Similarity with Command Ops Series (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns Series



Message

moet -> Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 2:01:57 PM)

I cannot help, each time I play Flashpoint Campaigns (FCRS), I think of Command Ops series (COps). I feel that both games have things in common that no other games have.

Strange feeling, since FCRS has no special order system: in COps, you ask HQ to execute your orders (in a smaller way Panzer Command Ostfront works also like it), while in FCRS you must give an order to each and every unit, HQ included, and all those orders are independent.

It is not the fact that you can fix the units’ stance while they are moving or staying still, any good wargame allows it.

So why do I feel that, with both games, I lead an intelligent army who does most of the work by itself? I need your help on this. Is it that in both games:

- You give « generic » orders. The AI has a quite big latitude in handling them depending on the situation.
- You don’t target enemy, you try to control areas. The AI chooses targets.

Is that (only) it?



TheWombat_matrixforum -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 2:11:12 PM)

That, and both design teams share I think a real desire to model combat, as well as make it a "game." They are looking at battle simulation from a theoretically sound and fairly high level, going for a command experience rather than a "nuts and bolts" experience, I'd say.



FroBodine -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 2:20:46 PM)

While I love this game, I still wish I had more control over my units. What about an override command where you could manually select your targets, for those specific times when you really want that level of control. I understand the vision of this game is you are not down in the trenches fighting. Maybe it could be an option in the settings, allow direct control or not. To go a bit further, maybe you only get a limited amount of direct control opportunities per game. Per hour?

Just some thoughts. I just feel like I am playing the game, I want to order my men! I know, go play another game, right? Well, I love this game, and I'm wondering if just a bit more direct control or variety of orders would push this game into the best of the best.



moet -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 2:24:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheWombat
…going for a command experience…

That is what I feel (and love) about this game. [:)]




Grim.Reaper -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 2:40:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jglazier

While I love this game, I still wish I had more control over my units. What about an override command where you could manually select your targets, for those specific times when you really want that level of control. I understand the vision of this game is you are not down in the trenches fighting. Maybe it could be an option in the settings, allow direct control or not. To go a bit further, maybe you only get a limited amount of direct control opportunities per game. Per hour?

Just some thoughts. I just feel like I am playing the game, I want to order my men! I know, go play another game, right? Well, I love this game, and I'm wondering if just a bit more direct control or variety of orders would push this game into the best of the best.


If this was ever considered, I would definitely want it to be optional since I actually prefer the opposite where I am not directly controlling every unit. That is one of the big attractions for me and this game. Too many games out there require micro management and becomes too much work for me. Certainly understand others might have different opinions so if it could be pulled off with an optional setting, then no issue for me.



cbelva -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 3:29:34 PM)

I have Command Ops and like that game too. However, they are very different systems and FPC is in no way trying to duplicate what Command Ops does (which is obvious). But yes there is a feel that is similar when playing both games. My I suggest my thoughts as to why they make us think of each other when playing...

1. Both games systems are unique in their own rights and give you the overall feeling of being a commander leading your troops in a desperate fight.
2. They both walk the fine line between sim and game.
3. I have found myself in both games yelling at my pixel troops and frustrated that my plans were not working out as I had envisioned [:D]



CapnDarwin -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 4:55:18 PM)

jglazier, the question I have is how do you envision implementing this target function when the resolution phase is running and can't be interrupted? Do you mean giving a unit a priority type of target? Something it will shoot at even if another threat is closer or deadlier then the selection.



Mad Russian -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 4:59:12 PM)

A few thoughts of my own,

quote:


(in a smaller way Panzer Command Ostfront works also like it)


I think I've heard of that game. [:D]

quote:


2. They both walk the fine line between sim and game.


This is a subject in almost every meeting we have. How does any action/addition/change the way the game plays.


quote:


3. I have found myself in both games yelling at my pixel troops and frustrated that my plans were not working out as I had envisioned


HEY, those are my pixel troops you're yelling at! They don't belong to you!! I just loaned them to you until the smoke clears. [:-]

Good Hunting.

MR



CapnDarwin -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 5:05:02 PM)

On the topic of game styles, yes we probably are in that unique class of game/simulation of making you a commander or in better terms a command staff. This one of the reasons FPG and CO games were used to do simulated staff exercises at Origins game fairs for a number of years. CO looks at a much larger picture of the fight up at an operational level. Factors like supply and sleep and operational tempo are major elements. They are good games for that level warfare. Flashpoint Campaigns looks at a smaller slice of time and location and that is why it is called a grand tactical simulation.

Both are excellent games at what they try to do. Granted, I'm a bit biased about one of them. [;)]



nukkxx5058 -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 5:11:30 PM)

I don't think we can compare a real time game and the turn based WEGO engine of Flashpoint.
I personally don't like real time , even when it's pausable.
I recognize that command ops is however a very good game.



CapnDarwin -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 5:16:26 PM)

nukkxx, I'm with you there. Not a real time strat guy myself. Pause helps, but just enough to play a good game like CO.



moet -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 5:50:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin
Flashpoint Campaigns looks at a smaller slice of time and location and that is why it is called a grand tactical simulation.


Do you plan to create bigger maps where the player would have more space/units to maneuver? May be raising the campaigns to the operational level?



FroBodine -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 6:01:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin

jglazier, the question I have is how do you envision implementing this target function when the resolution phase is running and can't be interrupted? Do you mean giving a unit a priority type of target? Something it will shoot at even if another threat is closer or deadlier then the selection.


No, I don't think a priority type of target would be very useful, for the exact reason you state. If something deadlier is closer or threatening, then obviously you want that target to take precedence.

I have typed about three different ideas of how this might work, but I keep saying to myself as I type that, no, that won't work in this type of game. Possibly for air units it might work. Your ground units attack their best targets per the doctrine, and so do your air units. But, you can give a specific target to a helo or jet if you want, for a specific surgical strike. I don't know. That might be cool.

Maybe i just need to get away from my direct orders way of thinking and enjoy this game for what it is. Which I am, don't get me wrong.



CapnDarwin -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 6:03:33 PM)

moet, not at this time. Like that WW2 would require a scale change, shifting to an operational level would need the same thing and you would need to layer in the other elements as well.



Mad Russian -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 6:09:25 PM)

We have experimented with different sized maps. I would think you could see some different sized map in the not too distant future.

Good Hunting.

MR



jack54 -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 8:17:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

We have experimented with different sized maps. I would think you could see some different sized map in the not too distant future.

Good Hunting.

MR



I was wondering about a set of overlapping maps; A campaign could be created where the final objective area of one map ends up being the setup area for the next scenario...probably less recoup time in-between battles. Just thinking out loud.



cbelva -> RE: Similarity with Command Ops Series (10/18/2013 8:27:50 PM)

I would love to see an operational campaign system where the battle could flow over one large map or a series of interlinked maps. We have briefly discussed that. The big issue was getting the current system up and running.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
6.359375