couple of questions

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

couple of questions

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> couple of questions

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

couple of questions - 10/31/2007 11:04:03 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

I know I am going to regret this but here goes....

I am reading the AARs and looking at the screenshots. The map graphics seems "ugly" to me...boring and a bit vacant. How many different terrain types are there?

Can anyone briefly explain the organization structure. For example, can units be moved from under the command of one HQ to another?

I understand the largest map so far is 200x200. I am curious to know how many units accompany that scenario. Also, I understand there might be no limits on map size and number of units but I think I read somewhere it is not recommended going above this because of computer performance issues. I find it odd that a game like TOAW (with an old but tweaked engine) can support 4000 units on a map of 300x300 with no problems (and in terms of graphics I think looks way better). So, what I really want to know is how feasible it would be to take a huge TOAW scenario (EA or FITE) and port it over. Since this game has many strategic options like production, subs, etc. it would seem ideal.

Post #: 1

RE: couple of questions - 10/31/2007 11:15:45 AM

Vic

Posts: 8262
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline

hi wolflars,

It will help if your turn the hex grid on i found. terrain in the release scenarios consists of plains, light forest, heavy forest, different kinds of towns, low mountains, high mountains, swamps, roads, streams and rivers. And sea of course.

Command chain is fully changeable.

And about map size... the units in AT are complex entities and you DO NOT WANT to play more then a few 100 units in a turn. I dont at least. the idea of 4000 units while possible to me would be a game killer.

kind regards,
Vic

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 2

RE: couple of questions - 10/31/2007 11:23:41 AM

seille

Posts: 2134
Joined: 6/19/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

Oha, ugly terrain graphics.....

@Vic
Can i get your permission to post a alpha screen pls ?

I have a lot of early alpha screen saved and some of them would show wolflars
how GREAT the actual graphics are.
Even the graphics are a thing i don�t care about too much when i look at the awesome game engine

< Message edited by seille -- 10/31/2007 4:42:57 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Vic)

Post #: 3

RE: couple of questions - 10/31/2007 11:26:22 AM

Vic

Posts: 8262
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline

there are alpha screens in public domain. so those yes sure.

(in reply to seille)

Post #: 4

RE: couple of questions - 10/31/2007 11:54:22 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

hi wolflars,

It will help if your turn the hex grid on i found. terrain in the release scenarios consists of plains, light forest, heavy forest, different kinds of towns, low mountains, high mountains, swamps, roads, streams and rivers. And sea of course.

Command chain is fully changeable.

And about map size... the units in AT are complex entities and you DO NOT WANT to play more then a few 100 units in a turn. I dont at least. the idea of 4000 units while possible to me would be a game killer.

kind regards,
Vic

Thanks for the reply Vic and congratulations on your release.

You mention terrain types that are in the released scenarios, since I am more interested in the editor I would like to know if new terrain types can be created.

In regards to HQ and organization, I take this to mean if I have 3rd Division assigned to II Corps, I can later (in game) reassign 3rd Division to V Corps? Can units breakdown into smaller entities?

4000 is certainly a lot, but if one were to make a global scenario then 2000-4000 is not absurd (WiF for example). Since I am not entirely clear how AT units function, it is mere speculation on my part. It seems your game is quite capable of doing this. I like what I am seeing in the AARs for showing off some of the features. The action cards and sea supply interdiction for example. I hope the editor is not too difficult.

@seille

In regards to the graphics, I did not mean it as anything more than constructive criticism. I too am more concerned with the engine and how it performs. So far, the game seems to be getting rave reviews.

(in reply to Vic)

Post #: 5

RE: couple of questions - 10/31/2007 4:37:47 PM

tweber

Posts: 1411
Joined: 6/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

4000 is certainly a lot, but if one were to make a global scenario then 2000-4000 is not absurd (WiF for example). Since I am not entirely clear how AT units function, it is mere speculation on my part. It seems your game is quite capable of doing this. I like what I am seeing in the AARs for showing off some of the features. The action cards and sea supply interdiction for example. I hope the editor is not too difficult.

This is an interesting point and one that I struggle with when putting together scenarios. What is the balance between realism / detail and playability? Most of the large scenarios I have put together have about 100 units on a side and take place on a 60-80 hex dimension map. I could easily have made the maps 150-200 hexes on a side and given players hundreds or thousands of units but chose not too. My thought is that the scenario would still run the same, but at a much slower pace. Would you rather play a Russia War game that takes a few weeks by pbem, a few months, or as long as the war itself? My personal preference is a few weeks, and so the scenario is in on that scale.

Within games, I have also looked for ways to improve playability. In War in Europe, sub warfare is abstract. I could have extended the map to include the Atlantic and forced the allied player to run sub patrols every turn. But, I thought this would be less fun. Likewise, I could have started the Soviets with a smaller initial army and made them awake from the start of the game, but I decided to put them on the sidelines until the War in the West was over.

I bought WiF about 15 years ago and I think it is a good strategic game for the format (paper and counters). But the computer is a different format and I wanted to optimize the playing experience accordingly.

quote:

You mention terrain types that are in the released scenarios, since I am more interested in the editor I would like to know if new terrain types can be created.

You can make new terrain types. If you come up with great graphics / new and interesting terrain types, you should post them. Mike Kreuzer has already developed Nato counters which I am thinking of using in a new scenario.

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 6

RE: couple of questions - 10/31/2007 5:12:07 PM

JameyCribbs

Posts: 35
Joined: 2/27/2007
Status: offline

To me, one of the most refreshing things about the scenarios I have played so far in AT is the fact that there are NOT 4,000 counters on the map! :)

Every few months, I get the urge to play TOAW. I open it up and hunt for a scenario. It seems that any scenario that interests me and that has a map bigger than a postage stamp, also has a gazillion units on it.

Now, when I was younger and played TOAW, back in the day, I could handle this counter density better. Now days, as soon as I see that mass of counters, my eyes start to glaze over.

So my hat is off to Vic for AT, and to tweber for his WWII Europe scenario, and for whoever designed the North Africa scenario. I have actually played through the North Africa one three times already. I can't remember the last time I finished a scenario in TOAW.

I realize that a lot of people love all those thousands of units. I'm just not one of them anymore.

(in reply to tweber)

Post #: 7

RE: couple of questions - 10/31/2007 11:22:09 PM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

Okay, so I bought it, downloaded, and started her up�initial impressions�good. The counters are prettier than in the screenshots, though I think the map is still ugly as sin. Overall, I think this game has tremendous potential and I can see where it might succeed where CEAW and SC2 fail (my opinion) in doing the whole strategic thing.

Now I understand why so many units may not be needed. Since the units are essentially shells and can be emptied and filled with any type of equipment, they function more like battlegroups than a corps or division in the strictest sense. This is unique and I think it will present players with quite a challenge trying to determine the right �formulas� for success. From a scenario design point of view, since the TOE/OOBs are abstracted this way, correct balance and accurate representations are quite arbitrary and will be quite a challenge.

On the whole, I give it a whole hearted recommendation for gamers who have been left disappointed with the many duds in the last few years. It is, so far, a fun little gun with tremendous potential�.now, here comes the critique�and it�s a big one.

The main reason I wanted this game was to play around with the editor. I like strategic level WWII games. I have enjoyed many boardgames over the years (3R and Krieg and WiF being some of the best). Computer versions, well�they are awful. I know people like SC2 and CEAW but I think they stink. And while I await MWIF I hoped to play around with AT�and admittedly the Europe scenario is already better than both SC2 and CEAW. However, I purchased this game with an understanding about the editor based on Vic�s comments on these boards. For example:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

I did not put maximums on anything, the largest scenarios made by beta testers that i have seen where about 200x200 hexes. Downside is that playing the AI on huge maps with a lot lot of units will slow down the AI. Also no map wrapping will be included in the initial release.

But this is what I get when I enter a map size of 201x201 (hopefully I am just doing something wrong):

Should this stop people from purchasing, no, because the game system seems pretty decent and I think people will enjoy it�.however, for me, it will probably not get much play because I purchased it for other reasons��..honestly, I feel a little cheated here fellas��

Attachment (1)

(in reply to JameyCribbs)

Post #: 8

RE: couple of questions - 10/31/2007 11:40:48 PM

Awac835

Posts: 279
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

Im not to say wether or not AT should support maps bigger then 200x200 hexes or more then 4k units.
But i dont understand why people are so demanding when it comes to some of these things. Do people really wanna play 1k x 1k hexes maps with 10k units and turns takeing 24 hours in front of your computer?

Ofc the people who play and enjoy War in the pacific please refrain from answearing the above question

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 9

RE: couple of questions - 10/31/2007 11:48:24 PM

seille

Posts: 2134
Joined: 6/19/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

Painting 40k hexes alone.......What a nightmare.

There is a workarround.
Creata a map with max size 200x200 and then add hexes (settings) at the right or bottom (between 0 and 100)

_____________________________

(in reply to Awac835)

Post #: 10

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 12:31:32 AM

rickier65

Posts: 14231
Joined: 4/20/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolflars

...
But this is what I get when I enter a map size of 201x201 (hopefully I am just doing something wrong):

Should this stop people from purchasing, no, because the game system seems pretty decent and I think people will enjoy it�.however, for me, it will probably not get much play because I purchased it for other reasons��..honestly, I feel a little cheated here fellas��

Wolflars,

It's unfortunate you bought based on expecting more than 200x200. I would actually like to have a larger limit myself, BUT...the message you quoted was from early September I believe. I had read through numerous post about this game posted in last week or so, particularly the "size" thread, and pretty much assumed from that thread as well as others that the max size was 200x200 (actually I wasn't sure if it might have been 100X100 as low as 100x100).

In any event, it would be nice to have it lifted, but I it sounds like Vic put quite a lot into this. and so far the comments sound pretty good

I did check some other games, and while I'd like higher hex limit, I notice lot of games I used to play are actually well under the 200x200 limit.

(Hope you still use it to make some scenarios though, thats really what i'm hoping for with this game, is a lot of user made scenarios.

Rick

Rick

(in reply to JameyCribbs)

Post #: 11

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 1:58:50 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awac835

Im not to say wether or not AT should support maps bigger then 200x200 hexes or more then 4k units.
But i dont understand why people are so demanding when it comes to some of these things. Do people really wanna play 1k x 1k hexes maps with 10k units and turns takeing 24 hours in front of your computer?

Ofc the people who play and enjoy War in the pacific please refrain from answearing the above question

Not demanding here bud�just misunderstood.

I really don�t want to get into a debate about this, as it has nothing to do with �demanding��which I am not--but rather �expectations.� (ie I f----d up when I read some of Vic�s comments and evidently I missed a critical one from Erik, so it is my fault and I am not going to say AT is bad or anything because I certainly can see its many merits). To sum it up: I am also not to say whether or not AT should or should not support such extremes but only to say that I am disappointed that it does not (again it would appear this is my fault).

As to �do people really wanna play�� Yeah, they do�and are. WITP (which I don�t play myself), many many many TOAW scenarios, and the upcoming MWIF are huge sellers for Matrix. There are plenty of people who would like to see a Europe (or Pacific or both) map at 15km with divisions, production, strategic warfare etc�

----------------------------------Wolflars Disclaimer----------
Different people like different things in their games. Some like hexes, some don�t. Some like NATO symbols, some don�t. Some like monster scenarios, some don�t. Some like counting each rifleman, some don�t and so on and so forth.
So, to anyone reading this who disagrees with me when I say something is garbage�no worries, you can have it�after all someone has to take out the trash.

(in reply to rickier65)

Post #: 12

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 1:59:15 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rick

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolflars

...
But this is what I get when I enter a map size of 201x201 (hopefully I am just doing something wrong):

Should this stop people from purchasing, no, because the game system seems pretty decent and I think people will enjoy it�.however, for me, it will probably not get much play because I purchased it for other reasons��..honestly, I feel a little cheated here fellas��

Wolflars,

It's unfortunate you bought based on expecting more than 200x200. I would actually like to have a larger limit myself, BUT...the message you quoted was from early September I believe. I had read through numerous post about this game posted in last week or so, particularly the "size" thread, and pretty much assumed from that thread as well as others that the max size was 200x200 (actually I wasn't sure if it might have been 100X100 as low as 100x100).

In any event, it would be nice to have it lifted, but I it sounds like Vic put quite a lot into this. and so far the comments sound pretty good

I did check some other games, and while I'd like higher hex limit, I notice lot of games I used to play are actually well under the 200x200 limit.

(Hope you still use it to make some scenarios though, thats really what i'm hoping for with this game, is a lot of user made scenarios.

Rick

Rick

LOL, yes unfortunate��

Honestly, I obviously misunderstood the whole thing�albeit some of Vic�s comments were a bit vague and the main one I must have locked onto was from Sept. 11. I only wished he had corrected me when I posted the start of this thread last night. The �Size� thread does seem to clarify in a vague and frustrating way. And I somehow missed Erik�s statement, that would have led me to ask further questions, much like jynx11 tried to on Oct 26�he has yet to be answered lol.

Ah well, unfortunate as you say. But it still is a nice little game and I am sure people will enjoy it. As I said, I recommend it so far. It is a gamers game if you know what I mean (without some of the extreme complexities). And for anyone who is a fan of the 3R, WIF, SC, SC2, CEAW concept the Europe scenario in AT is some heavyweight competition�beats SC2 and CEAW hands down so far (although I haven�t got past turn 2, the potential is evident).

As for user made scenarios, I am sure people will step up.

----------------------------------Wolflars Disclaimer----------
Different people like different things in their games. Some like hexes, some don�t. Some like NATO symbols, some don�t. Some like river hexides, some don�t. Some like counting each rifleman, some don�t and so on and so forth.
So, to anyone reading this who disagrees with me when I say something is garbage�no worries, you can have it�after all someone has to take out the trash.

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 13

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 1:59:34 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: seille

Painting 40k hexes alone.......What a nightmare.

There is a workarround.
Creata a map with max size 200x200 and then add hexes (settings) at the right or bottom (between 0 and 100)

Thanks for reply seille. And really it is one of the better releases of late.

If I understand this I will give it a go. Probably be a few days, however, as I should really read the manual before I give the editor a serious go

Ps. 40k hexes is nothing�.mere child�s play.

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 14

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 2:49:57 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

Okay I lied, I am not going to wait a few days....

And...ta da!...it works (can't put in 100--hence the "between 0 and 100", max is 99 but you can do it in increments). I now have a 350 by 350 boundry, which is a start. Thanks seille, you have restored my faith in humanity and Matrix--which gets shattered everytime there is a new release.

< Message edited by wolflars -- 11/1/2007 2:53:15 AM >

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 15

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 3:43:05 AM

rickier65

Posts: 14231
Joined: 4/20/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolflars

Okay I lied, I am not going to wait a few days....

And...ta da!...it works (can't put in 100--hence the "between 0 and 100", max is 99 but you can do it in increments). I now have a 350 by 350 boundry, which is a start. Thanks seille, you have restored my faith in humanity and Matrix--which gets shattered everytime there is a new release.

you mean you can actually "add" over and over??

Thats excellent.

Rick

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 16

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 4:49:43 AM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

Hey Wolf,

I'm glad you found a way to get the map sized the way you wanted, good to hear.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to rickier65)

Post #: 17

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 5:06:49 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rick

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolflars

Okay I lied, I am not going to wait a few days....

And...ta da!...it works (can't put in 100--hence the "between 0 and 100", max is 99 but you can do it in increments). I now have a 350 by 350 boundry, which is a start. Thanks seille, you have restored my faith in humanity and Matrix--which gets shattered everytime there is a new release.

you mean you can actually "add" over and over??

Thats excellent.

Rick

not sure how many times you can do it but I got to 350x350 with no problem, takes the computer about 5 seconds to think about it and then they show up.

Now I can get about to learning the editor. The real trick is going to be trying to figure out the composition of units, the correct calibration as it were. I am already seeing things I disagree with in the stock versions of some scenarios, but hey, that's just me. Or maybe I'm just bitter about some ugly artillery duels I just encountered along the Western Front Nov 1939 against a very aggressive Allied player (Arty packs a serious punch!).

This may sound bizarre but the OOBs for TOAW (with all of its precise equipment calculations) might actually be easier. I noticed Vic has some recommendations about unit size to compostion ratios, but they are not even across the board. Gonna be tricky.

Also, I wonder if there is a way to "limit" how much goes into any given unit shell. I think I would like to prevent "super units" composed of everything but the kitchen sink.

Conversely, there will be issues about breaking down a unit in order to surround stragglers. I noticed elements surrounded on six sides get smashed even though, in this case, 3 flanks were composed of ridiculously small units compared to the surrounded element. This is a chronic wargame problem!

(in reply to rickier65)

Post #: 18

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 5:25:51 AM

Willburn

Posts: 74
Joined: 10/29/2006
Status: offline

quote:

Conversely, there will be issues about breaking down a unit in order to surround stragglers. I noticed elements surrounded on six sides get smashed even though, in this case, 3 flanks were composed of ridiculously small units compared to the surrounded element. This is a chronic wargame problem!

Actually ive noticed that how large my unit is also affects how much of a bonus i get on my flanking. ( I think please correct me if im wrong) I mean if I have two small companies I sometimes get only 50% bonus from a two sided attack. But if both are quite large i get 75%. (I think).. Oh and if this isnt the case maybe that should be implemented? :)

< Message edited by Willburn -- 11/1/2007 5:26:20 AM >

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 19

RE: couple of questions - 11/1/2007 2:21:41 PM

Snoman

Posts: 101
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline

There is no hard limit to the max size of units, but there is a very strong incentive to keep them small. Read section 10.3.2 of the manual. basically, 'super units' as you describe them, end up suffering horrendous casualties and dont stay super for long...

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 20

RE: couple of questions - 1/2/2010 11:27:13 PM

CSO_Talorgan

Posts: 768
Joined: 3/10/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: seille

add hexes (settings) at the right or bottom (between 0 and 100)

They can't be added to the left margin or the top?

(in reply to seille)

Post #: 21

RE: couple of questions - 1/3/2010 2:36:56 PM

Barthheart

Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CSO_Talorgan

quote:

ORIGINAL: seille

add hexes (settings) at the right or bottom (between 0 and 100)

They can't be added to the left margin or the top?

They can now. It was added in a patch.

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to CSO_Talorgan)

Post #: 22

RE: couple of questions - 1/3/2010 9:46:12 PM

CSO_Talorgan

Posts: 768
Joined: 3/10/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barthheart

They can now. It was added in a patch.

Excellent!

It just gets better and better, doesn't it?

(in reply to Barthheart)

Post #: 23

RE: couple of questions - 1/6/2010 8:45:27 PM

Zaratoughda

Posts: 714
Joined: 11/15/2008
From: NE Pa, USA
Status: offline

Hmmm.... I was thinking of porting Erik Nygaard's TOAW Weserubung scenario to AT but, it is between 200 and 300 hexes (a LOT of sea) in at least one direction and thus I didn't believe it would be possible but, I hadn't seen this thread so I guess it is indeed possible... sheesh.... guess I now don't have any excuse other than available time.

Zaratoughda

(in reply to CSO_Talorgan)

Post #: 24

RE: couple of questions - 1/9/2010 5:13:46 PM

CSO_Talorgan

Posts: 768
Joined: 3/10/2007
Status: offline