RE: The Political Question? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

vinnie71 -> RE: The Political Question? (12/19/2009 5:00:14 PM)

Yep that's my question! There were several German generals who were transfered out from the East to the Mediterranean or West - like Arnim, Kesserling, Dietrich, Bittrich, Model, Senger and others that don't come to mind now.

BTW just asking[;)]



Fred98 -> RE: The Political Question? (12/20/2009 10:18:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Offworlder

......a leader which really did badly in the last couple of turns, he could be dismissed by the player? Or is it the AI which dismisses him?




The thing I don't get is that this is a game. Leaders will never do badly. Instead, players do badly. Promotion / dismissal doesn't make sense.

-



PyleDriver -> RE: The Political Question? (12/20/2009 10:28:32 PM)

Joe, leaders do so much in the game. Theres die rolls depending on there level, either armor or infantry ratings, of how much of there forces are commited to the battle. Good leaders are able to throw everything into the battle where other leaders won't..



vinnie71 -> RE: The Political Question? (12/20/2009 11:05:07 PM)

True. In every strategy game there are historical leaders who give you that extra bit. Ex is there an American Civil War game in which the Grant/Sherman combo on one side and Lee/Jackson combo are not special in one way or another? The same applies here. I'm not saying that one has to blame a failed attack on an AI generated general, but being able to influence who gets a crucial command does make the difference...



PyleDriver -> RE: The Political Question? (12/20/2009 11:19:44 PM)

Well we have that too...You have the power in this game to fire him...However, theres only so much you can do in a turn with AP's and what to do with them...Thus the beauty of the game...



vinnie71 -> RE: The Political Question? (12/21/2009 8:59:12 AM)

...after all we're only playing the game as a Hitler or Stalin....[:'(]



PyleDriver -> RE: The Political Question? (12/21/2009 9:12:38 AM)

Not really, were playing the game as OKH or STAVKA...



von Beanie -> RE: The Political Question? (12/31/2009 8:19:22 AM)

I'm not sure how victory is determined, but if there are victory points, then those could be gained or lost by accomplishing certain randomly assigned tasks, liking taking a certain city by a specific date. For example, if you choose to violate a "no retreat" order, you would lose X amount of victory points each turn for each hex surrendered. These sorts of political considerations greatly affected operations on the eastern front, and the players should be subject to the same sorts of political meddling that happened in reality. Nearly all of the board games about the eastern front 25 years ago included these sorts of mechanisms, and I can't imagine that it would be that hard to add as an OPTION.

The political sphere really needs to be addressed in computer wargames of this scope. One of the most disappointing aspects of WITP and AE to me is that there is never an incentive to try something like the Doolittle raid. It didn't make sense militarily, but Roosevelt saw the need for it politically. Sure, the Allied commander could refuse to try it, but then there should be a substantial victory point loss for failing the task. To exclude these types of "random" political matters from military games does a disservice to what the military high commands had, and still have, to deal with.



elmo3 -> RE: The Political Question? (12/31/2009 12:10:47 PM)

Currently victory points are based on taking and holding objectives and for inflicting enemy losses.



Pford -> RE: The Political Question? (12/31/2009 3:10:58 PM)

quote:

he political sphere really needs to be addressed in computer wargames of this scope.


Maybe, but not in this one; on that subject it appears the train has left the station: no player interference by OKH, OKW, or Stavka.



Fred98 -> RE: The Political Question? (1/3/2010 1:04:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Offworlder

True. In every strategy game there are historical leaders who give you that extra bit.



Yes but it am getting the impression that the player has no say. Instead the AI will decide that leaders from time to time get sacked or promoted. I see it leading to much discussiin after the game is released.

-




elmo3 -> RE: The Political Question? (1/3/2010 1:50:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

Yes but it am getting the impression that the player has no say. Instead the AI will decide that leaders from time to time get sacked or promoted. I see it leading to much discussiin after the game is released.


The details are still being worked out but: Leaders can get promoted in rank when they reach a certain number of promotion points. Leaders can be dismissed or executed based on poor performance. There is also a small chance a leader will be killed if his HQ is displaced by an enemy unit. Those decisions are made by the game. However you can also replace leaders by paying the cost in admin points for dismissing them. So it's not true the player has no say.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.96875