kipanderson -> Great news… few potential traps . (7/5/2006 9:17:22 PM)
|
Hi, The new series of games, and I hope it will be a series, sounds great. An improvement on an already fine game system. I will buy it for sure [:)]. However… just a couple of concerns. Firstly, Direct Fire and operational games, even the lowest level of operational games, do not mix, in my experience. Panzer Campaigns was broken, in terms of the realism of the simulation, by have direct fire as part of the combat procedure. Of course, Panzer Campaigns has been around for a long time, it is not its commercial success or otherwise that I am commenting on, but in terms of realism it did not make the grade in large part because of direct fire. Remembered that in all but the most open of open terrain even AFVs can take cover. Remember the “empty battlefield” [;)]. Think through when direct fire would happen, even between AFVs units. It would not happen just because the units were 1km apart, or oppose each other in the line. They would be behind structures, dips in the ground and such. The direct fire would happen when one side or the other were engaged in an assault of one kind or another. So why not include “direct fire” as just part of the assault/probe. Why have direct fire at all? Secondly… a point I have made a number of times before… I hope that units will not be “too agile” [;)]. Anyway… am greatly looking forward to the game. Do not take my concerns as criticism before Battlefront is even released. It is not meant that way. Finally, do consider options as a way to make a game that could be novice friendly and usable for the more serious wargamer and military history nut. All very good fun, All the best, Kip.
|
|
|
|