Map Question

[TheCaptain]

First off, thank you to the developers and team who brought us the Strategic Command series of games.

Before GC, I was primarily a War in the Pacific player. In playing GC, I'm concerned the Pacific map (distances between islands) is to small and condensed which take away from the reality of ship movements, etc. At least in War in the Pacific you had the vast ocean distances to make it feel realistic.

Are there any game or editor options available to me to make the map larger? Or are there future plans for a map update by the developers?

Kuddo's for the alternate campaign with Germany and USSR joining forces to take over the world.

Thank you for a great series of games.

[Hubert Cater]

Hi Captain!

Glad to hear you are enjoying the game

In order to adjust the map this is pretty straightforward in the Editor, i.e. you can increase the map size and then make adjustments as necessary by redrawing the tiles and borders and ownerships etc., but it can be time consuming.

In terms of future maps, officially developed map changes are not likely but there are a few mods already in the works that have significantly larger maps. One is even a 512x256 map but I can't say for sure when this one will be available as it is being developed, independently, by one of our beta testers.

Hubert

[Gorgin]

Is there a reason that the map for GC did not use the 512 x 256 format? In other words, would it be a mistake to try to mod this?

[Hubert Cater]

Not a mistake at all as like I've mentioned above there are already mods in the works that are being worked on at that size.

[Gorgin]

So why not a bigger map fr GC?

[Von_Altair]

I own SC1&2 and also SC Pacifig war and played a lot of them all. I also downloaded GC demo as soon as it appeared... not trying to troll or anything, but map really looks too small, to make any good tactical maneuvers in important theatres. Yeah yeah I know its now full world map but... I really belive, its better to have good and large map to enjoy the war in one area, than trying to make LARGE map with many small areas.

Have to wait, that someone creates larger worldmap with working campaign and that it goes smoothly enough, then it may be time to buy this as well...Playing in Pacifig or European theatres in GC, after SC2 and Pacifig war feels like trying to drive Honda Civic after Mercedes Benz

[Hubert Cater]

Honestly this was our design choice at the time and I could make the arguments that it made a lot of sense for a variety of reasons, i.e. such as playability, game time, resources and testing etc. but at the end of the day there are always going to be design choices that players will disagree with and we understand that. Essentially this is why we have made the game engine and Editor as flexible as they are for custom changes and/or mods.

[Von_Altair]

Honestly this was our design choice at the time and I could make the arguments that it made a lot of sense for a variety of reasons, i.e. such as playability, game time, resources and testing etc. but at the end of the day there are always going to be design choices that players will disagree with and we understand that. Essentially this is why we have made the game engine and Editor as flexible as they are for custom changes and/or mods.

Yeah its true that editor allows such things to happen. However there are a lot of players who thinks if he/she should buy the game. Then after looking at screenshots or demo and see that a map is quite small (yes a large map but small operation area for example in the europe). Not all the people have skills to make bigger map or patience/knowledge to search if someone maded bigger map. Would be wise to offer an official version. There would be more customers and... easier for us to see multiplayer opponents etc. I am the one who had to skip this game becose of a map. I love the game engine and mechanic itself, just a GC map really feels too small (owning SC1&2 + SC Pacifig).

[Hubert Cater]

Von Altair,

In terms of offering a bigger map, perhaps you are right that it would have been wise to have made it bigger, but of course we cannot discount the possibility that some players would also give the game a pass as they may feel a larger map would make the game unplayable and never be reasonably completed.

Believe me I don't say that to be argumentative, it truly is a concern as much larger maps, especially for a Global game, could make a realistic Multiplayer game unplayable as turn lengths can easily prevent these games from being played to completion and even for the AI some players don't want to spend years finishing a game whereas this game can be played from start to finish in a week or less than a month depending on how much time is devoted to it.

There are of course ways around making a larger map playable on a Global scale and Nupremal showed us this with his Global mod for the Pacific release but those types of workarounds were not what we were after for this release, i.e we wanted a continuous Global map at an appropriately playable scale. Again this was simply our design choice.

Beyond that you are also right that we could have tried to include different scales in this release but at some point this becomes unrealistic since as a business it is very difficult to anticipate what every player would want in a game. Think of it like a car, why make smaller cars when some will argue that most people only want bigger cars? Why not make midsized cars to compromise etc.? Eventually at some point a decision has to be made and with financial constraints those decisions need to be adhered to in order to complete a project and survive as a business.

The easiest thing for us would have been to simply limit the size of the maximum map size in the Editor and call it a day to avoid these types of concerns, but like we've said we wanted to give players the option even if we did not pursue it ourselves and hopefully this is a respectable compromise.

That being said, I completely understand if the game is not for you and this is really why we release demos so players can decide for themselves.

Hope this helps,

Hubert

[Bill101]

When we first started playtesting I did need to readjust to the new scale, but it didn't take long because with the Global game we're really playing at an ever so slightly higher level. It's not that much different, but it does mean that we can spend more time planning at the higher levels and considering our strategies.

The overall Global feel to the game is different to the previous games we've had in this series, and having played it quite a lot now I don't feel that the map scale is wrong.

But it's a personal choice and I do look forward to seeing some larger scale maps, though bear in mind that bigger maps will lead to more units and slower turns. Some will like this, others might not, and turns in the middle to later periods of the war can already take some time (about 10-12 minutes max in my multiplayer games).

[xwormwood]

Hubert & Bill101, you make excellent points, after all the first step could only be to release the first SC Global Game, bringing the improved engine and all those new good ideas to live.

The second step could be not a patch or an update, but an offical expansion. Maybe you could take a look into to one or the other mod (i'm certain you know the most important modders) and to user their mod for the next upcomming release.

I would honestly be willing to pay

- for older releases like WAW, PDE an PT ported into the newest, most enhanced game engine of GC

- for an even bigger but still playtested map with some good ideas how to enhance game speed (i know that the biggest possible map would slow the game alone from the sheer mass of data to calculate, not to forget for the AI having to calculate so much more)

This being said, i'm sure we all will finaly learn to love GC the way this release deserves it. But right now, after the first couple of hours, there is this above described feeling of a "downgrade". Not in the whole game, but in those areas you felt familiar with (from former releases).

Those areas i have never seen before feel simply fantastic (Africa, South America etc.).

This downgrade feeling is probably the result of wrong expactations of some of us customers.

I for example, somehow expected (or better hoped for) that the already excistings maps of WAW and PT would be knotted together, while the not exisiting map parts of the rest of the world would be somehow woven into the whole "package". And you, on the other hand, had to think about how a global game could be work best. The result of your design is a excellent working global game, this i think is pretty sure. Only some expactations, or better: fantasies, weren't fullfiled.

As soon as the initial phase of "i dreamt of this" and "this isn't what i dreamt of" and "well, not what i dreamt of, but hey, this is good" is over, everything should level out. At least thats what i think and feel sure about.

Anyway, kudos for the good, open way you comunicate with your audience, i truly feel very comfortable to have such good, honest and friendly game designer.

Keep up this good work!

[Snowstorm]

Hubert and Team,

I quite agree with XW.

In fact, I would offer something of a compromise solution:

Make an expansion including some of the things XW mentions, but try to make a larger map GC campaign that is included (not replacing) the current 1939 World at War Campaign. This way, those who want the normal (smaller scale) world map campaign can, and those who prefer the larger scale, longer turn global campaign can pick that one as well. People in BOTH camps are happy, and people in both camps will buy the game. Some of us really don't mind the longer turns, more units, and perhaps more strategy involved with the bigger map.

I think it's just something to ponder a bit more on.

[SeaMonkey]

There is beauty in simplicity! I dove right in "Alliance of Evil". I have to admit, the Chinese and Japanese together in a WW2 decorum takes some getting used to, but in a way, if you think about it, it does make sense, there's just no Pacific war.

The vastness of the possibilities has impressed me, even though I had pondered.

I recall a discussion Terif and I had over "Weapons and Warfare" where Terif posed the meticulous balance and variety from SC2 had been lost with the roads, and introduction of the smaller units, anti-air, anti-tank, and artillery that WaW incorporated, among other things. I proposed "it was progress", he retorted it was perhaps regression as it was limiting strategies. Well....Terif....SC2 is back...in spades!

[Colin I]

I seem to be one of the few players who does not want the map bigger. In part it really makes game unplayable if it gets too big (I try and send a PBEM turn off before going to work). This is particularly true for shuttling transports about the place which is a real time waster on a big map. Secondly, it frees us up to think of strategic aspects and not get bogged down at the operational level. The strategic nature is supported by fewer ports - puts a sharper focus on who holds them.

[Armuss]

Map in GC is very good. 256*64 is very playable.

I think: second step is patch, NOT offical expansion. SCGC is last and gold in Strategic Command 2 series. Next big step - SC3.

[Snowstorm]

Since I believe my former message from several posts ago may have been overlooked (and I'm admittedly keen on having it seen by the development team), I've pasted it in below again:

Hubert and Team,

I quite agree with XW.

In fact, I would offer something of a compromise solution:

Make an expansion including some of the things XW mentions, but try to make a larger map GC campaign that is included (not replacing) the current 1939 World at War Campaign. This way, those who want the normal (smaller scale) world map campaign can, and those who prefer the larger scale, longer turn global campaign can pick that one as well. People in BOTH camps are happy, and people in both camps will buy the game. Some of us really don't mind the longer turns, more units, and perhaps more strategy involved with the bigger map. A similar example of this was the old Talonsoft game East Front/West Front. A player was able to choose between playing at the Battalion, Regiment, Division, and finally at the Corp level, each level. If one wanted to play a simple, smaller, and quicker campaign, they played at the Battalion or Regiment level. If they wanted a progressively bigger, more complicated level with bigger maps and more units, they played at the Division or Corp level. This worked well for whatever one chose, and I think it might work well with this game, except with just two sizes offered(and more units involved as well as strategies).

[Gorgin]

A larger map is definitely needed. I get the arguments in favour of the current map, but it doesn't work very well for me. I'd be happier with longer cycle times and a better, bigger map.

[Hubert Cater]

If sales justify an expansion then this might be a possibility.

[Gorgin]

I'll buy a copy.

I've bought everything that you've produced so far. Although, with GC, I have -- for the first time -- been a little bit disappointed -- mostly by the scale of the map, when the program allows for a much larger one. I doubt that I have the skill or the time to attempt to do it on my own with the Editor.

[SeaMonkey]

Please.....you guys....have patience...the bigger map is coming.

Besides....you might be awaiting an upgraded CPU to run it......be careful what you wish for.