Some thoughts on the Map Size (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan



Message

apec -> Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 10:13:48 AM)

First of all, after 10 days of intense playing I feel confident to say that this game is not just fun but it has very solid foundations, the more I play the more I like its mechanics, my kudos to Alvaro for designing this beautiful game.

Regarding the map, I was considering that the current size is somewhat a limiting factor and perhaps a bit larger map would make the gameplay better.
Following the interesting AAR Burns vs. Flaviux you see how the actual front in France is restricted to 2-3 hexes and feels more a sort of WW1 experience, even the BEF seems to have no "space" in France. I have played vs AI only so far, and I experienced the same "traffic jam".
The current distance between Moscow and the german border is approx. 20 hexes, Leningrad is ca. 15 hexes far from Konigsberg that is less than two panzer moving distance. Medium bombers have a radius of ten hexes and positioned around Vitebsk can support both the assaults on Moscow and Leningrad. Honestly there is no feel of the russian vastness that the germans had in 1941 :-)

Of course, I am aware that creating a bigger map is a big effort, requires lots of rebalancing and above all put additional burden on the AI, however I am curious to know what other think about it.



MOS96B2P -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:00:14 PM)

I like the idea of a bigger map where each hexagon has less kilometers/miles in it. However, I'm afraid such a big undertaking might not be possible until a WarPlan 2 was produced way in the future. But again, in general, I do like the idea.

There has also been some talk of how the Pacific could be done and how the scale of the PTO might already need to be different compared to the ETO. I'm not sure if the thinking is to try to place the current ETO and future PTO on the same map where players can fight the entire war in one long campaign? If so changes to hex size may effect those plans for better or worse.



Flaviusx -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:08:52 PM)

Plenty of room to maneuver in the Soviet Union. And Red Army 1.0 is a paper tiger.

But the West is pretty grindy, yeah. It's doable at this scale, but it doesn't feel very fluid. That's okay, this isn't France 1940, it's the whole ETO, and I think the game works as a whole. You can get the job done in France in time, too, although you have to skip the sitzkrieg to make it happen.

Historical France 1940 is going to be very hard to do without a game specifically designed just for that campaign, and that is not this game.

That said, War Plan 2.0 on a different scale like you suggest would be a seriously cool game. And if this one succeeds as I hope it will, maybe that will happen! The basic game design is rock solid and can be adapted to it.



AlvaroSousa -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:14:14 PM)

The scale is ~25-50m per hex. WitE is 10m per hex. So one WarPlan hex is 9 hexes in WitE.

The Pacific will be 50m per hex. WitP is 60m per hex.

WarPlan maps tends to be taller than other maps because of the correct Peter's projection of vertical distance.



Numdydar -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:15:34 PM)

Interesting comment as I have written about the same issue over in the SC:WaW forum. The larger hex scale does simplify the map but it really does not do WWII justice inho.

I decided to do a comparison and started playing Time of Fury of all things lol. The game still has issues but the map scale is perfect. The French/Belgium border that contains Clear hexes is 6. So it looks like double the map scale. As a bonus it has weekly turns too :)

I really do not understand why in making what appears to be a solid game like this that someone cannot just make a decent large map with weekly turns?

I really dread the Pacific map that is being worked on since each hex contains even more area given the above comment.

I suggested that SC:WaW make a larger map as a DLC. Maybe that could be done here as well.

When you come from playing large scale games like WitE, WitP:AE, etc. 'dumbing' down the map scale and playing on it just is not a good experience. But obviously I am not part of the target audience [:(]



Zovs -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:19:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
You can get the job done in France in time, too, although you have to skip the sitzkrieg to make it happen.


My one disagreement with this is that France can fall near the end of June 1940, granted I did this in play testing and I did it while also waiting for the first May turn to attack France and the Low Countries. I was able to take out both Low Countries in 1 or 2 turns and then 'knived' my way into Paris.

Will need to try that in my PBEM game I have going right now with the current release and patches.



Numdydar -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:24:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

The scale is ~25-50m per hex. WitE is 10m per hex. So one WarPlan hex is 9 hexes in WitE.

The Pacific will be 50m per hex. WitP is 60m per hex.

WarPlan maps tends to be taller than other maps because of the correct Peter's projection of vertical distance.


War in the Pacific AE is 45 miles per her. AE was created by the fans of the game, Henderson Field, because the mass majority thought that the original 60 miles/her scale was too large to do the PTO justice. So they spent 4-5 years making the map scale 45 miles/hex.

This is my major issue with SC:WaW as the Pacific is way too small to really do justice to the PTO. If you can create a decent scale map for the PTO, then I will definitely buy. But I am NOT going to get burned again like I did with SC:WaW. Its is totally unplayable for me because of the map scale. Its the only SC game I have regretted buying too as I LOVED SC:WiE because its scale was really well done.



Flaviusx -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:26:14 PM)

Did you do that against a human opponent? Against the AI, maybe yes, but I am skeptical that you can wait until May 40 against a human opponent and get it done by June.

If you do wait you will have more panzers to do the job, but even so.

We will just have to wait and see somebody try this in PBEM.



Numdydar -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:39:22 PM)

Just for comparison, [:)] SC:WiE has 5-6 hexes of clear on the France/Belgium border (depending on how you count).

Even though the turns were not weekly, once I got used to the variable turn length, I thought the game worked really well with those.



Zovs -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:57:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Did you do that against a human opponent? Against the AI, maybe yes, but I am skeptical that you can wait until May 40 against a human opponent and get it done by June.

If you do wait you will have more panzers to do the job, but even so.

We will just have to wait and see somebody try this in PBEM.


Yes it was against another human play tester.



Zovs -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 2:58:30 PM)

IIRC I had 4 Panzer Korps and 1 Mech Korps and I had 2 of the Panzers on Engineer and the Mech (IIRC) on Elite. Pairs asked for Peace last turn of June.



Rasputitsa -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 3:43:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Interesting comment as I have written about the same issue over in the SC:WaW forum. The larger hex scale does simplify the map but it really does not do WWII justice inho.

I decided to do a comparison and started playing Time of Fury of all things lol. The game still has issues but the map scale is perfect. The French/Belgium border that contains Clear hexes is 6. So it looks like double the map scale. As a bonus it has weekly turns too :)


I bought 'WarPlan' and was impressed with the game, although I was disappointed in the map scale, with Belgium being mostly 3 hexes deep in the Ardennes It sent me back to 'Time of Fury', which felt much more comfortable with Belgium 6 hexes deep and weekly turns, which gives much more strategic flexibility.

Keeping ToF going is time consuming and difficult, but it feels right, however the best game is always the game that works and hopefully 'WarPlan' has a lot of development to come.

So I will still run ToF occasionally and watch with interest how 'WarPlan' grows.



Flaviusx -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 3:59:53 PM)

ToF was an interesting game that never got the support it needed to make it into an excellent game.

I think this game does a lot of things better. Economics, for starters. Oil and manpower matter here. The naval and air systems are much more developed, too. Logistics are also better handled.

I think the Soviets get better treatment here as well in terms of how their army develops.

Despite all the complaints about partisans I actually like this part of the game, it takes it seriously.

The AI is already better, imo, and there's plenty of room for improvement. Although I am already moving on to PBEM.




MVokt -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 4:23:02 PM)

Message deleted



Numdydar -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 6:30:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

ToF was an interesting game that never got the support it needed to make it into an excellent game.

I think this game does a lot of things better. Economics, for starters. Oil and manpower matter here. The naval and air systems are much more developed, too. Logistics are also better handled.

I think the Soviets get better treatment here as well in terms of how their army develops.

Despite all the complaints about partisans I actually like this part of the game, it takes it seriously.

The AI is already better, imo, and there's plenty of room for improvement. Although I am already moving on to PBEM.




Totally agree ToF could have been a great game with more support. So far SC:WiE is the best replacement so far.

While the map is a little smaller in WiE, its still big enough to do a good job reflecting the ETO.



apec -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/4/2019 9:31:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

ToF was an interesting game that never got the support it needed to make it into an excellent game.

I think this game does a lot of things better. Economics, for starters. Oil and manpower matter here. The naval and air systems are much more developed, too. Logistics are also better handled.




Totally agree, ToF was an interesting game concept but, although it was the third iteration of the same game (Road to War then Time of Wrath then ToF), sadly it never had a decent IA. Warplan does more things better since day one so I have great expectations on this game.

Yes, a larger map will only be possible in Warplan 2.0, as it is not just drawing a big map but it is all the work required to "scale" the current system on the new map. However a game like this will be an instant buy for me.




ncc1701e -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/5/2019 3:29:05 PM)

Loving geography, if a new map has to be done, I would love to see a better treatment of coastlines. See something like Schwerpunkt Games WW2 Europe, the coasts are beautiful.

[image]https://i.goopics.net/GeVpd.jpg[/image]



AlvaroSousa -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/5/2019 3:51:53 PM)

Very likely they use actual images. It is something I am considering for the 2nd version of the game.



ncc1701e -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/5/2019 4:16:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

Very likely they use actual images. It is something I am considering for the 2nd version of the game.


That would be awesome. When is Warplan 2.0 by the way? Just kidding [:D]



springel -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/5/2019 5:23:17 PM)

I am a bit put off by the shape of the Netherlands in this game, with the grossly enlarged North-Eastern part and the missing IJsselmeer, and the general distortion of other geographies that I am familiar with.

If it is a game abstraction to allow for certain manoeuvres, then the map should also have an abstracted visual theme, like the famous maps of the London Underground. I would appreciate that, I think. But with wiggly coastlines etc. that suggest a real map, but that has all the shapes wrong, I find it hard to be immersed in the map.



Numdydar -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/5/2019 9:24:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

Loving geography, if a new map has to be done, I would love to see a better treatment of coastlines. See something like Schwerpunkt Games WW2 Europe, the coasts are beautiful.

[image]https://i.goopics.net/GeVpd.jpg[/image]


Now that game has the right map scale :)

Edit: Each hex is 7.5 miles for reference.



ncc1701e -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/6/2019 8:16:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Now that game has the right map scale :)

Edit: Each hex is 7.5 miles for reference.


Yeah, nice map fitting very well.



Simulacra53 -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/6/2019 8:30:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa
Very likely they use actual images. It is something I am considering for the 2nd version of the game.


If you mean a full art map, please spare yourself the pain..l

Look at WitE or Flashpoint Campaigns, full map art is much less flexible than tiles.
You may have to give up a little, you gain more in flexibility - easy of changes and modding.



ncc1701e -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/6/2019 9:12:27 PM)

Agree but modding is still feasible. Look at Jison's WITE mapmod. The best graphics I have seen since a long time.
http://thestrategygamer.com/2017/01/31/war-in-the-east-map-mods/



Simulacra53 -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/7/2019 4:22:00 AM)

It is the ease of modding, there are few who would attempt a full scale map mod like Jison or Chemboy,
Jison’s WitE was actually the base for making my statement, and the sudsequent choice of tiles for WitW.



Titan -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/7/2019 9:10:31 AM)

I dont mind the size here, it has a better feel than SC WAW which just feels squeezed..However alittle more play area would be better and i can see that could be easily achieved here without making the map bigger..The far east area is rather large and i doudbt game play ever gets that far.. regardless perhaps less space there and more westwards?



apec -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/7/2019 9:44:27 AM)

Personally, I like the aspect of the current map. I find it clean and easy to read, fully functional for the gameplay. I would only like it to be a bit larger (ca. 1.5x) to have more play area and a less crowded frontlines.



MVokt -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/9/2019 5:01:33 PM)

Map requires a lot of reworking. It's not only about the scale but also about the many inaccuracies.



MVokt -> RE: Some thoughts on the Map Size (11/17/2019 9:50:07 AM)

Checked out that the USSR map contains many inaccuracies. A big one is the location of the city of Mogilev, in Belarus. The city appears to be too close to Minsk. Apart from that, Dniepr river seems not to pass through the city when the city is well located right on the west bank of the Dniepr. Map shows that is the Berezina river instead the one that crosses the city.

On the other hand, Moscow location is wrong. It should be at least 2 hexes NE. Map shows inaccurately that Moscow is at the same latitude than Smolensk when it is further north.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125