|
madorosh -> RE: Next game? (11/1/2011 2:23:51 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: resinslinger
What theater would I like to see the next game cover? Well, for me that would have to be the Western Front from 1940 to 1945. What features would I like to see in such a game? Buildings and structures that take damage that could destroy them and/or set them on fire. Tree bursts. What units or unit capabilities would I like to see? Cullen hedge row cutters on the American tanks, flamethrower equipped tanks, engineer vehicles including the weird ones, more "What If" weapons systems that were in development during the final days of the war. Give the engineer units the ability to blow structures, railroad tracks, and bridges remotely (visions of Remagen in my mind). Ski troops. Offmap naval assets. Working armored trains. Maybe include a few "What If" scenarios/campaigns for 1946/47 including one or two that pit the Allies vs. Soviet Union, especially ones that might have taken place in and around Berlin and Poland. More types of vehicle/tank obstructions. Friendly fire. This is my short-wish list.
If an PCO expansion game/set is being considered, it would be great to see some of the minor nations that fought on the Eastern Front; Romania, Italy, Finnish, to name a few. What about including some of the captured vehicles/tanks (French, Polish) for the Germans and American Lend-Lease vehicles/tanks for the Russians?
I keep nagging Steve (Mobius) to think about including the AA units. I've been told that they wouldn't be much use vs. ground units (what he called tank meat) and that the current game engine can't handle the high ROFs. If the new game engine could include a way to take on enemy ground-attack aircraft and increase the ROF, then there would be a use for these very important weapon systems. However, if it isn't possilbe to include these units because the game engine won't support the capabilities of these units, then I completely understand and agree with Steve (Mobius).
Okay, I've rambled on long enough. Chris.
I think what games like CM and PCO need to do is concentrate on building up capabailities in core sets first. Concentrate on key areas one at a time. PCO has a good start on armour modelling, for example. I've yet to see a game of this type do well at infantry engineer tasks - i.e. how infantry and pioneers negotiated things like barbed wire obstacles, road blocks, minefields, anti-tank ditches, booby-trapped buildings, fortified buildings (including cellars and rooftops), etc. To do this well would I think would take a great deal of time. It also wouldn't result in any great spectacular in-game effects - nothing flashy - which may be a point against it. But at some point, someone needs to get it right. Not just the obstacles, but the ways in which infantry and vehicles interacted with and overcame them, including the specialized armour that was eventually developed.
Far better to get these common elements in the game than the esoteric stuff like naval artillery or armored trains that really wasn't used at the tactical level during a running battle. Work on the stuff in distinct sets and the releases are coherent and achievable.
I would see examples of these distinct groups as:
Common engineering tasks, as described above
Improved vehicle capabilities - convoy movement, improved commands
Advanced infantry capabilities - scaling/rapelling, specialized demolition, parachute landing
Amphibious warfare - assault boats, landing craft, specialized German bunker types as in Normandy (H677, Tobruks, etc.)
|
|
|
|
