RE: Bitter Glory (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

06 Maestro -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/11/2009 2:39:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Widell
On the other hand, I would be happy to give a game with WitP:AE doing the naval stuff, maybe even switching to Harpoon level for certain combat action, TOAW for land battles and ToE levels, Eagle Day to Bombing of the Reich to deal with air op's and probably elements of AGEOD:ACW involved in building units and deciding on chain of command. Then add some Panther Games engine to play select land battles real time just like Harpoon would deal with fleet and certan aspects of air battles. Finally add the tech tree's (and some other parts) from HoI and the events and editor capabilties from AT. If you want economics included add stuff from the Capitalism series. I'm drooling already, but still.... would it make sense and be fun to play?



That's not just a game, that's a way of life[;)]. It would be great, if it could be done and one had the time to play it.



06 Maestro -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/11/2009 3:04:18 AM)

For a bunch of "dreamers", there has been a lot of progress. It looks like a very interesting approach to the war. Some aspects sound much like the upcoming HoI3, but the look is very different. The map really looks good.

I wish you the best of luck in completing this project.

Edit: BTW, I hope the final version of the game will have an English test option[:)].



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/11/2009 2:46:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joshuatree
Thanks for the update!
I do have a question if you don't mind. With all these technologies and sciences to develop, does it actually *do* something gamewise? I mean, I'm used to something like: Inf level 2 beats Inf level 1, unless Inf level 1 is more experienced and dug in. Fighter level 2 beats Fighter level 1, unless Fighter level 2 is disorganized... and so on. But when you say: " 4) wide array of weapons for the constructors (e.g. in the nose of a fighter plane you can mount 2 of 18 different mg and cannons); " 18 different Mg's and cannon's ?? Do you feel gamewise that your fighter gets better with a better gun? I am very curious as to how that all works out.


I'm eager to answer any questions, although sometimes my answers might have been ambiguous ;)
Regarding fighter issue - didn't I mention that also it is possible to vary a number of those weapons in a plane? So not only size, advancement and quality of weapon does matter but also number of barrels is a very important factor. Furthermore brute firepower is modified by maneuverability of plane - airframe and engine manifest its importance. There is no “unit model”, there are planes of your design produced by your industry formed according to organizations charts into air units. You can also design the charts... So we have an air unit composed of various planes, which gave its parameters to whole unit. And here come experience, military doctrine, leaders...

quote:

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro
For a bunch of "dreamers", there has been a lot of progress. It looks like a very interesting approach to the war. Some aspects sound much like the upcoming HoI3, but the look is very different. The map really looks good.
I wish you the best of luck in completing this project.
Edit: BTW, I hope the final version of the game will have an English test option[:)].

We are trying to shy away from abundance of abstractions, which lead, at least in my opinions, to weird feeling that a game is no longer about the second world war, but about any war.
The main version of the game is in English. I post some Polish names with English translation as a curiosity, or maybe it was in order to give a hint that game is made in a far away country ;)
Anyway who might mirror WW2 better then a group of　people devoted to it, a group from the country which was the most “touched” by WW2?



Joshuatree -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/11/2009 4:31:54 PM)

"I'm eager to answer any questions, although sometimes my answers might have been ambiguous ;)
Regarding fighter issue - didn't I mention that also it is possible to vary a number of those weapons in a plane? So not only size, advancement and quality of weapon does matter but also number of barrels is a very important factor. Furthermore brute firepower is modified by maneuverability of plane - airframe and engine manifest its importance. There is no “unit model”, there are planes of your design produced by your industry formed according to organizations charts into air units. You can also design the charts... So we have an air unit composed of various planes, which gave its parameters to whole unit. And here come experience, military doctrine, leaders... "

Thank you for your dedication Artur. And yes we are aware that it is made in a "far away" country [;)] Guess we all share the same hobby.
But as to my question concerning weaponstechnology, leaders, various planes types and so on and so forth... I guess most of us wargamers appreciate that kind of thing, but personally I ask myself this: How does this work out in the game? Can one "feel" in the game that one has the highest standards in weapon optics? I am used to games where you feel relieved to finally be able to produce say level 4 tanks (PzKpf IV, or Panther and so on), or you can finally produce the Focke Wulf fighter. Then you can say, *now* I can beat the T-34/85, or now I can beat the Spitfire, P-51, and so on.
But with this abundance of parameters... do you feel you actually have achieved something, or does it get tedious and a choar to do?
I hope I made myself clear.



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/13/2009 10:35:22 AM)

First of all lets get rid of this “lelvelwise thinking” ;) Surly you can built better/bigger/ more reliable battleship, tank or fighter, but you also can built more and cheaper. Lets look at simple comparison between PzIVJ and PzIVH – J version was a little bit worse in terms of combat capability but also cheaper and it was intentional. There are much more examples n RL which break “level thinking”. T34/76B (1941 version) was more expensive/recourse consuming and of better quality then T34/76C(1942 version).
I think a better question should be like “do I have proper combination of quality and quantity of my tanks, antitank guns, tank destroyers, guns, small arms, etc to deal with my enemy's combination?” or “does my combination became better and better?”
“Things” as they were in RL are much more fascinating then “things” as they were represented in some other games ;) so  I would like you to feel that you are playing “rock-paper-scissors” game, not “bigger is better” game ;)
Anyway should you feel I haven't answered your question, don't hesitate to ask less general questions :)



Joshuatree -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/13/2009 10:59:36 AM)

Thanks for your answer Anraz, much appreciated. Been reading your devdiary again: http://forum.wastelands-interactive.com/viewforum.php?f=105&sid=8de0b62e518ac2feb7d7989784edf1ba 
Lots of info to be found there, including screenshots. Ofcourse "levelling up" an unit is a simplified version of what's going on in RL, but it's done mostly because of gamemechanics and game fluidity... Like your RtV for instance. So I can't wait to see it in this game. Do you have, by any chance, an estimated release date?



Scott_WAR -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/13/2009 11:32:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anraz

First of all lets get rid of this “lelvelwise thinking” ;) Surly you can built better/bigger/ more reliable battleship, tank or fighter, but you also can built more and cheaper. Lets look at simple comparison between PzIVJ and PzIVH – J version was a little bit worse in terms of combat capability but also cheaper and it was intentional. There are much more examples n RL which break “level thinking”. T34/76B (1941 version) was more expensive/recourse consuming and of better quality then T34/76C(1942 version).
I think a better question should be like “do I have proper combination of quality and quantity of my tanks, antitank guns, tank destroyers, guns, small arms, etc to deal with my enemy's combination?” or “does my combination became better and better?”
“Things” as they were in RL are much more fascinating then “things” as they were represented in some other games ;) so  I would like you to feel that you are playing “rock-paper-scissors” game, not “bigger is better” game ;)
Anyway should you feel I haven't answered your question, don't hesitate to ask less general questions :)

Goos to hear. I had to stop playing GGWAW becasue the developer couldnt understand that tech isnt the end all be all of warfare. Higher numbers and better tactics CAN overcome superior tech,....but not in that game.



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/13/2009 9:09:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joshuatree
Like your RtV

Well, in fact principally patches to this game are ours (WI in mind).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_WAR Higher numbers and better tactics CAN overcome superior tech

One with higher numbers and better strategy can beat the other who uses better tactics and superior technology combined with poor strategy. Does it remind you something? ;)



JudgeDredd -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/13/2009 9:47:18 PM)

I've been watching this and I have to be honest, I don't hold any hope for the future of a good, capable AI for a strategic game this side of my death.

I'm only posting here about this because I was initially very interested when I read about it, but I have been sorely disappointed with strategic AI in second world war games for so many years now, I've given up.

Good luck to you though.



Lützow -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/13/2009 10:36:28 PM)

Hearts of Iron style titles are more about meticulous scheduling than operational warfare and there is always multiplayer gaming. That being said, I think Bitter Glory will have a tough stand against HoI 3.



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/14/2009 7:25:52 AM)

 
quote:

ORIGINAL:  Joshuatree   Do you have, by any chance, an estimated release date?


  In a dozen or so months.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL:  JudgeDredd   I'm only posting here about this because I was initially very interested when I read about it, but I have been sorely disappointed with strategic AI in second world war games for so many years now, I've given up.
 
What I can promise is we are going to spent a lot of time and effort while making AI, of course now it is much too early to say if we are able to “take some people by surprise” ;) In general my vision (=our goal) is based on “variational behevior”, eg. while AI is to play as Germany  it must chose one of given global strategies (similar to those which were considered by OKW). Honestly I afraid self-learning AI is out of our range, but we were discussing such thing - even simple solution could “consume” at least two programmers for one year.   The pain of life is that vision usually cannot be realized in 100%, but at least it is worth to try put them into effect ;)
 
quote:

ORIGINAL:  Lützow   Hearts of Iron style titles are more about meticulous scheduling than operational warfare and there is always multiplayer gaming. That being said, I think Bitter Glory will have a tough stand against HoI 3.

  There are not to many such games, so maybe it is enough place for both titles on the winner's podium...    



JudgeDredd -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/14/2009 10:42:50 AM)

Yes...progressional, learning AI is something nigh impossible to bugdet into a game, never mind very, very difficult to acheive. I was not hoping for something like that in my life time. However, surrounding cities with units (regardless of type) to prevent the inevitable? No strategic line of defense in depth?

I'm not saying your game doesn't have these...but these are things I've seen in previous strategic titles...when I start attacking Russia and there's a gaping hole because they decide to protect a few cities? I don't dfind that challenging, realistic OR  (more importantly) enjoyable.



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/14/2009 8:44:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
Yes...progressional, learning AI is something nigh impossible to bugdet into a game, never mind very, very difficult to acheive. I was not hoping for something like that in my life time.

Hmm I think budget of some games could easily allow it, but it seems there is no need for such features in AAAAAA games ;) So at least theoretically it might happen in your lifetime and I wish it for both of us :)

quote:

I'm not saying your game doesn't have these...

In fact in this precise moment it doesn't have as it is in stage of prealfa ;)

quote:

However, surrounding cities with units (regardless of type) to prevent the inevitable? No strategic line of defense in depth? [...] but these are things I've seen in previous strategic titles...when I start attacking Russia and there's a gaping hole because they decide to protect a few cities? I don't dfind that challenging, realistic OR (more importantly) enjoyable.

But what if we try to implement some mechanisms out of AI or even players control, mechanisms which force to build units out/ far behind the front/border, therefore forcing any big country to have strategic reserves? Could it change anything in your opinion, Judge?



JudgeDredd -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/14/2009 9:56:56 PM)

I'm always willing to be swayed.

Never say never.

In fact I was incorrect in my initial post...I seemed to have suggested I wouldn't be buying the game...what I actually meant to say or at least put across is that I won't be buying it out of the gate because I have been sorely disappointed in the past.

I will definitely be reading what people say when it's out...so it isn't a non purchase for me...simply not on my radar until some proper gamers have given it a run through [:D]



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/15/2009 9:56:00 AM)

People who weren’t successfully converted sometimes become greatest adversaries... , but converted people are the best believers ;) So maybe I should find a special way of converting, a bit more private one ;) Anyway now it is just a thought,  because  it will be only possible in the following year...



PunkReaper -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/15/2009 11:18:57 AM)

quote:

So maybe I should find a special way of converting, a bit more private one ;)



Watch out JD this is sounding a bit smutty for this forum....... get a room [:D][:D]



JudgeDredd -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/15/2009 11:33:55 AM)

lol....[&o]...I'm not cheap you know, Anraz!!



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/15/2009 12:27:47 PM)

Punk Reaper , do you know there is a nice Polish proverb: “a hungry one always thinks of bread” :D  ? IMHO for the sake of discussion you `d better get rid of this thoughts full of smut.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL:  JudgeDredd
lol....[&o]...I'm not cheap you know, Anraz!!

   Obviously I was thinking about beta tests :D External betatesting is usually reserved for special people and selected volunteers... Of course I`m not to impose it on anyone. Anyway it is  Judges` job to impose ;)



Joshuatree -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/15/2009 1:49:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Punk Reaper

quote:

So maybe I should find a special way of converting, a bit more private one ;)



Watch out JD this is sounding a bit smutty for this forum....... get a room [:D][:D]


Well Anraz, it *was* funny [:D]

Judge would be indeed the one to persuade to see a capable AI in a wargame.
I'm a bit more positive concerning AI's behaviour, yes sometimes they do odd things, sometimes they can give a great game, but for most casual gamers the AI can be quite a challenge.
It strikes me as strange though that the AI in First Person shooters is pretty good, Half Life 2 for instance, and in chessgames, but maybe wargames are more, much more complex.



Zakhal -> RE: Bitter Glory (4/15/2009 2:04:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joshuatree
It strikes me as strange though that the AI in First Person shooters is pretty good, Half Life 2 for instance,

In realtime games need for fast reaction gives bonus to AI. And it doesnt take much to code an AI that can shoot accurately or run around multiplayer map. Often they also add scripts to sp to enhance the AI but that is not really AI at all.

quote:


and in chessgames, but maybe wargames are more, much more complex.

Chess has a limited amount of moves which can be mapped so the AI can easily select the optimum path. In wargames though i.e witp the amount of different moves is so huge (insanely so) that its not possible to map all future moves. Wargames need more advanced different kind of AI that can calculate good moves from only limited set of information. Witp AI afaik is also based on fair amount of scripts because they are unable to do a real AI for it.

Empire total war the newest looks like it doesnt have scripts but the AI is brainless as always. Almost impossible to loose battle. In RTS games though AI has som chance because it can quickly do multiple things like build base, units and handle many combats around the map. It looses to human in single battles but it can overcome with mass.

Empire total wars AI was also handicapped further with the strategic map they added with the roman war. They should have sticked to the original one just to keep the game somwhat challenging on strategic level atleast.

Way to succesful AI in wargames is not necesserily through AI but by illusion with cheating,scripting,etc whatever means possible. It doesnt matter if the AI cheats as long as the player is unaware of it while having fun and challenging opponent. Even this though can be hard if not impossible to create in bigger wargames like witp.

I studied game theory in uni but most I remember was the sexy ukrainian woman teaching it with her "ukranian" accent. So allthough I find it interesting its not really my field but good luck to anyone who is willing to give it a try to create challenging wargame AIs. Im mostly a singleplayer wargamer so I need it.



dogancan -> RE: Bitter Glory (5/29/2009 9:49:37 PM)

any new updates? I believe there are a couple of people around here interested in this game.



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (6/2/2009 7:22:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dogancan

any new updates? I believe there are a couple of people around here interested in this game.



I`m glad to read it.

We have been finishing “Time of Wrath” recently. It consumes a lot of content-related resources, but meanwhile, step by step, we are building the code of Bitter Glory. For example an interesting detail - in the last few days convoy-related issue has been being implemented. The main idea of our solution is that a transport “tows” its escort to a destination port, but first, the escort “catch” the transport in the given area (all with automatism purpose in mind).

The Diary will return, I guess, in the following autumn.


btw I guess navy guys can recognize this model (made for BG) :)

[img]http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/9640/ship.png[/img]



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (6/2/2009 7:41:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hemal

People playing WW2 games usually have certain perceptions about this era, adapting from books and movies. Any divergence would just disrupt imagination. That being said, the fun part in wargaming is about 'alternating history' and not dealing with unhistoric elements. Got to admit that I didn't consider your 'Road to Victory', because from all I had read it's too shallow for my taste. However, I would gladly purchase another Grand Strategy game, which offers at least same depth as Hearts of Iron.

So please do yourself a favor and take the other road this time, by making 'Bitter Glory' to a worthy alternative for Hoi3 - and omit any unrealistic gameplay elements. Do not commit same mistake as Battlegoat with their SR 2020, since people who are in wannabe-rts-wargames, like 'Company of Heroes', usually prefer titles with an appropriate 3D engine anyway.


'Road to Victory' was a kind of joint-venture. I will never stop telling this ;)

Please let us know what would you recognize as “unrealistic gameplay elements” ? Give us some examples, as it is always helpful to hear the voice of the community.

(I have never played SR any longer then for 6 minutes ;) )



SeaMonkey -> RE: Bitter Glory (6/2/2009 3:58:44 PM)

How about a formation breakdown and grouping feature?  Since undoubtly there will be numerous units it would be nice to be able to form them up in battlegroups to say like army size, assign them a commander and move and fight with them as a single unit with all the advantages of the specialized arms they're in possession of.

Conversely, in areas of diminished activity, you could break them down into say division sized units to cover an area loosely as a defensive screen, or a recon element in the vast unknown of FoW.



madgamer2 -> RE: Bitter Glory (6/2/2009 9:19:18 PM)

Yeah I hear ya....Only once have I had a game with a decent AI. I got a copy when the designer was working out of his apartment. It waqs a navel tactical game called Action Stations and it used the standard WW2 navel plotting board type graphics but was a great playing navel game......its one I miss. As for strategic level....not with the present tech level. One day in the far future when my old bones are dust.....maybe in my next life LOL

Madgamer



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (6/3/2009 7:17:03 AM)

quote:

How about a formation breakdown and grouping feature? Since undoubtly there will be numerous units it would be nice to be able to form them up in battlegroups to say like army size, assign them a commander and move and fight with them as a single unit with all the advantages of the specialized arms they're in possession of.

Conversely, in areas of diminished activity, you could break them down into say division sized units to cover an area loosely as a defensive screen, or a recon element in the vast unknown of FoW.


In short it looks like this:

stacks of corps (we can give the same order ant they are under command of leader from the nearest HQ) ---> corps (with its own leader) --> units subordinated to corps (division, brigades, combat groups*) ---> platoons in a unit (any unit has it own platoons which can be replaced [between units] and detached [as a new unit]).

*Small units are weaker, but much more effective, huge unit can fight for w very long time, but they aren`t effective. The same platoon as a part of brigade (~3000 men, low stats and survivability) is at least teen % better then the same in a typical division (~15 000 men, medium stats and survivability) and ~20% better then in a huge WW1 like division (20000 and more men like in some American, Japanese or Yugoslavian divisions, they are very ineffective/inelastic/ heavy units, but with high stats and survivability).



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (6/26/2009 9:46:55 PM)

While we are finishing Time of Wrath we have finished the process of adding rivers to the world map (I called the screen below "wet dream of a geographer") :

http://screen.bitterglory.com/in/09-06/ineepmflr.png

Some people say that there are too many river, I'd rather say there are huge amount of hexes ;) Just look at whereabouts of Leningrad and Moscow:

http://screen.bitterglory.com/in/09-06/pdaljjgnl.jpg



Helpless -> RE: Bitter Glory (6/26/2009 10:19:22 PM)

quote:

While we are finishing Time of Wrath we have finished the process of adding rivers to the world map (I called the screen below "wet dream of a geographer") :

http://screen.bitterglory.com/in/09-06/ineepmflr.png


Do you differentiate rivers? Low Wisla vs. San.. [:)]



Anraz -> RE: Bitter Glory (6/27/2009 10:06:43 AM)


Yup:)

http://screen.bitterglory.com/in/09-06/nefohgveo.png



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.9082031