|
K62 -> (10/17/2003 9:42:54 AM)
|
I also vote for #1, even though the choice seems rather vague to me.
For one thing, in SPWaW accuracy is an important part of playability. People have fun with this game [I]because[/I] it is detailed and well-researched. It makes you feel that you can/must take the same kind of decisions as a field commander did in WW2. It makes you learn more about this great historical event.
That's more than 50% of the fun IMHO. That's why I vote for maximum accuracy - because I want maximum bang from the game ;)
Does playability mean for you "blowing things up" (i.e., multimedia effects) like in the last option of the poll?
Or does it mean play balance, like in your first post? :confused:
If it means [B]play balance[/B], that's even [I]harder[/I] to achieve than accuracy! Even a game as comparatively simple as chess is disbalanced and your chances and strategies depend a lot on which side you play.
A simple example for SPW@W. Let's say you have 1000 buy points to get tanks. It is hopeless and impossible to figure out a cost scheme that will allow you equal chances whether you buy Tigers or M4s! It just depends too much on terrain, support troops, weather etc. Somebody will always have good reason to complain that he was 'beaten on the purchase screen' :D
The examples are kinda confuse :( Can you, or anybody, guarantee that no batallion commander ever used MCs as "fast scouts" in WW2? To put it differently, does accuracy imply you have to know perfectly your army's drill book - and follow it to the letter? I don't think so.
Artillery limitation [I]is[/I] historical IMHO. There was only so much arty a small unit could have and so much that could be shifted from division reserve. It is not perfect (Americans should usually have more points for arty, Soviets in late '41 only a few big guns since they lost most everything in the retreat) but it's a step in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
