*Lava*
Posts: 1924
Joined: 2/9/2004 Status: offline
|
Hi! Just some comments and observations... I noted that the original post failed to mention an innovative command and control system, which, IMHO, is the heart of the game and separates it from all the rest. I really hope this isn't the last time we see such a system (but sadly I don't think we will because it is too challenging for the player). It is really quite revolutionary and, IMHO, is the best simulation of command and control I have ever seen in a wargame at the grand strategy level. And there is the rub... too much thinking and not enough counter pushing. Of, course, this system puts a lot of limitations on the player. It forces him to really think out a strategy, to plan way ahead, especially for the summer campaign season, and to allocate his very precious strategic points in attempting to meet his goals. Now nobody has really delved into this aspect of the game, its' truly innovative command and control system, on these boards, and it is IMHO, a real shame. If you get into a PBEM game, you will rapidly understand just how radical this command system is. Believe me, you do not need to mouse scroll all over the map. You find yourself staring at a front, thinking about your strategy, then switching to another front via the jump map, and again... staring at it... your brain just whirling around trying to figure how to proceed. My personal opinion is that the game system requires a lot of thinking, more than what the casual wargamer may want to put in. No insult intended here, but a 24 hour impression of this game is almost worthless. But what we do see here, and I have seen this on other game boards, is that folks now adays are just unwilling to put the effort into understanding how to play a game... any game. An example, Mad Minute Game's Take Command Series. If you had watched that forum from day one and followed studiously throughout the evolution of the two games they produced you will see that the majority of the folks only play half the game. MMG's games can be broken up into two quite different games (mechanics wise) at the point in which the player cannot micromanage every unit on the field.. the Corps and Army level. At the brigade and division level, folks are free and have the time to micromanage to their hearts desire, and this is the game they play. But the Army/Corps level requires a far greater understanding of how the units work autonomously (ai controlled) and it is quite apparent, that folks just aren't willing or care to learn how to play at the level. It requires a far deeper understanding of the game, and thus goes neglected. It appears to me that the a large percentage of folks have a threshold of about one or two sessions with a game in which they expect to, in general, be able to understand all major features. When that doesn't happen the game is shelved and/or they find reasons to try to explain why they couldn't grasp the methodology in the time it takes to eat a Big Mac. GoA is not your normal wargame. It is a completely different system; a far superiour system of simulating war at the grand strategy level. Unfortunately, while folks beg for innovation in wargames, when they get it, the "Big Mac" mentality of game playing means they don't have the time to actually appreciate it. This doesn't apply just to wargaming (where folks have built an urban legend that their "thinking" games set them aside from the rest), it now, IMO, applies to all games. The "Big Mac" mentality is here to stay, whether you are an FPS affectionado or a wargames grognard. I guess we need to get used to that. Again, this is merely my observation of folks who play games and the feedback I see on the forums of many games. Nothing personal intended. Ray (alias Lava)
|