marcbellizzi
Posts: 50
Joined: 4/13/2014 Status: offline
|
I am interested to know how units & forces are labeled/named in the game. I realize that military designation systems vary from country to country; however, there really needs to be some kind of continuity, at least within game. NATO produces a 'STANAG' (Standardization Agreement) that all NATO nations follow - it's available online, free, so there's no excuse to be simply guessing or inventing a system. Granted this campaign is pre-NATO, but then the naming doesn't follow WW2 conventions, either. NATO standard symbols are used for the counter-art; I don't understand why this wasn't continued for the units & OOB. Examples: -within the US Army OOB, there's an artillery unit labeled "187 155 Field Artillery Bat". On map, the counter shows "187°". Ok, which unit is this? What's the 187 155? What's a Bat? Batt? Btn? The little circle after the digits appears to be a French/Italian language symbol that denotes the latin 'st','th','rd' - the US Army has never used this. Looking in the 'Ardennes Allied OOB.pdf' the labels are all over the place; US Army Armored Division Combat Commands are noted with the German period (.) after the digit designating the Division (i.e. 5.CCA which on map is 'CA.5'; and while most unit designations are written out in their entirety in the OOB.pdf, the 'CC' is not. It is in the main manual, but that's 4 different places just to find the explanation. Another example of lack of consistency is nine versions of the abbreviation for the rank 'Lieutenant Colonel'-Lt.C, Lt.C.,LTC, LtC, Ltc, LtC., Lieut.Col.- with 4 variants used on the first page alone). Eventually I found the artillery unit in the OOB under the 87th ID. It's the 187th Field Artillery Battalion (155)(GS). The "155mm" is usually set off with paranthesis, at the end of the name; more accurately, US 155mm guns were GS (general support), 105mm were DS (Direct Support). I'm still confused about the degree symbol - if the game were primarily for a French audience, then the naming system should follow that language throughout, nes pas? - Space for unit labels on map has always been an issue with DC titles, I think the max size is 4 digits/letters; the default automatically adds the 'st', 'th' etc to the label, so it's unnecessary to add the degree or any symbol. The font is as big on top of an on map unit as it is below, just not in bold; this should probably be reduced if possible and may help with fitting. - On map the various Combat Commands are labeled "CA.5", "CB.5", etc; what is that? There are battalions and HQs that do not list the parent division in the on-map label so these should more accurately be CCA, CCB, CCR and lose the period and drop the digit (i.e. CA.5 becomes CCA). - German units seem to follow the German style of unit designations up to a point; the counters do not; for example the 13.Fallshirmjäger Regiment has 5 units on map in the scenario "Westwall". Yet all 5 simply show "13Fj" on map. The battalion designation is on the left side of the counter (the 1, 2 or 3 pips); wouldn't it be better to label them 1/13, 2/13, etc; the counter color tells you it's a Fallshirmjäger unit so the FJ up top is unecessary. If this appears 'nit picky', consider this; as a former service member the lack of accuracy is a little disappointing; as an old playtester & scenario designer I find the inconsistent labeling problematic; as a player I find the lack of consistency confusing. If I have problems following or understanding given my experience, I suspect others may as well. I'm not trying to offend. Please don't read in to my comments. I know first hand that designers and developers put a lot of time and effort into their products, and that forum comments can seem callous vs the amount of love dedicated to projects. I suppose that is the crux of the problem. Mr Reijkersz produces titles that display such a high level of creativity and immersion, they really are in a class of their own. I consistently return to play DC:Barbarossa and DC:Warsaw to Paris, because they are fun and provide a level of entertainment much higher than many other games available on the same campaigns/battles. Yet, I'm at a loss why the most visible aspect of the game (the units) do not reflect what otherwise seems clearly to be some of the best game design, detail & production out there. Marc Bellizzi
|