Question for all players (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Warrior -> Question for all players (11/22/2001 7:40:00 AM)

Would you rather play a scenario that is extremely difficult to win, or one that is a bit easier? I've been designing some really tough fights, but I want to make battles that almost everybody can enjoy. What's your preference?



Drex -> (11/22/2001 7:51:00 AM)

As much as I hate to admit it, the difficult scenarios give you more playing time as once you win the battle you are not as likely to replay it.



AlvinS -> (11/22/2001 8:05:00 AM)

I feel that I learn more from the tough ones. Also the feeling of finally winning a tough one is much greater than a simple one. I like suprises! AlvinS



Don Doom -> (11/22/2001 9:21:00 AM)

The last name says it all.



Alexandra -> (11/22/2001 10:02:00 AM)

I prefer ones that don't make it easy to get draws. I don't care if I win or lose - I just hate to draw Alex



Warrior -> (11/22/2001 11:10:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Alexandra:
I prefer ones that don't make it easy to get draws. I don't care if I win or lose - I just hate to draw Alex
Well, you probably won't like the Manchuria scenario I just finished. Russians vs. Japs, July 1945. Russians attempting to capture Mine #7. I knew what was happening and I could only get a draw. I had a LOT of Red Guards infantry with armor support, but the Japs are incredibly stubborn!! It was 30 turns of pure "Let's bash our heads against a stone wall until we make a hole"-type combat. (I'm now going to make an "easy" version for the faint of heart... which in this case is me! )



Capt. Pixel -> (11/22/2001 12:35:00 PM)

Oh you know - I bash my head all day against a stone wall so's I can afford the electricity to play SP. I kinda prefer to have a game that lets me play with the 'toys' without necessarily ticking me off. When I feel really stressed, but gotta play , I run thru a quick round of Whitman's Gamble - just to shoot up stuff, ya know



RichardTheFirst -> (11/22/2001 12:37:00 PM)

I prefer a good challenge. But also important for me is not to get bored (like it happens to me sometimes in big scenarios, I just reach the middle, I know I am going to win it and so why continue... ). So, in my oppinnion, the scenario should have challenge, variety, new ideas and surprises at several stages. The score being more or less balanced till the very end is an important factor for playing all the scenario.



Tommi -> (11/22/2001 4:19:00 PM)

Tough fights are OK, but hopeless ones aren't. Keywords here being: scenario balancing and play testing. Those two make the difference between tough and hopeless battles (IMHO). A tough fight is better than an easy one as you really have to think what you're doing instead of just charging around with your troops. I get more satisfaction if I get a marginal victory in a tough fight than a crushing victory in an easy one.



peter hellman -> (11/22/2001 5:05:00 PM)

In a campaign, I like a hard one, then now and then an easier one. Then in a scenario I like the surprises, and the need to secure some crossroads, or objects left behind. And I like to encounter different enemy vehicles and tanks. When I choose my own troops in a campaign, i tend to take quite similar troops over and over, so I don't really get to see those "worse" or more "rare" equipment in use. And I like the high visibility and much tanks-scenarios. And if there's some aircraft and bunkers, I don't mind. Thanks,



Salonen -> (11/22/2001 5:11:00 PM)

Yeah, I agree with Tommi, a fellow countryman. I like challenging fights but challenging can be understood in many ways.
It can be "challenging" to controll couple of hundreds units against hundreds of enemies. I don't like so much big fights. Mediums are ok but small fights with 0 - 30 panzers and 0-500 men is my fav. The challence comes from that you must think how to use your forces. I am never going to make a scenario with more forces (at least to this game). I just love more smaller fights than epic and gigantic battles between two corps.



ruxius -> (11/22/2001 5:25:00 PM)

I do not like hopeless scenarios because they force the player to play it again and again more concerned to earning the victory score rather than playing the game as a combat experience.
This may somehow transform playing SPWAW into a repetead load&save battle until you destroy the enemy tank... I vote for something in the middle..something should be hard to make the player apply some strategy..some other should be normal especially if the scanario is intended as a portrait of what really happened historically... Historical scenarios free from score purposes are the best ones INMO. Bye



ruxius -> (11/22/2001 5:27:00 PM)

I do not like hopeless scenarios because they force the player to play it again and again more concerned to earning the victory score rather than playing the game as a combat experience.
This may somehow transform playing SPWAW into a repetead load&save battle until you destroy the enemy tank... I vote for something in the middle..something should be hard to make the player apply some strategy..some other should be normal especially if the scanario is intended as a portrait of what really happened historically... Historical scenarios free from score purposes are the best ones INMO ..at least I expect one scenario gives knowledge about history..on the other hand very though scenarios find their best context into the WHAT-if scenarios...something you play with a different stance...
Bye



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.109375