Bucks
Posts: 679
Joined: 7/27/2006
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreekS
I struggle to see how to implement itin scenario's; I already limit ammo on ships and bases to what I think they might need/have. I guess with UNREP I can give immense amounts of ammo which won't be used in relatively short scens. I guess I could have ammo on the supply ship and force players to spend time/effort to cross-deck but as th AI will not do that the AI would be crippled. As the fuel; in my longest scens (Atlantic) frigates can runs out of fuels but most ships appear to have enough. If thats not realistic the DBs would need to be changed to force the player to take fuel from tanker-ships, but again then the AI would be crippled because I think it does not perform such operations.
So yes definitely an improvement in realism but not one I immediately have great scenario-idea's for. Maybe someone else?
Freek
Freek,
I have a request in with the Developers that, C3 will need to discuss for possible inclusion in H3ANW 3.10. This is related to giving scenario designers the ability to set a starting fuel load at a value that's not always 100%. At present we can alter individual ship's ammo loads, but vessels always start at 100% fuel. The requested change would allow scen designers to mod their platforms to some extent during the scenario design process.
This would allow designers to enforce logistical constraints on a player's actions. When used with time critical victory condition settings, I can imagine this would start to open scenario possibilities. If a player starts with say a group of 6 surface vessels and say 3 of these will require refuelling from a non-group tanker vessel, a player is going to have to make decisions about what he refuels and when. Where his units are in relation to his support vessels, their speed and what he has on the "threat board". He may be forced to expose his Tanker to attack in an effort to meet the victory conditions and a designer could make the Tanker part of the victory conditions with a "protect unit" entry. Also as you have stated Freek, you already limit ammo. If we "squeeze" the player a little more we can have some fun  . Take a scenario with a carrier group that's short of weapons. You present the player with a "ordnance shortage", and introduce the need to replenish his magazines or not. I mean how are your pilots going to feel about being asked to drop dumb bombs instead of modern guided weapons? What's the effect of carrying out the same attacks with different weapons. As always imagination is really the only limiting factor.
Also I don't see that having the AO - Artificial Opponent, notice I didn't mention there was any intelligence  unable to use these evolutions as an issue. I'm assuming most players have a larger capacity to deal with tactical problems and I see a designer's job as presenting the player with challenges, not the AO. Also we now have a sim that can be played human vs human, and as such if we wanted to have both sides dealing with these issues, we as designers can always create a specifically designed multi-player scenario to illustrate these options. I have done considerable work on chaff barrier simulation and although the AO can't utilise these types of systems, there's no reason why I shouldn't include them for MP use.
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
UnRep Operations - 
RE: UnRep Operations - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread