Multiple sides in battles

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Multiple sides in battles

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] >> Armored Brigade >> Multiple sides in battles

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Multiple sides in battles - 6/3/2017 10:32:28 PM

wargamerrr7449

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/3/2017
Status: offline

Would it be possible to see multiple-side battles in the new version of Armored Brigade? I mean the 'Ally' feature, which is presented in Steel Panthers. For example, USA + West Germany vs. USSR + DDR.

In my opinion, it will make the gameplay more interesting since the player will not be limited to his own nation army. Moreover, it will make the game more realistic, because in real life US and West German troops would always fight together.

Post #: 1

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/6/2017 10:49:38 PM

Veitikka

Posts: 1304
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

Was it really possible to have multiple factions per side in Steel Panthers? I didn't recall that.

Unfortunately in AB it won't be possible. However, in a campaign the playable and enemy factions can probably change between the battles.

_____________________________

Know thyself!

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 2

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/7/2017 3:27:58 PM

wargamerrr7449

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/3/2017
Status: offline

Actually, it was not really a multiple faction choice (factions are like USA vs. North Vietnam), but in WinSPMBT and WinSPWW2 it is possible to select Ally units under the Ally flag. They will be under player's control but they will belong to Ally. For example, Soviet Union can also use some Czech units under czech flag.

Is it possible to implement something like this later into the game?

The second question is about unit icons on the battlefield. In free version I tried to make some unique icons for special regiments (like color emblems) but all the color is destroyed by blue/green/red overlay. Is it possible to, somehow, remove this overlay and make possible to add colored emblems?

(in reply to Veitikka)

Post #: 3

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/7/2017 8:53:37 PM

calgar

Posts: 121
Joined: 1/5/2012
Status: offline

Hi!

Just saying that on the level that we see in ArmBde, multinational coop is not really the norm. At least not during that time frame. This level of cooperation is really being implemented today, and even now this magnitute is something new.

Cheers

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 4

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/8/2017 2:43:21 PM

Veitikka

Posts: 1304
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wargamerrr7449

Actually, it was not really a multiple faction choice (factions are like USA vs. North Vietnam), but in WinSPMBT and WinSPWW2 it is possible to select Ally units under the Ally flag. They will be under player's control but they will belong to Ally. For example, Soviet Union can also use some Czech units under czech flag.

Is it possible to implement something like this later into the game?

It can be possible, but I think it would be unrealistic to have a HQ unit commanding platoons of various nationalities. I believe that in real life they would be operating inside their designated boundaries, in separate areas. Considering the dynamic nature of the game, it would be more realistic to play two smaller tactical battles (one with each faction) in a campaign, instead of one large battle with mixed factions.

quote:

The second question is about unit icons on the battlefield. In free version I tried to make some unique icons for special regiments (like color emblems) but all the color is destroyed by blue/green/red overlay. Is it possible to, somehow, remove this overlay and make possible to add colored emblems?

I suppose you're talking about the formation "flags". This is a good question. I think it should be possible to give them custom colors.

_____________________________

Know thyself!

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 5

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/8/2017 8:29:44 PM

wargamerrr7449

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/3/2017
Status: offline

I mean small green icons above formations and big blue icons above individual units. What about them? How can I make them colorless?

(in reply to Veitikka)

Post #: 6

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/8/2017 9:40:57 PM

Veitikka

Posts: 1304
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wargamerrr7449

I mean small green icons above formations and big blue icons above individual units. What about them? How can I make them colorless?

It's not possible to remove the colors in the freeware version.

We'll make the formation icons use the image colors, so these can be modded to any color. However, the unit icon colors are manipulated by the engine, so there's more control over them. Destroyed units, units under fire etc. Also, recently I implemented a nice little role-playing feature, allowing the player to assign himself to any unit in the setup phase. That unit should be rendered in a different color, and so on...

_____________________________

Know thyself!

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 7

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/13/2017 8:28:07 PM

wargamerrr7449

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/3/2017
Status: offline

Another interesting question: will there be naval units, paratroopers and truck-towed artillery?

(in reply to Veitikka)

Post #: 8

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/14/2017 8:03:12 AM

TAKODA

Posts: 32
Joined: 3/22/2014
Status: offline

Troop transport helicopters capable of deploying troops and equipment during game play would be amazing.

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 9

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/14/2017 11:19:16 PM

Veitikka

Posts: 1304
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wargamerrr7449

Another interesting question: will there be naval units, paratroopers and truck-towed artillery?

No naval units.

It would be suicidal to drop paratroopers or conduct an air assault to a heavily defended enemy front line. I think airborne assaults are outside the scope of AB's tactical battles. I'd like to have units that can infiltrate the enemy lines, but such units could really unbalance the game.

There will be static light artillery, but without trucks, and only one faction will have them.

_____________________________

Know thyself!

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 10

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/15/2017 9:58:33 AM

wargamerrr7449

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/3/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veitikka
No naval units.

It would be suicidal to drop paratroopers or conduct an air assault to a heavily defended enemy front line. I think airborne assaults are outside the scope of AB's tactical battles. I'd like to have units that can infiltrate the enemy lines, but such units could really unbalance the game.

There will be static light artillery, but without trucks, and only one faction will have them.

At the same time, all these features are successfully implemented in WinSPMBT and WinSPWW2. Well, I think that you have lost at least one potential buyer :)

(in reply to Veitikka)

Post #: 11

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/15/2017 12:57:43 PM

Veitikka

Posts: 1304
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wargamerrr7449

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veitikka
No naval units.

It would be suicidal to drop paratroopers or conduct an air assault to a heavily defended enemy front line. I think airborne assaults are outside the scope of AB's tactical battles. I'd like to have units that can infiltrate the enemy lines, but such units could really unbalance the game.

There will be static light artillery, but without trucks, and only one faction will have them.

At the same time, all these features are successfully implemented in WinSPMBT and WinSPWW2. Well, I think that you have lost at least one potential buyer :)

The games have different design philosophies. If a feature is "cool" it's not necessarily "realistic" at all. SP has equipment that the AI can't use properly.

Dismounted scouts that start in the enemy setup zone are still possible though. I guess the deeper in the enemy area they try to get the lower their chances should be. Also, they should not start very close to enemy units. My main concern is that the player could instantly know where the enemy main force is, and then start shelling them with artillery.

_____________________________

Know thyself!

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 12

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/15/2017 5:29:24 PM

wargamerrr7449

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/3/2017
Status: offline

Would it still be possible to mod these features into the game? I think that, even though the main game may lack these features, players should have a chance to use them in their mods. For example, if I am doing a WW2 themed mod, how could I simulate Operation Market Garden or Normandy airborne landing?

Being mod-friendly is very important for games today. Most successful strategies sometimes continue to live for decades because of player-created content.

(in reply to Veitikka)

Post #: 13

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/17/2017 11:18:26 AM

Veitikka

Posts: 1304
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wargamerrr7449

Would it still be possible to mod these features into the game? I think that, even though the main game may lack these features, players should have a chance to use them in their mods. For example, if I am doing a WW2 themed mod, how could I simulate Operation Market Garden or Normandy airborne landing?

Being mod-friendly is very important for games today. Most successful strategies sometimes continue to live for decades because of player-created content.

AB is very mod-friendly when it comes to the content, and the game has an in-game data editor. However, the core engine cannot be modded, and I don't see how airborne landings could be implemented without changing the engine. AB has low-flying close air support aircraft and scout helicopters only. On-map artillery with trucks can be added by a modder.

_____________________________

Know thyself!

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 14

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/17/2017 2:10:14 PM

wargamerrr7449

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/3/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veitikka
AB is very mod-friendly when it comes to the content, and the game has an in-game data editor. However, the core engine cannot be modded, and I don't see how airborne landings could be implemented without changing the engine. AB has low-flying close air support aircraft and scout helicopters only. On-map artillery with trucks can be added by a modder.

That is what I am actually talking about. I don't know how difficult it is to add airborne landings or naval units for developers, but I think that it will bring the game more players because there is no such easy-to-mod game, which will feature almost all the branches of armed forces. It is like 2D version of Wargame: Red Dragon.

Maybe there is a chance to see these additions as DLC? Many DLCs actually change the overall gameplay and the engine itself (just look at Paradox Interactive strategies).

(in reply to Veitikka)

Post #: 15

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/18/2017 9:24:29 PM

Veitikka

Posts: 1304
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wargamerrr7449

That is what I am actually talking about. I don't know how difficult it is to add airborne landings or naval units for developers, but I think that it will bring the game more players because there is no such easy-to-mod game, which will feature almost all the branches of armed forces. It is like 2D version of Wargame: Red Dragon.

There's a reason why a game that has it all does not exist.

I think that if you want to make a game very flexible then the core engine must be very generic, and unit behavior and such is implemented in a script based engine on top of it, so the modders can get creative. That's not how AB is implemented. Unit behavior is in the core engine, which can't be modded. All you can do is to give it a set of parameters.

quote:

Maybe there is a chance to see these additions as DLC? Many DLCs actually change the overall gameplay and the engine itself (just look at Paradox Interactive strategies).

I don't see naval units coming, because this is a land warfare game, but there's a chance that paratroopers in some form could be added in the future. It depends on what the themes of future DLCs and add-ons will be.

_____________________________

Know thyself!

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 16

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/21/2017 1:02:36 PM

wargamerrr7449

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/3/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veitikka
I don't see naval units coming, because this is a land warfare game

Would it still be possible to mod-in quasi-naval units? I mean units, which can float on the water but unable to move on hard ground (like small boats or landing crafts). In Steel Panthers these parameters are set by 'land speed' and 'water speed'. Actually, I don't remember whether it is possible for Soviet BMPs to swim in Armored Brigade.

(in reply to Veitikka)

Post #: 17

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/25/2017 7:51:09 PM

Veitikka

Posts: 1304
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wargamerrr7449

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veitikka
I don't see naval units coming, because this is a land warfare game

Would it still be possible to mod-in quasi-naval units? I mean units, which can float on the water but unable to move on hard ground (like small boats or landing crafts). In Steel Panthers these parameters are set by 'land speed' and 'water speed'. Actually, I don't remember whether it is possible for Soviet BMPs to swim in Armored Brigade.

Currently it's not possible to make landing crafts. I was thinking about having them, but currently the units cannot possess amphibious capabilities. I think in reality many vehicles need some preparation before they can swim in water.

_____________________________

Know thyself!

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 18

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/27/2017 9:26:22 PM

wargamerrr7449

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/3/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veitikka
I think in reality many vehicles need some preparation before they can swim in water.

What about BMPs, PT-76 and BTRs?

(in reply to Veitikka)

Post #: 19

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 6/29/2017 8:10:23 PM

Veitikka

Posts: 1304
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wargamerrr7449

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veitikka
I think in reality many vehicles need some preparation before they can swim in water.

What about BMPs, PT-76 and BTRs?

I've heard that BMPs' swimming capability was not that good.

The game doesn't feature any bridging equipment, so it would unrealistically affect the game balance if only one side can cross a wide river, or even swim right through a lake. River-crossing is a very complex operation.

There are AI issues. If the mech units can swim but tanks cannot, it requires a special plan (or just ignoring the swimming capability). What if a mechanized company is advancing dismounted, and then meets a river? The AI should be smart enough to collect all the infantrymen back to the vehicles before moving on. Otherwise the grunts are left to the wrong side of the river.

I believe that swimming vehicles won't be in the first version of the game, but perhaps in the future releases.

_____________________________

Know thyself!

(in reply to wargamerrr7449)

Post #: 20

RE: Multiple sides in battles - 7/1/2017 6:40:35 PM

nikolas93TS

Posts: 619
Joined: 2/24/2017
Status: offline

And amphibious crossing is not simple as just driving your vehicle into the water.

The depth and width of the river, bank conditions, and the current�s velocity are major factors to determine the unit�s ability to conduct a crossing, even if amphibious. These factors will determine if the force can cross by fording/swimming, and by rule, reconnaissance of the near shore and predetermined crossing sites are necessary. Such actions are performed, whenever possible, by engineer reconnaissance teams which might be drawn from the divisional level, identifying "wet gaps" early and deploying the required resources to allow hasty crossings.

Also, due to the limited organic crossing assets, additional support from echelons above the brigade combat team or regiment is often necessary. That support is only available when that HQ have taken purposeful action to position the assets at the right time and place and integrate them with the manoeuvre force to make a hasty crossing feasible. Coordination of these assets must be made early in the planning process.

So, as Veitikka mentioned, it is a complex process, both doctrinally and in game terms. Currently, we do have shallow water and fording areas which (at least abstractly) assume above-mentioned preparations were made. I don't exclude that in future we might expand river crossing operations.

(in reply to Veitikka)

Post #: 21