't fit a 2k x 2k section of terrain in Russia? However, I would like to see a greater variety of maps created with interesting topographical features.

Ultimately, the best campaigns will be tied together with a good historical story, so you feel that you are participating in a larger campaign. Once we get the map editor, I think that we’ll have the tools to create campaigns limited only by our imaginations.

Please remember that these are just preliminary observations, but I'm excited for the future.

All the best

Oudy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a nice breakdown of what we should expect. Personally I have no problem with small unit action. The biggest issue I have with working on maps is the lack of natural cover. While I really hate the people who constantly compared this game to Combat Mission, there are a few things that are needed in this game that are in combat mission.

Right now the game is mostly based around assaulting the trenches. Not a bad thing and it would hardly have been rare in WWII, but it is something that has totally dominated the combat in this game. This game needs the natural cover that CM had. There needs to be natural cover, thick woods, and some cover benifits to go along, even if its just statistical, and some kind of AI incentive for them to advance their troops using this cover. This is needed if we are to see some meeting engagement or simple attack and defend battles on non-dug in enemies.

When you think about it, the biggest implication is that battles will always be the same because trenches can not be placed or moved (unless I am mistaken). This means that besides some cosmetic changes the maps are the same and the same flanking moves will work regardless of the enemy (though some well position ATGs could make it much harder).

Unless some kind of natural cover is added, things are going to get boring real fast. One can only stand assaulting and flanking trenches so long before they shelf the game, regardless of the potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@oudy,

dont know how much my pc will stress under a big scenario but i hope someone will try to give it a go. ill surely try that one. My pc has no probs running with these battles and iam sure they could be bigger and it will still run good. But hell it all depends on what kind of pc you got and what kind of vid you have.

Like CMxx i always played the big ones i must admit the smaller ones i played in TOW are also a lot of fun but i still hope you can make a bigger playground for your battles and see alot more units running arround your screen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...